To start, you may be surprised that every university doesn’t have a CMS already, this fact alone should provide some evidence of the wrangling that occurs when just trying to get such a project off the ground.

I totally agree with Patrick, a CMS should not represent loss of control. In fact, it offers freedom from mundane web editing for the downtrodden Web Provider (university speak for ‘person who edits web pages’). However I think discussing implementation of institutional content management systems by purely referring to how it changes the web doesn’t cover the whole story. Staff changes have to be considered too.

Traditionally the role of web provider within the institution could often be seen as that of hobbyist. The role would generally fall either to someone with good content or good technical knowledge (although people with both sets of knowledge did exist, I think they were in the minority). When the legislation changed in 2001, with the introduction of SENDA (Special Educational Needs and Disability Act), institutions across the country moved to introduce stronger regulation to their content production. Codes of practice were tightened, in-house training courses became a requirement; the age of the ‘hobbyist’ was coming to an end.

Welcome to the age of content management. On the face of it, content management represents a well-balanced system, it separates all of the aspects of web publishing, giving control to the various experts. The marketing department gets an overall control of branding, computer services gets control of the code output and the faculty gets control of the content. Just as it should be. However, by removing the coding function of the web provider role, the institution must guard against losing the pockets of excellent practice that have developed and (more importantly) losing good will amongst staff.

Downgrading a job by removing the technical aspect can have an effect on the job classification (and potentially pay scale) of an unexpectedly large percentage of employees. It is especially true in the divisional university that change on this scale is the only catalyst to finding out the true size and appearance of the web provider community.

Also, the web stirs up passionate arguments because it represents a window of communication, an identity, for even the smallest research project. Compromise (or dictatorship from marketing/computer services) must arise for change to progress when seeking to fundamentally alter the method groups within the institution use to present themselves on the web.

It has always been difficult for me to marry up the world of institutional web publishing and the world of web evangelist. I take both seriously. Although of course there is some overlap in their objectives, the evangelist’s main aim defaults to ensuring standards whilst the institution’s main aims are content, content, content – with a quick turnaround (as Patrick states). Good content management strikes a balance between both of these requirements. Therefore for the purposes of timeliness and compliance with the law, some form of content management is in the future of every university.

Implementing a content management system in an organisation as diverse as a university can be a detailed job. No matter what status quo you find in many parts of the institution, you’ll always find one section where content collection, storage or publishing requirements are vastly different to the rest. For example, the computing school wants to protect its ability to impress their tech savvy audience with tailored functionality and (b)leading edge features; the management school must meet the expectations of an audience ranging from post A-Level to business executive; central services such as finance all require tailored electronic systems (often with a web interface) that allow them to communicate with stakeholders. To each of these sections the CMS represents potential loss of control and change to business processes within the office. To some that’s scary stuff.

I don’t pretend to have the answers, all I can say is that I know this situation requires big helpings of change (and expectation) management. This is because in my experience one of the best ways to upset a group of people is to be perceived to be ‘taking away’ their website. I also know, to truly meet the business requirements of this kind of institution requires a good team of researchers and implementers. Generally the definition, understanding and solving of the issues that arise can only be achieved with the collaboration of experts, even if one of these experts is a lowly web provider.

• Jesse James Garrett,
• Molly Holzschlag,
• Drew McLellan,
• Simon Collison,
• Dan Cederholm,
• Tantek Çelik,
• Jeremy Keith,
• Joe Clark,
• Jon Hicks,
• Shawn Lawton Henry,
• Andy Clarke,
• Richard Ishida.

As usual accessibility was high on the agenda, but this year the debate about where the responsibility lies turned more towards the user agent developers than ever before. As part of this theme Joe Clark presented “When Web Accessibility is Not Your Problem“. The comments he made, along with his take-no-prisoners style seemed to shake the audience up (and at least one other speaker). To tell you the truth, I’m still a little uncomfortable with what he had to say, I’m going to have to revisit that one. Also, there was a lot more about design, including the hilarious “High-Noon Shoot-Out: Design vs. Implementation“. Drew and Simon (mentioned above) presented a rousing debate culminating in Drew running into the audience handing out placards stating “THERE IS NO FOLD”. The event seemed to get the ‘designer’ and ‘developer’ tracks sorted this year (when compared to last), however as always you find yourself wanting to split in two for some sessions.

