Subscribe:   Posts   |   Email   |   Facebook   |   Twitter

Internet Marketing and Web Development in Higher Education and other tidbits…

Why Higher Ed Sucks at Content Strategy

28 Feb 2012

written by Michael Fienen

Why Higher Ed Sucks at Content Strategy

Let’s face it, higher ed has problems. They have a lot of problems. Whether it’s bad coding, poor graphic design, or a lack of upkeep, someone is always talking about something that’s not working and getting plenty of sympathy from the rest of the web development community. Article after article, conference after conference we talk about all the different things we have trouble with and try to understand why it doesn’t work and what to do about it. One area that’s been getting more and more focus, in part thanks to folks like Meet Content, is content strategy (regardless of whether or not you think it’s a “Real Thing.” I’m looking at you, Karlyn). With the start of a new year, many of us are taking some time to revisit our policies and practices, and get ready for a better 2012. But there’s one big problem when it comes to content strategy for us:

We’re gonna fail.

The thing is, there are ultimately so many factors working against us, that it’s extremely difficult to find success in any kind of realistic content cycles. There are a handful of folks doing okay, and parts of sites that venture off on their own have also managed to find success, like the Financial Aid department at Ithaca College. The tough part is that despite all of the case studies and conference presentations, schools find they cannot replicate the success demonstrated by someone else. But as I’ll discuss, there’s a good reason the ones that are doing well are managing it, and it requires tough decisions.

We’re too damn big

I’ve talked to more than one DI level school that has, and I kid you not, millions of web pages. Millions. Millions. Think about that for a second.  If you checked 100 pages a day, every day for a year, you wouldn’t even manage to check the quality of 50,000 pages. If you had only one million pages, that wouldn’t even cover 5% of your site. One of the first steps in starting a content strategy is a content audit. How much of your site are you prepared to commit to that when you’re so huge? Yes, a lot of that is automatically generated or archival. Yes, not all of it is meant for normal human consumption. Yet the fact remains that when a problem is so big and you can’t even pinpoint where to start, many will choose to do nothing. Since many university sites lack any comprehensive business or marketing strategy when it comes to the creation and maintenance of content, literally every piece of information gets put out there, and it’s put out there by hoards of individuals that are ultimately not qualified to edit web sites. So we grow. And grow. And grow. Then there comes a point where you see folders that literally have ten versions of the same page, and you’re faced with the challenge of figuring out which one is “right.”

6 techs to end the world gray goo Why Higher Ed Sucks at Content Strategy

Remember my mantra. Repeat it to yourself in your sleep. Tattoo it on your forehead. Wax it into your chest hair. Do less better. Stop pretending that some day you’ll come around and find a way to control this problem. You won’t. Your users will keep producing content that will eat your site alive over time, at a rate that will outpace your ability to police it, until it’s impossible to find the pieces that are of value to your visitors. Think of it like the signal to noise ratio of your site. There is a DEFINITE line that you must mind. One of the best ways to know that you’re getting to close to it is when you get this phone call:

“Yeah, hey, we were wondering… when you do a search on the site for Billybob’s Big Adventure, our page is like the 1,337th one that shows up. It really should be first, but instead right now you see Billy Bob’s Big Adventure from 2010. See, that’s old and we changed it to Billybob for The Twitterz. Students are complaining and we have an ad going out in 7 minutes, 26 seconds to promote it. Can you fix that and make it show up first?”

Maintaining good content is an expensive process, both in time, labor, and money. Not maintaining a bunch of crappy content is sort of like running up a balance on your credit card. When the bill comes due, the interest will eat you alive.

Employee turnover

If you aren’t, imagine you’re an army of one. You leave. What happens? How many keys do you hold? How well documented are your processes? You’re the motor, the driving force behind all the important web strategies. Do you think you’ll be replaced by someone just as motivated? Just as skilled? Just as willing to work until midnight without logging comp time? Will you be replaced at all? When we experience turnover in our offices, that’s bad enough (Though I do believe the applicant pool for our positions is getting better with age). If you are one of the keystone’s of your web office, how many months of productive web time are lost when you leave? That’s a tough blow to come back from, and on it’s own can have high costs for your overall site quality.

tumblr le63xxjVse1qdnjtio1 500 Why Higher Ed Sucks at Content Strategy

...knows a thing or two about being an army of one...

