Skip to main content

Digging deeper into CMS requirements (#4: Costs)

This is the fourth post about digging deeper into content management requirements. See also

This is perhaps the most important factor for WCMS buyers.

The total cost of an information system is easily displaced as buyers have a tendency to ignore the total lifecycle of the software. A CIO in a small company could explain that she spends zero on web content management since she does it all by herself, but the number of hours she spends updating the web content each week might amount to a significant expense relative to the size of the company.

A WCMS has costs upon acquisition. The software is bought, and additional modules or plug-ins will likely add to the price. It must be tested, deployed and tweaked by developers to fit the company's environment. A web design must be applied to the templates. Users must be instructed on how to use the system. Older content must be imported.

There are maintenance costs to be considered. Content managers receive wages. The WCMS is customized, extended and maintained by developers, adding cost to the investment.

The final step of the lifecycle is migrating away from the WCMS to a newer one, or perhaps the web content is to be absorbed into an enterprise content management system. The content has to exported from the old system and imported into the new system. Finally, the value of the previous investments are nulled as the intellectual capital put into the use of the legacy WCMS is no more.

Depending on the amount web content and the complexity of the software, all these tasks involve considerable costs.

Like in any form of company profiling, there is no immediate return on the investment (ROI). This can lead to an negative process where the WCM division of an organization gets low priority and receives low-funding, the division performs worse web content management, and the web-site returns less revenue. However, many of the WCM systems benefits, like in any IT-investment in general, are intangible and hard to find and measure [Weill & Broadbent, 1998]. Intangible benefits of running an advanced WCMS can include a smaller need for WCM-staff. One less full-time employee could quickly make such a large WCMS investment worthwhile.

Measuring all investment down to an economical figure can prove to be an inaccurate measure of a WCM system's success. There may also be other infrastructural business values which should be investigated. A quality web-site is a crucial part of the identity of a large IT-company. All in all, finding the ROI is a complex task which is not the center focus of this research, but it has been explored in many others [Hallikainen, 2002], [Ward, 2003]. I recommend exploring some of these before planning a CMS acquisition.


Hallikainen, P., Kivijärvi, H., Nurmimäki, K. 2002, "Evaluating Strategic IT Investments: An Assessment of Investment Alternatives for a Web Content Management System", conference proceedings from HICSS-35, IEEE International

Ward, T. 2003, "Find ROI: Measuring Intranet Investments" Retrieved 30. April, 2006

Weill, P., Broadbent, M. 1998, "Creating Business Value through Information Technology & Rethinking Technology Investments: The Information Technology Portfolio", Leveraging the new infrastructure, HBS, ch. 1 & 2, p. 1-4

Comments

  1. I wrote some articles on ECM/CMS planning here:

    http://www.scanguru.com

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Open source CMS evaluations

I have now seen three more or less serious open source CMS reviews. First guy to hit the field was Matt Raible ( 1 2 3 4 ), ending up with Drupal , Joomla , Magnolia , OpenCms and MeshCMS being runner-ups. Then there is OpenAdvantage that tries out a handful ( Drupal , Exponent CMS , Lenya , Mambo , and Silva ), including Plone which they use for their own site (funny/annoying that the entire site has no RSS-feeds, nor is it possible to comment on the articles), following Matt's approach by exluding many CMS that seem not to fit the criteria. It is somewhat strange that OpenAdvantage cuts away Magnolia because it "Requires J2EE server; difficult to install and configure; more of a framework than CMS", and proceed to include Apache Lenya in the full evaluation. Magnolia does not require a J2EE server. It runs on Tomcat just like Lenya does (maybe it's an idea to bundle Magnolia with Jetty to make it seem more lightweight). I'm still sure that OpenAdvant

Encrypting and Decrypting with Spring

I was recently working with protecting some sensitive data in a typical Java application with a database underneath. We convert the data on its way out of the application using Spring Security Crypto Utilities . It "was decided" that we'd be doing AES with a key-length of 256 , and this just happens to be the kind of encryption Spring crypto does out of the box. Sweet! The big aber is that whatever JRE is running the application has to be patched with Oracle's JCE  in order to do 256 bits. It's a fascinating story , the short version being that U.S. companies are restricted from exporting various encryption algorithms to certain countries, and some countries are restricted from importing them. Once I had patched my JRE with the JCE, I found it fascinating how straight forward it was to encrypt and decrypt using the Spring Encryptors. So just for fun at the weekend, I threw together a little desktop app that will encrypt and decrypt stuff for the given password

The Git Users Mailing List

A year ago or so, I came across the Git-user mailing list (aka. "Git for human beings"). Over the year, I grew a little addicted to helping people out with their Git problems. When the new git-scm.com webpage launched , and the link to the mailing list had disappeared, I was quick to ask them to add it again . I think this mailing list fills an important hole in the Git community between: The Git developer mailing list git@vger.kernel.org  - which I find to be a bit too hard-core and scary for Git newbies. Besides, the Majordomo mailing list system is pretty archaic, and I personally can't stand browsing or searching in the Gmane archives. The IRC channel #git on Freenode, which is a bit out-of-reach for people who never experienced the glory days of IRC. Furthermore, when the channel is busy, it's a big pain to follow any discussion. StackOverflow questions tagged git , these come pretty close, but it's a bit hard to keep an overview of what questio

Git tools for keeping patches on top of moving upstreams

At work, we maintain patches for some pretty large open source repositories that regularly release new versions, forcing us to update our patches to match. So far, we've been using basic Git operations to transplant our modifications from one major version of the upstream to the next. Every time we make such a transplant, we simply squash together the modifications we made in the previous version, and land it as one big commit into the next version. Those who are used to very stringent keeping of Git history may wrinkle their nose at this, but it is a pragmatic choice. Maintaining modifications on top of the rapidly changing upstream is a lot of work, and so far we haven't had the opportunity to figure out a more clever way to do it. Nor have we really suffered any consequences of not having an easy to read history of our modifications - it's a relatively small amount of patches, after all. With a recent boost in team size, we may have that opportunity. Also the need for be

Managing dot-files with vcsh and myrepos

Say I want to get my dot-files out on a new computer. Here's what I do: # install vcsh & myrepos via apt/brew/etc vcsh clone https://github.com/tfnico/config-mr.git mr mr update Done! All dot-files are ready to use and in place. No deploy command, no linking up symlinks to the files . No checking/out in my entire home directory as a Git repository. Yet, all my dot-files are neatly kept in fine-grained repositories, and any changes I make are immediately ready to be committed: config-atom.git     -> ~/.atom/* config-mr.git     -> ~/.mrconfig     -> ~/.config/mr/* config-tmuxinator.git       -> ~/.tmuxinator/* config-vim.git     -> ~/.vimrc     -> ~/.vim/* config-bin.git        -> ~/bin/* config-git.git               -> ~/.gitconfig config-tmux.git       -> ~/.tmux.conf     config-zsh.git     -> ~/.zshrc How can this be? The key here is to use vcsh to keep track of your dot-files, and its partner myrepos/mr for o