Comments on: Which Comes First: the Crew or the CMS? http://jonontech.com/2009/04/12/which-comes-first-the-crew-or-the-cms/ Confessions of a Digital Agency Nerd Wed, 10 Mar 2010 18:43:58 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 By: David Siedband http://jonontech.com/2009/04/12/which-comes-first-the-crew-or-the-cms/#comment-2204 David Siedband Tue, 04 Aug 2009 00:22:02 +0000 http://jonontech.com/?p=473#comment-2204 Building a custom CMS implementation is a process; a conversation; a relationship. The customer should have a list of criteria to start from, and good vendors will ask questions to the customer clarify their needs. In this process some CMS options will fall out. At that point, you probably have a short-list of vendors who you resonate with. Often times vendors work in a specific CMS, so the vendor/CMS choice are often intertwined. My recommendation is to perform your initial technology choice filtering based on clear criteria. Based on those criteria you may be equally comfortable with multiple technology choices. Once you're narrowed your technology choices make your vendor choice based on communications. Which vendor listened better? Who asked better questions? Who was a better communicator in the scoping process. That's the vendor to work with. Building a custom CMS implementation is a process; a conversation; a relationship. The customer should have a list of criteria to start from, and good vendors will ask questions to the customer clarify their needs. In this process some CMS options will fall out. At that point, you probably have a short-list of vendors who you resonate with. Often times vendors work in a specific CMS, so the vendor/CMS choice are often intertwined. My recommendation is to perform your initial technology choice filtering based on clear criteria. Based on those criteria you may be equally comfortable with multiple technology choices. Once you’re narrowed your technology choices make your vendor choice based on communications. Which vendor listened better? Who asked better questions? Who was a better communicator in the scoping process. That’s the vendor to work with.

]]> By: Jeff Cram http://jonontech.com/2009/04/12/which-comes-first-the-crew-or-the-cms/#comment-1142 Jeff Cram Thu, 04 Jun 2009 05:46:18 +0000 http://jonontech.com/?p=473#comment-1142 This discussion is hard to have without specifics on the exact business case. However, I believe: - Both CMS vendor and integrator bring their own biases. It's critical for the end client to understand these biases going in. An integrator can steer you just as astray as a CMS vendor. - The biggest mistake organizations make is thinking a CMS project starts with the technology resulting in selecting both cms vendor and integrator based on tech competence alone. - Having multiple partners is OK. A neutral strategic partner can help you select the right technology and an expert integrator can help you get it done right. This is often the approach that works the best. - CMS aside, most organizations need a strategic web partner that is looking at the bigger picture. CMS is only a part of an overall web infrastructure and web strategy. You can do a textbook technical CMS implementation and still completely fail. This is something vendor pro services have a hard time understanding. We just wrote a post on CMS selection. Would love to hear any thoughts. http://www.cmsmyth.com/blogs/cms_myth/archive/2009/05/30/does-your-cms-fit.aspx Jeff Cram CMS Myth www.cmsmyth.com This discussion is hard to have without specifics on the exact business case. However, I believe:

- Both CMS vendor and integrator bring their own biases. It’s critical for the end client to understand these biases going in. An integrator can steer you just as astray as a CMS vendor.

- The biggest mistake organizations make is thinking a CMS project starts with the technology resulting in selecting both cms vendor and integrator based on tech competence alone.

- Having multiple partners is OK. A neutral strategic partner can help you select the right technology and an expert integrator can help you get it done right. This is often the approach that works the best.

- CMS aside, most organizations need a strategic web partner that is looking at the bigger picture. CMS is only a part of an overall web infrastructure and web strategy. You can do a textbook technical CMS implementation and still completely fail. This is something vendor pro services have a hard time understanding.