What if your boss or VP left and was replaced with someone that had a different vision of strategy for the web? What if that person decided to gut years worth of hard work and cycle building (because they don’t trust their tools – see below). How would that impact your ability to maintain the site?

An even bigger challenge is if you have a hundred or more people across campus contributing to the site, how quickly are they getting recycled? Are you even told when these folks leave? Do you keep track of the attrition rate? 10%? 15%? More? And these aren’t usually people that know the web, love it, and breathe it like you and I do. They’re the ones calling with questions about putting an image on the right side of a page. Nevermind their writing skills. With constant turnover, and typically mediocre training programs in place, you never get to train a solid foundation of thoughtful, understanding web contributors. In cases where you do, then you stay awake at night worrying about private sector competition for those people. This is also the nightmarish trick that will turn an apparent short term success into a long term failure.

The idea of a sort of “critical mass” in your editor pool where they become somewhat self sufficient and able to help each other and stay productive, for most universities, is a myth.

Wrong chain of command

I was at my last university for going on six years. In that time, I’d had three bosses (four if you count the time I had to answer to the VP directly for a few months until my current boss was hired), four offices, and have been part of three different organizations: OIS (our version of IT), Marketing, and finally Marketing and Communication (an evolved and restructured version of #2). This is an incredibly common story. When you can’t stay in one place for more than a couple years, it’s nearly impossible to get solid processes and cycles in place – they always end up disrupted and thrown into disarray by the changes.

1D3511030DAD139A0B7764D480BA81BD Why Higher Ed Sucks at Content Strategy

Where do you keep yours at?

Ultimately, none of these kinds of offices – IT, marketing, development, PR, etc – are the right place for us. It’s a responsibility shell game. Web communications is a system and discipline unto itself now, and it needs to be recognized, authorized, and resourced as such. Anything else is hiding it in a silo, where it’s efforts and priorities are colored by the strategy of whomever is in charge. Moving it around doesn’t solve that issue, it only changes the flavor.

Hint: if it tastes purple, see a doctor.

We’re too established

Higher ed is changing. Slowly, but surely. Many times, it’s a tortoise and hare race, and more than once the slow pace of higher ed has been a good buffer to my benefit. But, the cycle of change isn’t coordinated enough. Our foundations are old, but solid. There are cracks, but it’s not compromised yet. Look at the pyramids. They show their age, they’re a little worse for wear after the weather, the wars, and the abuse. They also aren’t going anywhere. This is the source of much infighting in higher ed. I am not a fan of decentralized web management. I feel it breeds resentment and accomplishes little success in its results. People use decentralization as a “solution” to the “We’re too damn big” problem without consideration for how it actually functions. It’s a mismatch in the problem-solution process.

The thing is, we’re too “established” in the politics of how we got here. One of the main reasons we let everyone have a site and do their own editing isn’t because its good for the users, or good for the content, but because we don’t want the headache or the bad press for trying to take the capability away. What the hell kind of screwy strategy is that? It’s just yet another shell game – this one of responsibilities. Creating any kind of good content strategy is going to require changing the way people work on your web site, and that is diametrically opposed to the long standing tradition of “this is my site, I’ll edit it how I like.” Culture, by very use of the word, is a hard thing to change.

Sometimes you just gotta rip the band-aid off.

Looking too much at startup success

I try to read a lot. Sometimes I’m a bit more successful at that than other times. One of the huge constants I see though is that a lot of the success stories we look to outside higher ed come from tech and startup firms. MailChimp is a great example. Their Voice and Tone site is a thing to behold. And you can’t have that. Not yours. Tech firms get it. They understand the role web plays in their business strategy, and they address it properly as a result. Start ups (tech or otherwise) have the advantage of building their processes correctly from the ground up. Instead, we’ve bolted it all on, like that guy in town driving the 1989 Buick Reatta painted in gold fleck with a plywood spoiler (I REALLY wish I had a picture of that right now to share). We can’t use those examples because we aren’t them. And as I previously stated, we can’t even look within our own industry many times because schools are too unique – we can’t just replicate others’ success by rinsing and repeating.

Part of finding success is making sure your solutions fit your problems. We share many commonalities from school to school, but every problem we face requires some introspection and tailoring. It’s okay to get input from colleagues elsewhere to make sure you’re on the right track, but make sure you’re working towards your own solutions.

