INTERACTIVE WHITE PAPER: CMS technology

Do you think it is better to build your own CMS or to buy a packaged solution?

Have your say...

>>>This posting is part of e-consultancy's Interactive White Paper entitled 'Content that works'. Throughout the paper, there are 18 topical questions like this, linked to the e-consultancy forums, where you can have your own say on the issues raised.<<<

Click here for more info about the paper and to download it for free:

http://www.e-consultancy.com/book/publications.asp

In my experience, the most successful CMS systems that we have provided use an already developed in-house CMS as a foundation that we then build upon according to the clients needs. This enables us to quickly supply a client with a CMS with many common features which can then be enhanced to incorporate any features the client may want.
It also has the advantage that the client is not purchasing costly advanced features that are not a business requirement.

The standard modules include features such as:
Content Classification & Metadata Management
Roles Based Security - multiple users with different access rights to different types of information.
Search facility.
Documents represented in XML to allow viewing on different platforms.
Templating.
Dates of validity of documents and automatic notification to selected personnel when a document is soon to become out of date.

Without wanting to turn this thread into a list of CMS features I'll just mention some of the modules that clients have incorporated into their CMS:

Audit trail, Version control & Rollback of documents.
Workflow - i.e a submitted document must be first be approved before going 'live'.
Personalisation of content - i.e. a user can build a profile so that only relevant content is delivered.
Localisation of content - i.e. different content being delivered to different countries.

We have used this method to deploy CMS systems to both Government agencies and Blue Chip and despite their different requirements we were able to provide them with a system that, although having similar mechanics behind them, satisfied the needs of both.

Andrew Price
Systems Developer
Box UK
http://www.boxuk.com

On 18:15:07 30 May 2001 Ashley wrote:
>Have a look at my post to this forum on CMS systems:
>http://www.e-consultancy.com/forum/default.asp?v=523&p-
>=1 There are some useful links there which help in
>providing decision criteria and frameworks to help address
>the build versus buy decision challenge.
>
>Cost is clearly a big factor that can quickly make choices
>for you. Setting aside the HTML editors, which have some
>limited content/site management features (managing links,
>uploads, versions etc.), you are talking a good
>£300k+ for any CMS which provides templating,
>workflow, rollback, collaborative publishing, meta tagging
>etc. and quite possibly a lot more by the time you add in
>implementation and consultancy costs.
>
>A back-of-the-envelope calculation of return on investment
>on such a spend (and over what timescales) might point you
>in the build direction. Bespoke builds can be done for
>much less but you have to realise that you can't then have
>everything - you must manage expectations carefully about
>how flexible and feature-laden a tool this will be. You
>must also realise that if you then continually add to,
>tweak and customise the CMS application to deliver
>features that were not part of the original build spec (as
>often happens when you use the thing in anger) then you
>could well end up with a Heath Robinson type application
>held together by bits of digital string and sellotape.
>Clearly not good.
>
>In theory there is a middle path which is where agencies
>have developed their own CMSs which they can then offer to
>clients at a reduced rate - they are essentially reselling
>application work done elsewhere. You get the cost and
>speed advantages of the 'Here's a CMS I made earlier'
>factor + you get more features + you benefit from it
>having been road-tested with others. I say 'in theory'
>because I would be wary of becoming reliant on a solution
>which risked being neither one thing nor the other and
>which may leave me exposed in terms of reliance on the
>agency.
>
>Any agencies out there who think they have a credible
>developed-in-house CMS offering?
>
>
>
>
>On 12:06:11 16 May 2001 Sam wrote:
>>Do you think it is better to build your own CMS or to
>buy
>>a packaged solution?
>>
>>Have your say...
>>
>>>>>This posting is part of e-consultancy's
>>Interactive White Paper entitled 'Content that works'.
>>Throughout the paper, there are 18 topical questions
>like
>>this, linked to the e-consultancy forums, where you
>can
>>have your own say on the issues raised.<<<
>>
>>Click here for more info about the paper and to
>download
>>it for free:
>>
>>http://www.e-consultancy.com/book/publications.asp