Setting the Groundwork for a Content Management System

1
Setting the Groundwork for a Content Management
System

• Keeping the Users Needs in Focus

Track 2 Enterprise Computing and Information
Systems October 20, 2005 (220pm-310pm)
Meeting
Room W207A
Presented by Robert Brosnan Director - Web
Digital Communications Nancy
Mustachio Director - Application Development
Marie Somers Manager - Web Development
2
Session Blueprint

• Quick review Seton Hall Universitys
  characteristics
• Define the many faces of user
• Setting the Groundwork
• Scope, Vehicle Mission, Users Goals, Features,
  Architecture, Constraints for Ancillary
  Communications Tools
• Choosing a product

3
Who We Are.Seton Hall University

• Mid sized, Catholic affiliated university in
  suburban NJ, 15 miles from New York City
• Two campuses comprised of 8 Schools and
  Colleges
• gt5,000 undergraduate student
• gt4,000 graduate students
• gt1,900 employees, including 400 full-time faculty
• 2004-05 Fact Book

4
Background WebDev Info

• FrontPage chosen as web development tool in 1999
• Complexity of template was a stumbling block for
  most users updating content
• Clumsy method of maintaining accounts and sub
  webs

5
Background WebDev Info

• Over 300 websites, including student organization
  sites
• IT managed 75 of the webs image creation and
  design layout
• IT cycled thru outdated content, reminded
  owners to update
• Most major sites (e.g., schools/colleges) have
  their own webmasters with varying skill level
• Soft stylistic guidelines (i.e. not enforced)

6
Catching the Content Management System Fever

• Method to manage content a tool set to
  support guidelines, policies and procedures
• Ease of use, including training (no need for
  HTML, really?)
• Information architecture and scaleable
  infrastructure
• Public image library of approved images
• Versioning and track changes (and workflow too!)
• Dynamic content feeds and automatic content
  expiration

7
Stop, Heal thyself! Think about All Our Users

• Who ARE our users?
• What do THEY expect?

8
Our Users Defined
External End Users Prospective students and their
parents, Alumni, Donors, Prospective employees
Internal End Users Students, Faculty,
Administration
University Contributors Info gatekeepers, service
personnel
Importance
PR Image keepers
IT
User Base
9
Our Users Defined
First and foremost, IT and PR must forge an
alliance!
Importance
PR Image keepers
IT
User Base
10
Setting the Groundwork

• Scope
• Vehicle Mission
• Users Goals
• Features
• Architecture
• Constraints for Ancillary Communications Tools

11
Defining Scope
12
Browser Accessible Domains
Public Externally exposed, institutional functional communications vehicles E.g., University Web Site Private Internal, institutional functional communications vehicles E.g., Webmail, MyWeb, HR
Personal Externally exposed, personal Web sites for faculty, staff and students Academic Tools for teaching and learning E.g., Class Web Sites, Electronic Portfolios
13
Defining Mission
14
Mission Statement

• Promote University to External Audiences
• Serve as a Conduit for Internal Audiences

15
Users and Goals
16
Intangible Goals

• Bolster Image
• Provide Vision
• Serve as a Rallying Point

17
External End Users

• Provide opportunities for users to learn about
  SHU and (hopefully) to become members of the
  University community.

External End Users Prospective students and their
parents, Alumni, Donors, Prospective employees
18
Internal End Users

• Stay up-to-date with University news and events
  and provide a hand-off to internal University
  services.

Internal End Users Students, Faculty,
Administration
19
University Content Contributors

• Provide a single, simple, Web-based content
  authoring system.

University Contributors Info gatekeepers, service
personnel
20
PR Content Contributors

• Provide a tool for managing marketing
  communications campaigns across all mediums,
  domains and sites.

PR Image keepers
21
System and Application Developers

• Provide a flexible, extensible and rapid
  development environment that reduces support and
  content demands on IT.

IT
22
Features
23
Institutional Information

• Provide institutional information on the
  University in a user-centered context.

24
Dynamic Content

• Every browsing session must provide a unique
  experience for the user.

25
Global Content

• Every page delivered must provide opportunities
  for the user to learn more about the University.

26
Focus on Writing

• The tool must require little more than the
  ability to use MS Word.

27
Universal Platform

• The tool must extend to encompass the entire
  Public Web sphere and beyond.

28
Architecture
29
Architecture Objectives

• Base Structure
• Navigation Elements
• Global Content
• Subsite Structure

30
Architecture
31
Subsites
32
School Subsites
33
Constraints
34
Plays Nice with Others

• Accepts content from and provides content to
  other systems through open standards, or
  syndication methods.

