It is great to see the wide range of approaches to managing content in HE. I think the question is not necessarily whether you cull content. The question should be what is its ROI. Content is more than just words and pictures, it is an important business asset and needs to be treated as such.
If you consider most enterprise level websites they contain large amounts of 'content', which has been delivered at considerable effort and cost to the organisation, but very few know how to manage this asset effectively or understand its contribution to the organisations objectives.
I would argue that all content is valuable however, some content may be worth less, because it is not be aligned to the organisations objectives. Unfortunately Web Content managers are often left to make value judgements around pages or a website instead, which inevitably leads to tension between the organisation and the content owner.
Ultimately great content, is well-managed and structured and addresses the user and consequently the organisations needs. Where this is not the case, this often leads to resource being poorly directed, which can lead to a lower quality output, a duplication of effort and consequently a poor ROI.
Personally the conversation we should be having is how do we create an environment in which content is aligned, managed effectively and what systems, processes and reporting mechanisms do we need to have in place to achieve this. This approach helps direct organisational effort, improve quality, demonstrate ROI and leads to better conversations with content owners.
The problem is that content strategy is a new discipline, as a result large organisations are still in the process of catch-up. I would argue until we start thinking of content as more than just words and pictures, we can't begin to help content to achieve its potential or have meaningful conversations around the challenges which we all face, in particular multiple channels and devices.
If you are interested in learning more, I am a fan of Rahel Bailie (ROI) and Karen McGrane (Structured content).
Rich
On 8 Apr 2013, at 18:10, ALLISON Neil <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> I'd second the recommendation of Erin Kissane's ALA book. Also Karen McGrane's Content Strategy for Mobile (also ALA - free chapter http://bit.ly/SKoYxs). There's also a new book I've not read yet which is HE-flavoured - Content Everywhere (interview with author: http://bit.ly/RET7Ba).
>
> The one thing I've not seen anyone mention in this thread is objectives. Establishing what is ROT - well, the R and the T anyway - requires an understanding of what is to be achieved. It's a long game, but as we moved sites into our central CMS we worked with stakeholders to establish who the target audiences and what they wanted to achieve with them. Content that isn't helping them achieve their goals is often impeding them. That's where the education comes in as the common attitude is "couldn't we leave it in, someone might want it, what's the harm?"
>
> To help overcome this attitude, I find the points made by Lou Rosenfeld in this article (http://bit.ly/REUtMp) helpful - particularly the scorecard. Ultimately, it's not about the content, it's about users achieving their goals (to paraphrase Gerry McGovern)
>
>
> Cheers,
>
> N
>
> *************************
> Neil Allison
> University Website Programme
> 0131 650 9513
>
> www.ed.ac.uk/website-programme
>
> Blog: www.usability-ed.blogspot.co.uk
> Twitter: @usabilityed
>
> *************************
> ________________________________________
> From: Managing institutional Web services [[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Russell, Craig [[log in to unmask]]
> Sent: 08 April 2013 16:24
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: Content culling, or stopping the ROT
>
> Oh for 16'000 pages!
>
> We have 180,000 content items in our CMS (pages, images, pdfs etc).
> And a further 115,000 files on our static hosting.
>
> We too have a highly decentralised publishing model.
> Any account holder can publish content in the CMS, and most do.
>
> This may sound bad, but we actually quite like it.
> For us it works out quite well that most people choose to publish using the CMS and not try to do things on their own.
> And we feel that the mixed bag of content gives our site character.
>
> As for ROT...
>
> We don't worry too much about the trivial, we've learnt that sometimes seemingly trivial content, can be surprisingly popular.
> What we struggle with is identifying these gems so we can build upon their organic exposure.
>
> Typically redundant content falls in to disuse, as long as it's not inaccurate, we tend to leave it alone.
> Though we do archive content when we're notified to do so, usually through support tickets or when were involved in major content updates.
>
> Outdated (and also duplicated) content is the trickiest to deal with.
> We only really know about these pages when they become a problem (e.g. false positive search results).
> Sometimes we stumble across them, though I suspect that most goes unnoticed.
>
> I think we need to encourage habits in our editors to create content that works for them, us and our visitors.
> Content that is discoverable, reusable and visitor-orientated.
> But we're only just beginning to discuss how we can achieve this.
>
> -Craig
>
> Craig Russell
> [log in to unmask]
> Web Systems Analyst
> University of Leicester
>
>
>
> --
> The University of Edinburgh is a charitable body, registered in
> Scotland, with registration number SC005336.
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Managing institutional Web services [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Hannah Hiles
> Sent: 08 April 2013 15:02
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: Content culling, or stopping the ROT
>
> Thanks to everyone who has replied so far! As luck would have it, I'd
> completely forgotten that we have a copy of the Halvorson book on the
> shelf, so that will be a great help.
>
> We have about 16,000 pages so a content audit is quite a daunting
> prospect - is this a typical size of site?
>
> Cheers
> Hannah
>
> On 8 April 2013 12:44, Helen Sargan <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>> I'd suggest that you have a look at a good Content Strategy book. I found that 'Content Strategy at Work' ( Margot Bloomstein) worked best for me - I didn't get on with the Halvorson book 'Content Strategy for the Web', which is meant to be *the* one to go for.
>>
>> Giving people a model and a checklist to work with can often work - that's in the examples of the book.
>>
>> On 8 Apr 2013, at 12:15, Hannah Hiles <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi everyone
>>>
>>> We are currently discussing the future development of our website but
>>> as one of my colleagues so beautifully put it, "we need to clear out
>>> the loft and garage before we decide if we need to move house".
>>>
>>> I was wondering whether anyone had a good policy in place for
>>> identifying and eliminating all that ROT (Redundant, Outdated,
>>> Trivial) content on your sites?
>>>
>>> Content creation is completely devolved here so we will need to
>>> "encourage" colleagues in the Faculties/Research
>>> Institutes/Directorates to look at their pages and get rid of anything
>>> unnecessary.
>>>
>>> I'd be interested in hearing about anything that works - and anything
>>> that doesn't!
>>>
>>> Take care
>>> Hannah
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Hannah Hiles
>>> Media and Communications Manager (at Keele Monday, Wednesday and Thursday)
>>> Keele University
>>> Keele
>>> Staffordshire
>>> ST5 5BG
>>>
>>> 01782 733857
>>> [log in to unmask]
>>
>>
>> **************************************************************************************
>> Helen Varley Sargan email:[log in to unmask]
>> Information Provision & Webmaster [log in to unmask]
>> University Computing Service New Museums Site
>> Pembroke St tel: 01223 334480
>> Cambridge CB2 3QH fax: 01223 334679
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Hannah Hiles
> Media and Communications Manager (at Keele Monday, Wednesday and Thursday)
> Keele University
> Keele
> Staffordshire
> ST5 5BG
>
> 01782 733857
> [log in to unmask]
|