In retrospect, I’m a bit miffed I missed Nate Koechley‘s “High Performance Web Pages“, as afterwards I heard really positive things about it. Also, I found the choice between “1 Web, Acid2 and CSS3” and “Advancing Web Accessibility” to be difficult, it ended up being a bit of an ‘ip-dip-doo’ situation (very scientific me). Anyway I did see some really interesting and thought provoking presentations, I plan to blog them in my next few posts (I wrote 48 pages in an A5 note pad across two days, I’m not going to write it all up here but it’s a lot to go through). I’ve also got a few pictures I know I should post, still thinking what’s best for that but I guess I’m going to have to bite the bullet and get a Yahoo! ID and use flickr.

Two surprising and potentially destructive (although I hope not) issues have flared up recently within the blogging community both of which involve some respected names in web design, accessibility and user interaction. I was in two minds whether to post this entry. I wanted to make this comment as it’s been brewing for sometime, but I didn’t want to further exaggerate the grief of those concerned. I’m not going to link to the sites concerned, if you don’t know what I’m talking about you’ll have to dig around. Suffice to say both issues were incredibly personal and are posted in public space. These events have reminded me of my own emerging understanding of blogs and the questions that cropped up – where do you draw the line between personal and private? Is this distinction relevant? Can an instinctively private individual ever hope to use their blog effectively as part of their professional life? These questions relate to my own sensibilities, but surely other people have been through similar thought processes when contemplating joining this throng of mostly amateur publishing.

Personally I keep business and personal matters as separate as possible. Writing my thoughts here, I don’t know who’s reading, it’s probably a little paranoid but that unsettles me. I find it difficult to create and keep friendships online, I’ve met all of of my close friends in the flesh first, then kept in touch through email (yes, it’s online but it’s private), phone, weekends at theirs etc. In the physical world I can keep professional and personal separate. However living life on the web presents different challenges. If I were to publicly document my personal life on the web, suddenly this could have an impact (potentially both positive and negative) on my work as a web designer.

Blogs offer false security. Right now I’m sitting in my bedroom, a familiar and very personal environment. If I were so inclined, I could quite easily pour my heart out to you in the belief that you’d understand and possibly even empathise. But the truth is, I have no idea how you’re interpreting my words. Similarly, aggressive and threatening comments may take no time to write but can never be retracted. Any writing provoked by overwhelming feelings can be quickly transferred to the web and may well persistently exist. It’s like writing in a newspaper, but without all the editorial checks *. That’s the double edged sword of a blog. It lets the author get their opinion out very quickly which is great for democracy, but what if they’re e.g. drunk or emotional as they write? Not that I’m widely read, but I could quite easily damage my reputation with only a couple of offensive words.

Listening to the radio on Thursday morning, the presenter mentioned this very issue. He described employers using the tactic of searching for personal information posted online about potential employees. Although I question the ethics of this, it’s fine if all you do is upload pictures of your family holiday for your friends, but what about photos from drunken nights out or other indiscreet moments?

Personally I feel for those concerned in the current ugliness. They are all inspirational to me and I hope they’re not deterred from working together in the future (and in one case, blogging at all). Really I just want to get my thoughts out there about blogs and the new social landscape they’re presenting us. I’m not trying to poke fun at anyone (I hope I haven’t broken my first blogging rule!?!). I write this because I feel the need to get it out and make a record (in my often inaccurate way). If you’re interested please comment, I find that usually helps in refining the point.

* Speaking of newspapers, the more serious (threatening) of these cases made it into The Indepedent newspaper on Thursday. Joan Smith saw fit to write a piece about online abuse. I only mention this because it proves how far blogs are affecting the mainstream media.

• http://authenticjobs.com/ - although judging by the current listings it would require a relocation to the states.
• http://www.cssbeauty.com/ - Seems to be more in my neck of the woods (London, UK).