Focused on finish lines, not cycles

Pretty simple here. We have to get the people we work with or through to understand that the maintenance processes of a website are not something that is ever complete. It’s a cycle. You’re always doing it, and it’s not something you can ultimately step back from and wash your hands of.

That’s what she said?

We don’t trust our tools

One of the biggest and most common complaints I hear from web folks at other schools is the lack of internal validation they get on campus. They offer an opinion, are ignored, and end up having to cede to the HiPPO. For some reason that still defies much logic, we hire experts (or at least people that could be trusted with giving the advice), but administration has no interest in taking their feedback with more than a grain of salt. Slowly, I see this changing, but it’s still part of the “We’re too established” principle that will be around for a while. The web is built around challenging old world concepts, so answers to questions usually involve risk and speed (not the drug. Hopefully), and that’s uncomfortable for higher ed administration.

So what do we do? We pay consultants to tell us what we already know to slow things down a little. Something we already knew gets drawn into a six month ordeal. And when it’s all said and done, we still don’t empower our people and validate that they were right all along.

This is why our “recipes for success” often come out looking burnt and tasting like purple.

So, What Do We Do?

I hate griping for so long without offering some kind of solution, because that’s not very productive (though I know you just sat in your office for 30 minutes reading this, so don’t gripe to me about productivity. Also, I’m sorry I’m such a long winded jerk). You can boil this down to some pretty simple takeaways.

  1. Wake up – stop running the rat race. Acknowledge the fact that more than likely, the way you’re doing things isn’t really a plan for long term success. You need to be clear headed and have a strong vision if you’re going to…
  2. Get high level buy in – your boss, your boss’s boss, and your school president. Sit down with them mano-a-mano and sell your process to them. Change has to come from within, but it won’t come at all if you don’t have some big iron behind you. This will also help you as you build towards acquiring proper authority and chain-of-command.
  3. Prepare for pain – if you’re going to make real headway and do some actual good, you’re going to need to piss some people off. In the words of Colin Powell: “Being responsible sometimes means pissing people off.”
  4. Identify the right problems – one of the biggest mistakes we make is not really understanding the root of our troubles, which then leads to…
  5. Identify the right solutions – decentralization is not a solution. Make sure you have properly matched a solution to the problem you need to solve. And make sure it fits your organization and needs. Understand that all the articles and workshops in the world won’t prepare you completely for what you’ll need to do at your school to get things on the right track.
  6. Set the right goals – because this is how you’ll validate all the pain and build a new foundation using the right models.
  7. Do epic shit – seriously. Break the establishment. Smash that egg and make a delicious, digital omelet.

I apologize if you expected a bit more than some simple platitudes regarding how to get your web content on the right track. I can’t offer more than that, because the real solution is just doing a lot of hard work. And I don’t care if you call it content strategy, or marketing strategy, or web marketing strategy, or whatever. There are a million right ways to do this, and only a few wrong. The key is to work your butt off towards the goals you set, and you can’t go wrong. We’re all in the same game and playing for the same team. The difference is how you come at steps 4, 5, and 6 above. Focus on what will work for you and make your plans successful.

Photo credit: cc icon attribution small Why Higher Ed Sucks at Content Strategycc icon sharealike small Why Higher Ed Sucks at Content Strategy Some rights reserved by QuinnDombrowski

The content of this post is licensed: The post is released under a Creative Commons by-nc-sa 3.0 license

About the author

Michael Fienen

For six years, Michael served as the Director of Web Marketing at Pittsburg State University. Currently, he is the Senior Interactive Developer at Aquent and is also CTO for the interactive map provider nuCloud. When it comes to web communication, he focuses very heavily on interpersonal communication components of websites, as well as content considerations that must be taken into account when building usable sites.  He is an active supporter of the dotCMS community, accessibility advocate, consultant, internationally featured speaker on web issues, and general purpose geek who wears many hats.

Michael's Facebook Michael's LinkedIn Michael's UWebD Profile Michael's Twitter Michael's Flickr Michael's YouTube Michael's FoursquareProfile Michael's Lanyrd Profile Michael's Tumblr Account Michael's Slideshare Profile

This post was written by - who has written 99 posts on .eduGuru

  • Mark Greenfield

    Great post.  Everything here rings true and is why I am so passionate about the need for true web governance which addresses all of  these issues.

    • Michael Fienen

      Definitely, especially because I think a new, solid approach to web governance is one part of that “New World Order” sort of thinking to blowing up our existing models.

