The CMS Catch-22

What’s the point of a CMS? I’ve really been trying to figure that out, because here is the usual pattern for CMS users:

  1. Company X Wants a web site.
  2. Company X looks to hire a web developer/designer. In-house people who know the web would be perfect.
  3. Said designer is “too expensive”.
  4. Company X finds CMS XYZ, which is only a few grand, spent only once to implement.
  5. XYZ is purchased, because it allows everyone to share the load, without knowing HTML.
  6. XYZ is deployed, and there is much rejoicing.
  7. X uses XYZ for a time, but becomes more web savvy.
  8. XYZ is found to be missing some nifty features that X wants, and non-HTML knowing staff members step it up.
  9. The non-HTML knowing staff gets tired of trying to make updates. By this time, they all know basic HTML.
  10. XYZ is labelled internally as inflexible, and the new guy gets assigned to do all of the updates.
  11. Back in his lair, the the vendor for XYZ counts his gold pieces.
  12. X gets tired of the inflexibility of XYZ. Even though they’ve sunk in some cash for upgrades, they drop XYZ.
  13. Said designer is hired, and the corporate site is fresh, nimble, and flexible.

Yeah, so maybe I’m biased, but there really is no reason for a large corporation to have a CMS. Ever. Maybe they have some sort of twisted point existing as training wheels for smaller organizations, but I don’t think I’ve seen many succeed.

When is the last time you heard someone talk highly of the CMS running the company website?

This entry was posted on Friday, November 17th, 2006 at 1:44 pm and is filed under design, cms. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Both comments and pings are currently closed.

4 Responses to “The CMS Catch-22”

  1. Andrew

    I really like Keith Robinson’s discussion on the subject of CMS: http://www.thinkvitamin.com/features/blogs/redefining-content-management
    I think, like he says, that “most CMSs aren’t really built to address the specific needs and problems of the people and processes you’ll have in place. Even when geared to a specific type of content or industry they often miss the mark.”

    But there is a place for CMS. If you take the term and widen it to mean more than simply the technology but the people involved, and if you follow the principles Kieth illustrates at the end of the article, I think a CMS can be quite helpful to a web content-driven or content-reliant organization. Again, the key is really to start with and focus on the PEOPLE or the ROLES (since people come and go)as the most important part of the CMS and then use a CUSTOM technology solution to support those roles (keeping in mind that an out-of-box solution will only end in misery).

    November 18th @ 1:35 pm
  2. john

    @Andrew

    I agree - I think some can have their place. Heck, this is a WordPress install I’m using, so I can’t really discount them at large.

    This post is largely a result of an idea we talked about so I’m glad you got to read it. :)

    This post wasn’t so much about custom CMSs, and I agree with you there as well.

    November 21st @ 7:48 pm
  3. Micah

    Well, I am a small company, not a large one. But I use “XYZ” for free (all-be-it maybe against the licensing allowances). And I have a brother-in-law named “said-designer” who hopefully, someday, when I am big, will cut me break!

    LOL.

    December 13th @ 8:26 am
  4. Janell the Great

    You forgot to metion that CMS XYZ was produces by Thai WarCraft gold miners in their free time. ;)

    Someone was trying to contract me to fix the problems of a Malyasian XYZ website earlier this month. What is it with hiring the lowest bidding Asian company and then hiring a team of Americans to fix the thing? ;)

    May 16th @ 2:52 pm
 
random side bar image...