We just wrote a post on CMS selection. Would love to hear any thoughts.
http://www.cmsmyth.com/blogs/cms_myth/archive/2009/05/30/does-your-cms-fit.aspx

Jeff Cram
CMS Myth
http://www.cmsmyth.com

]]> By: Philippe Parker http://jonontech.com/2009/04/12/which-comes-first-the-crew-or-the-cms/#comment-842 Philippe Parker Mon, 18 May 2009 09:49:51 +0000 http://jonontech.com/?p=473#comment-842 Jon, I largely agree with your process, but I still remain unconvinced overall. We've all worked on projects that have been painful in extreme because the product didn't do what it was supposed to. That to me is a clear indication that you need to do some significant work selecting the right tool. And you can't always trust your supplier to do that for you, as they have a vested interest in more services. Fundamentally, if you're trying to improve how you manage content you need to pick the right tool. If you care little about those operational aspects, then just pick an agency who'll build you a great website. A few further thoughts here: <a href="http://contentedmanagement.net/blog/people-or-software/" rel="nofollow">http://contentedmanagement.net/blog/people-or-software/</a>. Philippe Jon,
I largely agree with your process, but I still remain unconvinced overall.
We’ve all worked on projects that have been painful in extreme because the product didn’t do what it was supposed to. That to me is a clear indication that you need to do some significant work selecting the right tool. And you can’t always trust your supplier to do that for you, as they have a vested interest in more services.
Fundamentally, if you’re trying to improve how you manage content you need to pick the right tool. If you care little about those operational aspects, then just pick an agency who’ll build you a great website.
A few further thoughts here: http://contentedmanagement.net/blog/people-or-software/.
Philippe

]]> By: Jon Marks http://jonontech.com/2009/04/12/which-comes-first-the-crew-or-the-cms/#comment-820 Jon Marks Sun, 17 May 2009 09:12:49 +0000 http://jonontech.com/?p=473#comment-820 John - I think you're right. I'll try to write a separate post outlining my views on Digital Agencies/Systems Integrators/Vendor PS and various hybrids. They're starting to merge and overlap, but defining them and agreeing a common definition will be useful for taking this forward, and writing a book ;-) Anyone else want to write their views on it first. I've got a raging hangover today ... John – I think you’re right. I’ll try to write a separate post outlining my views on Digital Agencies/Systems Integrators/Vendor PS and various hybrids. They’re starting to merge and overlap, but defining them and agreeing a common definition will be useful for taking this forward, and writing a book ;-)

Anyone else want to write their views on it first. I’ve got a raging hangover today …

]]> By: Ian Truscott http://jonontech.com/2009/04/12/which-comes-first-the-crew-or-the-cms/#comment-819 Ian Truscott Sun, 17 May 2009 08:56:00 +0000 http://jonontech.com/?p=473#comment-819 @Jon Marks -My point was about when to get the vendor involved, not a partner like yourself, as you point out organizations really benefit from experienced help putting together requirements/wireframes and getting someone in to do that stuff and can cut through @John Goode's point about internal politics. After that it gets muddy, which I think is your point. @John Goode - I think for both end customers and vendor partners there needs to be some model of proving that this relationship is more than a logo on a website, we used to see too much of "partnerships" being based on a couple of alliances guys having lunch. I am not sure I am qualified to comment beyond that really, I'm a product guy that likes talking to people - the mechanics of the partner economy is probably a minefield I should be cautious of in this company! @Jon Marks -My point was about when to get the vendor involved, not a partner like yourself, as you point out organizations really benefit from experienced help putting together requirements/wireframes and getting someone in to do that stuff and can cut through @John Goode’s point about internal politics. After that it gets muddy, which I think is your point.

@John Goode – I think for both end customers and vendor partners there needs to be some model of proving that this relationship is more than a logo on a website, we used to see too much of “partnerships” being based on a couple of alliances guys having lunch. I am not sure I am qualified to comment beyond that really, I’m a product guy that likes talking to people – the mechanics of the partner economy is probably a minefield I should be cautious of in this company!

]]> By: John Goode http://jonontech.com/2009/04/12/which-comes-first-the-crew-or-the-cms/#comment-814 John Goode Sun, 17 May 2009 07:08:21 +0000 http://jonontech.com/?p=473#comment-814 @Ian Truscott, @Jon Marks. Can we discuss the difference in project delivery methods and style between Vendor PS team and Vendor Partner (Digital Agency)? It's my experience that Vendor PS teams exist to facilitate sales. They don't usually offer UX as an intrinsic component of their delivery. Are we clear about the difference? The reason I ask this is that as a digital agency we're often rated and categorised by WCMS vendors. Some just want to monitor, control and accredit competency. Others want to take it further. I wonder how well equipped vendors are in measuring and categorising their partner organisations? I also worry about how many clients know the difference between a Digital Agency, an SI and a Vendor PS team etc and when to select one from this or any other list? Many of the players in this space have smudged boundaries. Clarity helps to determine the importance of *crew* selection. Ordinary folk may appreciate your comments…. @Ian Truscott, @Jon Marks. Can we discuss the difference in project delivery methods and style between Vendor PS team and Vendor Partner (Digital Agency)?

