{
    "version" : "https://jsonfeed.org/version/1",
    "content" : "news",
    "type" : "single",
    "title" : "The Content Corner: Content Management System Considerations |Digital.gov",
    "description": "The Content Corner: Content Management System Considerations",
    "home_page_url" : "/preview/gsa/digitalgov.gov/bc-archive-content-3/","feed_url" : "/preview/gsa/digitalgov.gov/bc-archive-content-3/2015/10/05/the-content-corner-content-management-system-considerations/index.json","item" : [
    {"title" :"The Content Corner: Content Management System Considerations","summary" : "These days you couldn’t be faulted for thinking your content management system (CMS) choices are limited to two open source systems and maybe an enterprise-level offering that no one uses anymore. And while it’s true that for the public sector the popular open source options are extremely attractive from a cost standpoint, if nothing else,","date" : "2015-10-05T11:24:31-04:00","date_modified" : "2025-01-27T19:42:55-05:00","authors" : {"tyrus-manuel" : "Tyrus Manuel"},"topics" : {
        
            "content-strategy" : "Content strategy",
            "mobile" : "Mobile"
            },"branch" : "bc-archive-content-3",
      "filename" :"2015-10-05-the-content-corner-content-management-system-considerations.md",
      
      "filepath" :"news/2015/10/2015-10-05-the-content-corner-content-management-system-considerations.md",
      "filepathURL" :"https://github.com/GSA/digitalgov.gov/blob/bc-archive-content-3/content/news/2015/10/2015-10-05-the-content-corner-content-management-system-considerations.md",
      "editpathURL" :"https://github.com/GSA/digitalgov.gov/edit/bc-archive-content-3/content/news/2015/10/2015-10-05-the-content-corner-content-management-system-considerations.md","slug" : "the-content-corner-content-management-system-considerations","url" : "/preview/gsa/digitalgov.gov/bc-archive-content-3/2015/10/05/the-content-corner-content-management-system-considerations/","content" :"\u003cdiv class=\"image\"\u003e\n  \u003cimg\n    src=\"https://s3.amazonaws.com/digitalgov/_legacy-img/2015/08/600-x-400-Process-of-creating-site-Process-coding-and-programming-Design-and-programming-enotmaks-iStock-Thinkstock-464986388.jpg\"\n    alt=\"Graphic illustration of a machine that processes pieces of content and produces a web page.\"/\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\n\n\n\u003cp\u003eThese days you couldn’t be faulted for thinking your content management system (CMS) choices are limited to two open source systems and maybe an enterprise-level offering that no one uses anymore. And while it’s true that for the public sector the \u003ca href=\"/preview/gsa/digitalgov.gov/bc-archive-content-3/resources/content-management-systems-used-by-government-agencies/\"\u003epopular open source options\u003c/a\u003e are extremely attractive from a cost standpoint, if nothing else, the CMS marketplace is as full of options as it ever has been. So whether you are shopping around for a new system or looking to revamp your current one, there are \u003ca href=\"/preview/gsa/digitalgov.gov/bc-archive-content-3/2013/10/30/content-management-systems-toolkit/\"\u003ea variety of items that need to be considered\u003c/a\u003e as you examine your CMS options.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ch2 id=\"how-flexible-is-your-system\"\u003eHow Flexible Is Your System?\u003c/h2\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eOne of the greatest pain points I have experienced during my various CMS implementations has been a lack of flexibility in the chosen system. A great deal of flexibility and customization is common place in the main open source options, but even with them there can be a significant amount of customization needed after implementation. The main consideration here is to remember that while your site and content may have structures familiar to much of the rest of the public sector, there always seem to be variables. You should select a system that will allow you to make sure it will best meet the needs of your content and your users. And just as important, remember to plan for the time needed to customize your CMS. Sorry to burst any bubbles, but an Out of the Box (OOTB) solution that you “just install and you’re ready to go” is a myth.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eOne important step in the CMS review process is to make sure you and/or a team you gather has a very good understanding of the \u003ca href=\"/preview/gsa/digitalgov.gov/bc-archive-content-3/2015/03/09/the-content-corner-performing-a-content-audit/\"\u003efull range of content generated\u003c/a\u003e on your site. Depending on your workflow and content provider structure it may make sense to gather your content leads or all of your contributors. You also may need to gather a group of either “editors” or “authors” or “approvers,” again depending on your structure. Talk to them about their normal content posting, but most importantly, talk to them about their abnormal content posting.