Content Management Systems in Libraries

Content management systems (CMS) are becoming an important presence on campuses and in various cultural and heritage repositories. They often bring unified policies concerning web publishing, elevate the need for the technical expertise of the contributing staff, and can also enable more immediate interaction between an institution and its audience.

What I found interesting while reading through the articles in the special issue dedicated to CMS of the Library Hi-Tech (2006, Volume 24, Issue 1) is that most of the scenarios presented were home-developed systems; few institutions would adopt an already developed package. Even in the case of Morehead State University, as described in Migrating a Library's Web Site to a Commercial CMS within a Campus-wide Implementation *), where the university opted for an outside vendor to provide them with a CMS, they chose a relative new-comer to academic software and caused considerable problems. Most likely, the universities often wanted to built on expertise of their own staff and preserve workflows that may have considered key and well-tested. In some case, the technolust of those in charge was not hidden very well (Kent State for instance).

The question is whether an opportunity to revise workflows and streamline operation was not missed when the architecture of the new CMS system tried to preserve the existing set-up. I was also uneasy when reading about elimination of the code view and relying solely on WYSIWYG and forms. That is often very limiting. I can see why in many cases elimination of the possibility edit code of the page is imperative, but on the other hand I experienced several situations in the past when a small touch in the source code of the HTML could easily fix an issue, but it was not possible because of the system set-up.

I read with particular interest article CMS/CMS: content management system/change management strategies **). This article transparently listed explored methodologies, lessons learned, possible pitfalls and in the end practical recommendations. The articles focused more on the managerial issues and questions of project management. The most important point I took from the article is that the preparation and planning phase is key. To know one's own structure, role and mission is important when implementing CMS, so that the structure and workflows were as effectively channeled as possible and the possibility of duplication minimized. I was also reminded that it is unreasonable to expect that the current state of institution will be preserved, as the "Virtual change will drive organizational change."

After all, implementing an institution-wise CMS is an opportunity to re-think one's role, reevaluate service provided to institution's users and their effectiveness. In short, it is an opportunity for improving the function of an institution.

References:
* Tom Kmetz, Ray Bailey: Migrating a Library's Web Site to a Commercial CMS within a Campus-wide Implementation. Library Hi-Tech (2006), Volume 24, Issue 1, pp. 102-114.
** Susan Goodwin, Nancy Burford, Martha Bedard, Esther Carrigan, Gale C. Hannigan: CMS/CMS: content management system/change management strategies. Library Hi-Tech (2006), Volume 24, Issue 1, pp. 54-60.