It’s my experience that Vendor PS teams exist to facilitate sales. They don’t usually offer UX as an intrinsic component of their delivery.

Are we clear about the difference? The reason I ask this is that as a digital agency we’re often rated and categorised by WCMS vendors. Some just want to monitor, control and accredit competency. Others want to take it further. I wonder how well equipped vendors are in measuring and categorising their partner organisations?

I also worry about how many clients know the difference between a Digital Agency, an SI and a Vendor PS team etc and when to select one from this or any other list?

Many of the players in this space have smudged boundaries. Clarity helps to determine the importance of *crew* selection. Ordinary folk may appreciate your comments….

]]> By: Jon Marks http://jonontech.com/2009/04/12/which-comes-first-the-crew-or-the-cms/#comment-790 Jon Marks Sat, 16 May 2009 14:21:56 +0000 http://jonontech.com/?p=473#comment-790 Yep, all makes sense. Unless you're a full service agency like LBi. Half of the work we do is the user research, writing the requirements, doing the wireframes, clickable prototypes, testing these, iterating these, continually liaising with the technical teams to ensure the output of the wireframes and requirements make sense and reasonable within the implementation budget. If we get engaged after the wireframes have been done, it's too late for us. Hence the dilemma I was talking about towards the end of the post. I also find that if we are engaged after the requirements and wireframes are complete, the focus is often far too front end, and the back end usability requirements and content model definition are sadly lacking. Which is sad as these are the areas that affect the CMS selection more to than the front end. I tried to explain this (badly) in the post <a href="http://jonontech.com/2009/04/16/oh-cms-deliver-me/" rel="nofollow">Oh CMS, Deliver Me </a>. Referring back to my numbered steps, I am pretty convinced that the CMS vendors should only be engaged at Step 4 after the wireframes. That's almost the definition of our User Centered Design process. But which steps would you think an Agency like LBi (or Avenue A/Razorfish, Sapient, Conchango and our other competitors) would be involved in? Which, if any, of my 3 options are viable? Yep, all makes sense. Unless you’re a full service agency like LBi. Half of the work we do is the user research, writing the requirements, doing the wireframes, clickable prototypes, testing these, iterating these, continually liaising with the technical teams to ensure the output of the wireframes and requirements make sense and reasonable within the implementation budget. If we get engaged after the wireframes have been done, it’s too late for us. Hence the dilemma I was talking about towards the end of the post.

I also find that if we are engaged after the requirements and wireframes are complete, the focus is often far too front end, and the back end usability requirements and content model definition are sadly lacking. Which is sad as these are the areas that affect the CMS selection more to than the front end. I tried to explain this (badly) in the post Oh CMS, Deliver Me
.

Referring back to my numbered steps, I am pretty convinced that the CMS vendors should only be engaged at Step 4 after the wireframes. That’s almost the definition of our User Centered Design process. But which steps would you think an Agency like LBi (or Avenue A/Razorfish, Sapient, Conchango and our other competitors) would be involved in? Which, if any, of my 3 options are viable?

]]> By: Jon Marks http://jonontech.com/2009/04/12/which-comes-first-the-crew-or-the-cms/#comment-789 Jon Marks Sat, 16 May 2009 14:06:51 +0000 http://jonontech.com/?p=473#comment-789 Maybe you are right. But then I'm still unlucky. I'm currently involved in 3 (all started in the last few months) where step 1 is to select the CMS. With a CMS vendor that is partner channel only, sometimes we then have to help by doing CMS demos, filling in matrices and more. Should the CMS we are pimping be selected, then we are fortunate enough to get an ITT to compete against other partners of the CMS vendor that haven't had to spend anything on the processes up to that point. Such is life, I guess. It might be because most of our clients/prospects are quite large organisations and so their procument is very rigid. They have many procedures for product/vendor selections that kick in. The smaller companies often just let us pick the CMS. I'd love for us to just say no to this kind of process, but it seems we don't say no enough these days if the prize is juicy. Maybe you are right. But then I’m still unlucky. I’m currently involved in 3 (all started in the last few months) where step 1 is to select the CMS. With a CMS vendor that is partner channel only, sometimes we then have to help by doing CMS demos, filling in matrices and more. Should the CMS we are pimping be selected, then we are fortunate enough to get an ITT to compete against other partners of the CMS vendor that haven’t had to spend anything on the processes up to that point. Such is life, I guess.