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eA common pitfall when reviewing content during a CMS review is to become lulled into a false sense of security by a majority of very similar content. Generally, every site has at least one or two “black swans”; those pieces of content that are:\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cul\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eRare,\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eCompletely unlike 99% of the rest of the site and\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eExtremely important.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003c/ul\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eTo be safe, you may want to take those outliers and make them your starting point when determining whether a CMS has the flexibility your content and your users require. And one note for clarity: when I say users, in this case, I mean your content contributors, not your external site visitors. Your site visitors could care less what CMS you use; the only way they will be impacted is if the CMS isn’t a good fit for users or content.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ch2 id=\"elements-and-form-fields\"\u003eElements and Form Fields\u003c/h2\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eOne way to help ensure the system is a good fit for your content and users is to structure the content elements and their form fields appropriately. The CMS and how your contributors use it has a significant impact on how \u003ca href=\"/preview/gsa/digitalgov.gov/bc-archive-content-3/2015/03/20/structured-content-in-government-how-hhs-and-nci-are-getting-started/\"\u003estructured and adaptive your final content can be\u003c/a\u003e. Instead of using several large text areas that allow or force a contributor to paste a broad range of content, structure should be provided from within the CMS interface. This not only helps the contributor make better decisions regarding what goes where, but also helps to make them feel more confident in the work they’re doing.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAfter the extensive content review that you should have completed as preparation for this CMS implementation or revision, you should have a good idea of your various content types and their individual elements. In fact, in the course of your content review you may have uncovered areas for improvement. Perhaps your site was combining staff members’ names and job titles; or the address, hours of operation and contact information were all in one large field. You can now break out these various fields into separate ones, which creates an easier process for the contributor, will allow for greater flexibility and will \u003ca href=\"https://digital.gov/2013/07/29/how-to-create-open-structured-content/\"\u003emake your final product more shareable and reusable\u003c/a\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ch2 id=\"determining-permissions-and-limits\"\u003eDetermining Permissions and Limits\u003c/h2\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAnother area of CMS implementation many struggle with is determining users’ rights and permissions. My personal preference is to start with tight controls and then loosen the reins as the user requests it or as levels of trust and competence are proven. Yes, I know how that makes me sound, but if you’re working on a live, public sector site, you tend to be careful. However, Rory Douglas, \u003ca href=\"http://alistapart.com/article/managing-your-content-management-system\" target=\"_blank\"\u003eauthor of the recent article that inspired this post\u003c/a\u003e, recommends you “err on the side of giving them (the user) slightly too much” freedom. Some of this depends on the level of familiarity you as an administrator may have with your contributors and their level of familiarity with your system, \u003ca href=\"/preview/gsa/digitalgov.gov/bc-archive-content-3/2015/06/08/the-content-corner-creating-a-content-style-guide/\"\u003estyle guide\u003c/a\u003e, workflow, etc.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eWhether it’s a permission or another setting, you will also need to determine certain limits users will have. Many times this is handled via a specific user type such as:\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cul\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eAuthor,\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eEditor,\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eContributor or\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003ePublisher.