  • Doug Nichols

    The longer I deal with stuff in my own small corner of the university’s web presence the more and more I wished for some type of centralized area that handled it all.

    My fantasy pipe dream has been something along the lines of a single unit that not only had the appropriate numbers of developers/designers to keep things running on a day to day basis but specialized liasons who were responsible for being the go-to-guys between the web managers and the various colleges and academic departments (not to mention all the other sides of the university’s web world.

    Obviously this is a non-starter just from the organizational restructuring and possible funding issues, but a guy can dream.

    • Kevin Sherman

      And funny story Doug, we actually are fairly centralized (meaning, it’s pretty much just me and some student workers) right now and work with departments around campus to improve their web presence, keep content up to date etc. But we have some departments that think everything is better if they split off and do their own thing.

      • Erik Hagen

        Do you let them split off? If so, do you provide any support afterward or are they on their own? With one exception, we’ve been able to prevent this (so far).

      • Kevin Sherman

        We’re trying very very hard to prevent them from spinning off by providing them resources and support (admittedly, limited) to try and see their hopes and dreams realized in the framework that already exists. We have one department that does have their own site, but they got it before I was around ( :) ) and during a time when we were trying to rebuild the back end of the website to better support everyone. So they got lucky. And fortunately, we have a Provost who is largely on our side, which is helpful.

  • Dan Woychick

    Your observations match my own experience as one of those consultants that has been brought in to tell the powers-that-be what their own web team already knows. In addition to the process improvements you suggest, I’m convinced most higher ed websites should be divided into a streamlined, well-controlled, external-facing internet and shovel the vast majority into an intranet – a “junk drawer” – that can be fixed (or not) whenever you get around to it.

  • Erik Hagen

    Get out of my head. (Seriously, are you spying on me at work?)  Being centralized has undoubtedly been good for our school, but I have a hard time imagining what a world without campus contributors looks like. They are usually administrative assistants who get the “web stuff” dropped on their plate along with the boatload of other tasks they already had.

    Of course, I wouldn’t mind seeing this model go away and moving all web work into the centralized office (for all the reasons you mentioned: turnover, poor training, lack of web writing/design skills, etc.) but the thought of an avalanche of minor content requests coming in on a daily basis makes my head hurt. As we all know, big projects move at a snails pace because of the distractions of daily requests and fires to put out. The big hamster wheel. And then you have the grand irony – the more projects you crank through, the bigger your maintenance workload gets, leaving less and less time for new projects.

    This article has added a lot of ‘oomph’ and clarity to what I’ve been dreaming about in terms of structure and priorities. How do we use our 8 hours (ha!) each day to do good, efficient work that moves the right needles? Somewhere there’s a RESET button begging to be pressed.

    • Michael Fienen

      Ideally, the small, trivial types of requests should be entered into a ticketing system which you can task off to a part time or student worker. Your core web team should be focusing on projects that further institutional goals and messaging. Items that fall into realm of “housekeeping” really shouldn’t be handled by the people you’re paying more than $20/hr.

      • Kevin Sherman

        Good thoughts! That’s the model I’m (unofficially) moving us to. We used to have many editors around campus, but found that it did not work out very well at all. I have two student workers (only about 10hrs a week between the two of them) and they have been tremendously helpful with the smaller quick projects to free me up for the fun stuff. I’d just prefer our office took care of getting the content formatted online, at the end of the day, it’s easier. And I don’t want to spend half of my summer cleaning out thousands of lines of junk code out of hundreds of catalog pages again :P

  • heavywinter

    This article should have been titled “why higher ed sucks at building great websites” … not just content strategy.

  • Marcy Sterner Gineris

    Excellent points, Michael. (Finally, Ash and his boomstick make it into higher ed!) Your message about buy-in- from the the top rings true. It’s difficult to make it happen, though.

    • Michael Fienen

       I never said it was easy. But that’s the rub, right? We know it’s hard, and we know we’re gonna get under some people’s skin, but even the best of us get taken in by the politics of it all. It’s made much easier when you just accept the fact that you might need to bulldoze your own path. Commit to the work and stand by the principles and I promise headway will be made.