It might be because most of our clients/prospects are quite large organisations and so their procument is very rigid. They have many procedures for product/vendor selections that kick in. The smaller companies often just let us pick the CMS.

I’d love for us to just say no to this kind of process, but it seems we don’t say no enough these days if the prize is juicy.

]]> By: Steph Gray http://jonontech.com/2009/04/12/which-comes-first-the-crew-or-the-cms/#comment-788 Steph Gray Sat, 16 May 2009 13:16:53 +0000 http://jonontech.com/?p=473#comment-788 Jon - I think you may have been unlucky. Agency-side, I think most briefs we saw were open-minded about CMS except where the client already had an established site in place. Within govt (where my experience is more limited), I'd say the two are often procured together. But there's still a big emphasis on the CMS and its functionality, which is probably excessive. As I said in my original tweet, bad implementation of a sophisticated tool probably lands you in a worse position than good implementation of something more basic (and probably cheaper). I know from working with good developers just what pain and negative motivation can come from fighting against a supposedly easy to use but badly engineered CMS. Jon – I think you may have been unlucky. Agency-side, I think most briefs we saw were open-minded about CMS except where the client already had an established site in place. Within govt (where my experience is more limited), I’d say the two are often procured together. But there’s still a big emphasis on the CMS and its functionality, which is probably excessive. As I said in my original tweet, bad implementation of a sophisticated tool probably lands you in a worse position than good implementation of something more basic (and probably cheaper). I know from working with good developers just what pain and negative motivation can come from fighting against a supposedly easy to use but badly engineered CMS.

]]> By: Twitter.com/Squizme http://jonontech.com/2009/04/12/which-comes-first-the-crew-or-the-cms/#comment-783 Twitter.com/Squizme Sat, 16 May 2009 11:53:38 +0000 http://jonontech.com/?p=473#comment-783 We kinda sit right in the middle as we develop a supported open source platform called MySource Matrix and essentially provide professional services around this. I dont understand why agencies need so many cms products and from feedback puts the living fear of god into the client when forced to engage with such a choice, ( cms overload totally ). I would look at open source cms platforms and build your platform on a product that is constantly evolving & take out a support / SLA agreement to provide your organization warranty / peace of mind with minimal costs with the archaic license models out there. This debate is spot on and I would welcome any non agency / vendor individuals to come to a upcoming event to network with 150 of UK leading industry professionals on this very subject. There is a free 1/2 day seminar / debate being held at Australia House July 2nd with networking event afterwards. ( sorry no agencies, vendors ) a panel hosted by Gartner,World Health Organization & eConsultancy entitled "The Future of Web Content Management". To read more how to bring this topic to a wider audience feel free to register at:http://tinyurl.com/qsyne4 Great post D We kinda sit right in the middle as we develop a supported open source platform called MySource Matrix and essentially provide professional services around this.

I dont understand why agencies need so many cms products and from feedback puts the living fear of god into the client when forced to engage with such a choice, ( cms overload totally ).

I would look at open source cms platforms and build your platform on a product that is constantly evolving & take out a support / SLA agreement to provide your organization warranty / peace of mind with minimal costs with the archaic license models out there.

This debate is spot on and I would welcome any non agency / vendor individuals to come to a upcoming event to network with 150 of UK leading industry professionals on this very subject.

There is a free 1/2 day seminar / debate being held at Australia House July 2nd with networking event afterwards.

( sorry no agencies, vendors ) a panel hosted by Gartner,World Health Organization & eConsultancy entitled “The Future of Web Content Management”.

To read more how to bring this topic to a wider audience feel free to register at:http://tinyurl.com/qsyne4

Great post

D

]]>