The case for standard look and feel

I'm always surprised to see how many corporate Web sites do not have standard templates for their site. I see this for small and large companies alike. A strong brand reflects a strong identity to site visitors. Because of the nature of the Web, site visitors need to be reminded that they are on the same site as they click around. If they encounter different looks, they may think they left the site. Although design should be the last thing you worry about when creating a Web site, it is nonetheless critical to ensure that the site has a standard look and feel.

Without a Web strategy?

Would you run your business without a strategy, or at least a set of goals everyone can rally around? Obviously, the level of planning depends on many factors, but all companies need a point of reference that will drive their efforts in the right direction (or at least the one chosen). Assuming you answered "no" to the question above, you're on your way to understanding the need for a Web strategy. You need a yearly (or more often if necessary) review of your Web site goals. From there, you can define the end-products you will need to provide for the site. This exercise will help determine whether your site is still in line with your company's business objectives, and ensure that your Web resources will be used to support the business.

Web governance?

Has anyone thought seriously about Web governance? Really, this is not something at the top of a Webmaster's mind. Content freshness, new content, dead links, new design, etc. That's what we worry about on a daily basis. However, a successful site is one that is planned and resourced like any other IT or communication project.

Many seem to forget that when they create a site. Information architecture, standard look and feel, access rights, workflow, content reviews, and other WCM issues is what they focus on. I used to think the same way... However, a good governance will ensure that the right people make the right decision about the WCM system. Business objectives need to drive the Web site. And business objectives come from all parts of a company, not just sales and marketing. That's why setting up a governing body is critical to the success of a site. The Web team and content providers do their work, but the strategy of the site is developed by the governing body.

WCMs are a commodity

When an industry has hundreds of players with no-one dominating, you have an indutry selling a commodity product.

There has been a lot of innovation in the WCM market over the years, but I feel we have reached a plateau. It will take a whole new approach in marketing WCMs to revitalize the industry.

--
Sent from my Treo 600

About Web presence

This is the inaugural post for the WPA Consulting Group blog.

Regularly, I will be posting some thoughts about the state of what I like to call the Web presence Management world. You see, the difference between Web presence management and Web Content management (WCM) is the ability to view the forest as opposed to the trees. This seems like a new concept, but in reality it has been around since the first published Web sites. When central Web teams were responsible to post content on Web sites, these sites where not being updated very fast, but they pretty much held together well. With the release of WCM systems, content publishing was decentralized to content providers. More content gets published fast, but a new situation now occurs: The left hand doesn't know what the right hand is doing. Because each section of a site is maintained by different people who come from different departments with different needs, the Web site as a whole suffers from unequal quality.

In the next few posts I will address how this can be overcome.