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003c/ul\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eWithin these user groups you need to determine whether or not the user will be able to create actual HTML or will be limited to plain text. Will they be able to upload files and what file type? Will there be a file size restriction? Again, some of this is really determined by your users and your content contribution structure and workflow. Are you on a small team or do you have a far-flung set of remote contributors? Are you all \u003ca href=\"/preview/gsa/digitalgov.gov/bc-archive-content-3/2015/09/21/the-content-corner-harness-the-power-of-user-generated-content/\"\u003epart of public affairs or from all walks of life\u003c/a\u003e with varying levels of competence with content creation? Again, my tendency is towards the least amount of options possible for a user to do their job—it’s less risk for everyone that way. If plain or formatted text works as opposed to HTML or a WYSIWYG, then that’s where I would start. And don’t think that the WYSIWYG is a silver bullet or cure-all; however, with some customization it can make everyone’s content contribution tasks a little less painful (most of the time).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ch2 id=\"wysi-not-always-wyg-hahahugoshortcode2654s7hbhb\"\u003eWYSI Not Always WYG \u003cdiv class=\"image\"\u003e\n  \u003cimg\n    src=\"https://s3.amazonaws.com/digitalgov/_legacy-img/2015/10/250-x-250-Vector-code-editor-Icon-Dacian_G-iStock-Thinkstock-528678591.jpg\"\n    alt=\"Split screen code editor icon\"/\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\n\n\u003c/h2\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eIn many ways, a \u003ca href=\"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WYSIWYG\" target=\"_blank\"\u003eWYSIWYG\u003c/a\u003e (What You See Is What You Get) can be a blessing and a curse. They allow for quick and easy content additions or edits. Even for simple tasks, I like to have one available. But without a proper pruning of features, they can allow a user far too much control and your site will suddenly start \u003ca href=\"http://archive.org/web/\"\u003epartying like it’s 1999\u003c/a\u003e with red text and animated gifs (the uncool kind). The most critical aspect on WYSIWYG control is to eliminate any formatting options that would allow a contributor to violate style or CSS standards for the site, especially things like:\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cul\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eColors,\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eUnderlining and\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eFonts.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003c/ul\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eI also tend to closely control options for image insertion, namely whether an image is left or right aligned or its pixel size (this is especially important). Most of this can be done via CSS, and I personally don’t feel content contributors should be worried about these details. It goes back to a laser-like focus on the content itself. Make the best content possible at its core. Don’t worry about what it looks like or where the images go (to a certain extent). Let the developers or designers worry about that. Allow your content contributors to just sit back, relax, and enjoy worry-free content creation.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAgain, the number of WYSIWYG options allowed is influenced by your workflow and content creation structure. If your authors regularly need to bold text or create ordered or unordered lists (important elements of \u003ca href=\"/preview/gsa/digitalgov.gov/bc-archive-content-3/2015/07/06/the-content-corner-creating-good-content-is-hard/\" target=\"_blank\"\u003ereadable content\u003c/a\u003e) then be sure to allow those options. If contributors are allowed and expected to add links (again a \u003ca href=\"/preview/gsa/digitalgov.gov/bc-archive-content-3/2015/02/25/avoid-weak-links-in-your-digital-chain/\"\u003efairly important aspect of the Web)\u003c/a\u003e then be sure to make that process as painless as possible. I am also a big fan of making it as easy as possible to link to existing site content. If that can be easily facilitated, I highly recommend making it available.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eNext time, I will share additional ways to help make whatever CMS you either implement or re-configure serve your content strategy and your content contributors as best as possible. But the first steps are to deeply understand your content, your contributors and their process, and how that can best be integrated into a content management system. Remember, the CMS should be made to fit your contributors needs and workflow—not the other way around.\u003cem\u003eYou’ve just finished reading the latest article from our Monday column, \u003ca href=\"/preview/gsa/digitalgov.gov/bc-archive-content-3/topics/content-strategy/\"\u003eThe Content Corner\u003c/a\u003e. This column focuses on helping solve the main content issues facing federal digital professionals, including producing enough content and making that content engaging.\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eSign up for our \u003ca href=\"https://public.govdelivery.com/accounts/USHOWTO/subscriber/new\" target=\"_blank\"\u003edaily or weekly DigitalGov newsletter\u003c/a\u003e to receive more great content like this delivered to your inbox!\u003c/p\u003e\n"}
  ]
}