Content Migration - It's Not All Sour Milk

Yesterday on CMSWire, Gerry Mcgovern, certainly one of the more preeminent experts on content management had an interesting post on web content migration.

If I read the post correctly, the point Gerry makes is that all content migration projects are doomed to fail if you don't focus on the quality of your content. Moving old content into the new CMS is like pouring spoiled milk into a new, shiny jug.

In concept, I definitely agree with Gerry. Focusing on the quality of your content is an absolute must if you expect your web site redesign, or new CMS to affect the results of your web site. At CrownPeak, we've seen the best re-designs fail because of a lack of focus on content.

However, we would respectfully also point out that this is a bit more nuanced challenge than Gerry points out in the post. Having been a part of hundreds of CMS and content migration projects for more than seven years - our experience is that some times re-editorializing content comes at the expense of success.

We've seen a few examples of content that may not be the best written, or adhere closest to the brand - but because of a "happy accident" of keyword density becomes one of the most highest ranked pages from Google's perspective.  Then, when that page is removed and/or changed - losing all its page rank glory.  Similarly, especially with Government and Non-Profit sites - we've seen so much attention time and effort paid to putting an inventory of content together - that the entire project gets out of hand.  Or, similarly, we've seen old content get removed because of "quality" issues and  just simply confuse users of that content.

Sometimes, we have to say, content is just content - and just like the crazy old uncle that you've come to live with - your old content may be kind of embarrassing - but it may serve a very particular purpose.  

So, as anyone familiar with our CMS Pocket Guide and our webinars realizes - we are the first to agree that content migration projects - well quite simply - suck.

But, while I absolutely agree with Gerry that "taking your old intranet content and migrating it into a new software system [can be] doomed to failure", I would just add a helpful safety tip.   Don't just take an inside-looking-out approach before determining quality.  Make sure that you also take an outside-looking-in approach as well.  It might surprise you just how many people don't see sour milk in your jug - but rather see sour cream.

Comments

[Scott Carolan]

I have a questions regarding the "sexiness" of a CMS platform. If content is what it is (not sexy), then how can I (as a layman CMS manager) make the CMS attractive to users?
Thanks,
Scott

[Robert Rose]

Scott....

Excellent question... By content being what it is - I don't think that *necessarily* means that it can't be sexy... It just means that in a content migration strategy - it's not always the "sexy" content that should stay.... In other words, ugly content has value too...

But to answer your question more directly... I think it really depends on the CMS you use... Certainly I think (as I believe you're also pointing out) usability goes beyond simplicity - and into attractiveness.

Now, my own feelings on this are a little more practical. While I think a "sexy" interface is nice for a CMS - I don't think it's terribly productive. Unlike an Email program, or a social networking application, or game, or other type of online web experience - a CMS is (in our experience) something that users don't want to spend alot of time in - regardless of the product. They want to be in, and out - as fast as they can. In fact, I rarely compose my messages in this blog software... Most often, I compose them in Notepad, or Word or email them to myself when I'm on airplanes. I simply use the CMS (in this case the blog software) to post and publish.... so, "sexiness" in this case is how fast is the interface, and how easily can I do the job I have... I think that's the place to focus on for CMS interfaces...