35
Tool Selection
36
Whos Out There?

• IBM gt Lotus Workplace
• PaperThin gt Commonspot
• Vignette gt V7
• Percussion gt Rhythmyx
• RedDot gt ECMS
• Minds Eye gt Element
• Open Source gt OpenCMS
• circa 2003-2004

37
Vendor Summary

• Why each vendor was chosen for comparison
• Summary of company and application description
• Customer base
• Collected pros cons of the system
• Detailed side by side comparison grid
• Customer questionnaire

38
Sample Explanation of Why We Choose the Vendors

• IBM gt Lotus Workplace
• Due to our relationship with the company and our
  current infrastructure.
• The Lotus Workplace would be an extension of our
  current Lotus Notes environment.
• PaperThin gt Commonspot
• History with university clients. One of the few
  CMS vendors on the market who has taken the extra
  step to understand Hi-Ed.
• Scaleable and fits within out current
  infrastructure.
• Vignette gt V7
• Flexibility of their system and scaleable.
• Growing number of Hi-Ed clients.
• circa 2003-2004

39
Sample of Application Summary

• OpenSource gt OpenCMS
• An enterprise-ready content management solution
  built in JAVA and XML from open source
  components. OpenCMS can be deployed on almost
  any existing IT infrastructure and provides
  feature suited for medium to large
  internet/intranet applications.
• Runs in a full open source environment (e.g.,
  Linux, Apache, Tomcat, MySQL) as well as on
  commercial components (e.g., Windows NT, IIs,
  BEA, Weblogic, Oracle RDMS)

40
Sample of Customer Base

• RedDot gt ECMS
• Educational Customers include
• Penn State AIS Dept, San Jacinto College
  District, Southeast Missouri State University,
  Trident Tech College, University of Arkansas,
  University of Albany
• Commercial Customers include
• Federal Express, The New York Times, March of
  Dimes, Kraft, Honda, Starbucks

41
Sample of Pros Cons

• PaperThin gt Commonspot
• Pros include
• Editor interface is browser based and would not
  require client software to operate.
• Offers full control over page elements for
  editing, flexible levels of security.
• Full training is offered for the product and
  tailored for the role of the user.
• Cons include
• Does not offer dynamic environment for Lotus
  Notes

42
Comparison Grid

• Demos conducted vendors required to follow a
  script (i.e. apples to apples)

43
Comparison Grid

• System Availability Specs (e.g., Websphere,
  Linux, Windows, Apache, IIS)
• Database Support (e.g., SQL, DB2, Oracle, Domino,
  Sybase)
• Primary System Language (e.g., ColdFusion, XML,
  JAVA, ASP, JSP)
• Support Options (e.g., Trial Period, Available
  Training, Phone support, Manuals, Online Help,
  User SIGs, Forums, Conferences, Feature Request
  Process)

44
Comparison Grid (continued)

• Security Specs (e.g., LDAP integration, File
  Authoring Control, User Administration for
  Various Roles)
• Content Flow (e.g., Versioning, Approval, Audit
  Trail, Reporting, Expiration/Scheduling)
• Communications/Messaging Elements (e.g., Weblog,
  Discussion Forums)
• Development Features (e.g., Templates, User
  Interface, Photo Gallery, Personalization)

45
Sample of Customer Questionnaire(16 questions)

• City College of New York on CommonSpot by
  PaperThin
• Did you experience any difficulties during the
  implementation of the product? If yes, what were
  they?
• Not at all, the whole installation went very
  smoothly. We are running the system internally
  right now. We are hoping to have the full launch
  by the beginning of July.
• What platform are you running the product on?
• We are running Windows 2000 server with an SQL
  database. We also have Cold Fusion MX 6.1.
• Which version of the product are you currently
  using? V3.2, though we are getting ready to
  finalize the upgrade to V4.
• We are working on setting up the replication
  system before we install V4.
• With regards to the site templates, how many do
  you currently use?
• 1 base master template and then 5 page layout
  templates. The colleges and departments can then
  copy over the templates for use on their
  sections.
• Did you experience any problems with the design
  or implementation of the templates?
• Not at all, the system basically takes care of
  the creation for you. It is a very smooth
  process. The original thought was to have a whole
  library of templates, but after a lot of research
  and discussions, we agreed on 5.
• Do you use workflow to track changes to the site?
  If yes, how was your experience setting up the
  workflow process?
• We set up the workflow process for our own
  development right now. Each college has its own
  admin rights to set up their unique workflow. The
  system is very easy to use.

46
Its important to understand that a CMS is more
than just new software it represents a culture
shift for your organization. John Kovacevich
Tendos Thought Leadership Newsletter