  • Susan T. Evans

    I agree with Erik. You might have been in my head. I wrote this post about content strategy a few weeks ago and we published it on the mStoner blog this week. Kindred spirits we were on this well-loved topic of content strategy. (And now, thanks to EDUniverse, we’ve finally met):, my favorite takeaway from your post: “work your butt off towards the goals you set.” Amen, brother! That hard works scares a lot of people away.

  • Paul Schantz

    Michael is clearly a Browncoat.

    An excellent and entertaining post.  There’s a lot of truth in this, and it isn’t limited to higher ed web sites.  Much of what Michael describes, I experienced in one way or another in a decade of working for Fortune 50 web teams, long before I ever got to higher ed. Trust me, their sites sucked just as much on the inside.

    Many (most?) campuses simply don’t have either:

    a) enough professional web staff for them to be taken seriously as a group

    b) a meaningful commitment to producing content for the web as a primary – or at the very least, dedicated – communications channel

    c) an appropriate content governance structure in place (as Mark said)

    d) a combination of these

    As Michael says, it takes time and effort to chip away at the edifice.  Keep at it though and don’t despair.  Times are a-changin’ for higher ed, and eventually your campus will “get it.”  Be there when it does.

  • robin2go

    We’re not gonna give up. We can’t give up, Fienen. You know why? Because we are so very stubborn. We are just too stubborn for God to let us give up.

    • Michael Fienen

      Never gonna give you up. Never gonna let you down. Never gonna run around and desert you. Never gonna make you cry. Never gonna say goodbye. Never gonna tell a lie and hurt you.

  • postcardprintingservice

    Yeah, this is the reason why higher ed sites usually end up with a thousand pages full of irrelevant and old content. They must remember that a website is not just a silo where you compile articles. Each page must regularly be updated. Clear objectives must be set. What do they really want to do? At the end of the day, what do they want to achieve?

  • Sandra

    Reading about millions of web pages you mentioned some schools have is shocking! And I cannot understand what is it good for to have automatically generated content? What is the sense behind? After some, anyone will lose the interest in so why? We at have only some but sometimes it is difficult to create content for that. And if the content is meaningless, who will read it? Those pages will be abandoned.

  • chen guoxin

    The note of terms was plain, straightforward, and comprehensive, at any rate. It informed me, 
    First, That Frederick Fairlie, Esquire, of Limmeridge House, Cumberland, wanted to engage the services of a thoroughly competent drawing-master, for a period of four months certain.  Cheap MBT Shoes or Cheap Toms Shoes all them onl 
    Secondly, That the duties which the master was expected to perform would be of a twofold kind. He was to superintend the instruction of two young ladies in the art of painting in watercolours; and he was to devote his leisure time, afterwards, to the business of repairing and mounting a valuable collection of drawings, which had been suffered to fall into a condition of total neglect.  MBT Shoes 
    Thirdly, That the terms offered to the person who should undertake and properly perform these duties were four guineas a week; that he was to reside at Limmeridge House; and that he was to be treated there on the footing of a gentleman.  MBT Shoes Sale and Toms Shoes Sale store online 
    Fourthly, and lastly, That no person need think of applying for this situation unless he could furnish the most unexceptionable references to character and abilities. The references were to be sent to Mr Fairlie’s friend in London, who was empowered to conclude all necessary arrangements.  Discount MBT Shoes online sale and Toms Outlet too These instructions were followed by the name and address of Pesca’s employer in Portland Place — and there the note, or memorandum, ended. 
    The prospect which this offer of an engagement held out was certainly an attractive one.  MBT Shoes The employment was likely to be both easy and agreeable; it was proposed to me at the autumn time of the year when I was least occupied; and the terms, judging by my personal experience in my profession, were surprisingly liberal. I knew this; I knew that I ought to consider myself very fortunate if I succeeded in securing the offered employment — and yet, no sooner had I read the memorandum than I felt an inexplicable unwillingness within me to stir in the matter. I had never in the whole of my previous experience found my duty and my inclination so painfully and so unaccountably at variance as I found them now.  MBT Outlet shoes and Toms Shoes Online Store Sale 

  • Pingback: Stolpersteine und Vorgehen: Die Einführung der Content Strategie an Hochschulen - BisCulmCom Blog

  • Pingback: Stolpersteine und Vorgehen: Die Einführung der Content Strategie an Hochschulen | BisCulmCom

Proud Member of BlogHighEd University Web Developers eduStyle

© .eduGuru - Internet Marketing and Web Development in Higher Education and other tidbits…. Powered by Wordpress.