Slide 1: SIR C
Investigation into the management of web content in Higher Education Institutions
1
Slide 2: SIR C
Aims
To improve HEI’s understanding of how institutions are currently managing their web content To raise awareness of trends and possible future directions Expand the evidence base by building on the previous studies – most notably by Cox & Emmott
Cox, A. & Emmott, S. 2007. A survey of UK university web management: staffing, systems and issues, CWIS, 24 (5 ) CWIS,
2
Slide 3: SIR C
Methods
Qualitative
– consultation with relevant stakeholders Quantitative – UK wide survey of HE web teams
3
Slide 4: SIR C Sample
21 consultations resulting in 18 hours of interview data 134 responses to the survey from 103 universities
– 66 per cent of all ‘new, post 1992’ – 76 per cent of all Russell Group – 48 per cent of all ‘old’ universities
4
Slide 5: SIR C Research findings
The web team Institutional issues, attitudes & strategies Content Management Systems End users / audiences The future
5
Slide 6: SIR C The Web Team
6
Slide 7: SIR C Job roles & responsibilities
Wide range of job titles, job descriptions, responsibilities Spend the most time on ‘liaison and support’ Spend least time on training new/ existing editors in CMS or web editing’ Web content management – as much to do with ‘management' as it is ‘web’ 7
Slide 8: SIR C
Size of web teams & institutional positioning
Web teams varied considerably in function and form between institutions:
– Most web teams (79 per cent) function on a university/institution-wide level – Most web teams sit between IT and marketing, or are positioned partly or fully in one of these departments – Variety in terms of the size and remit of web teams can lead to confusion among members of institutional staff about what it is that web teams actually do – Despite broad remit, most web teams are also rather small at their core: a team of between one and four people is the norm
8
Slide 9: SIR C Web team skills
‘All-rounder’ skills are required to function and flourish in content management Writing ‘plain’ English might be just as important as writing code. Communication skills are essential
9
Slide 10: SIR C Web team challenges
Stuck in the middle Cultural / technological legacies Issues of quality & quantity Not enough hours in the day… Writing for the web is a skill Institutional expectations vs. available resources Institutional resistance to change In comparison, updating content is ‘easy’
10
Slide 11: SIR C Institutional issues, attitudes & strategies
11
Slide 12: SIR C Provision, authorisation & ‘ownership of content’
Provision of web content largely devolved …as is ownership …and authorisation How many provide content – pick a number between 4 and 1,000
12
Slide 13: SIR C Web Strategy
Do institutions have a Web Strategy?
– Evenly divided between those with web strategy (44 per cent) and those without (43 per cent).
Web strategies appear to be a relatively recent phenomena Primary aims of strategy
– – – Improve user experience Consolidate and centralise websites Present a cohesive public ‘face’
13
Slide 14: SIR C Web resources
Imbalance between levels of funding and institutional expectations Perspectives on funding not entirely negative
14
Slide 15: Perception of the adequacy of the funding available to website/ web team
1 - very poor 2
SIR C
3
4
5 - very good
0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40% 45%
15
Slide 16: Perceived value of the web & understanding of web teams in HE
SIR C
Senior management are generally aware of the value of the web in the context of Higher Education. …but have less of a grasp on the goals and objectives of the web team Senior management now consider the institution’s web presence to be more important than they did five years ago. …but the extent to which this change in perspective was reflected in resourcing is up for discussion
16
Slide 17: SIR C Attitudes to outsourcing
There is a preference for in-house website development and maintenance over outsourcing
There is a preference for a combination of outsourcing and in-house development and maintenance There is a preference for outsourcing over in-house development and maintenance
Don’t know
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
45%
50%
17
Slide 18: SIR C Content Management Systems
18
Slide 19: SIR C
CMS use
Overwhelming majority (85 per cent) reported using a CMS.
– Of these, over three quarters (78 per cent) suggested that the CMS that they used functioned at an institutional level – Terminal Four most popular (20 per cent), followed by a range of in-house, bespoke options (13 per cent). – Two-thirds using proprietary solutions – Nearly one-half (46 per cent) of current CMS users said that their system had been installed within the last three years.
19
Slide 20: C How important were the SIR following criteria to the choice of CMS that you use?
Usability for content providers Reliability of the system Scalability of the system Ability to provide future proofing Cost of the system Ease of maintenance Enhance author compliance with regulations/ legislation Ability to integrate with existing systems Reputation / financial stability of provider Ability to aggregate information across sites Q uality of external support Ease / Speed of installation Compatibility with existing skill sets within web team Popularity with the department or unit Previous experience(s) with CMSs
0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0
20
4.5
5.0
Slide 21: SIR C CMS use – satisfaction
General positivity about current CMS, nearly two-fifths (39 per cent) scoring CMS 4 our of 5 and approximately one-fifth (19 per cent) giving their current solution maximum marks. But 10 per cent of the sample appeared to be dissatisfied with the system that they had in place giving their CMS a score of ‘1’ or ‘2’. 21
Slide 22: SIR C CMS use – change
A quarter of CMS users (26 per cent) were considering changing the current CMS The majority - 63 per cent - were not
22
Slide 23: SIR C Open Source vs. Proprietary software
A large proportion of respondents (44 per cent) suggested that there was no intrinsic institutional preference either way There were almost twice as many more respondents who suggested an institutional preference for proprietary software (33 per cent) than for Open Source options (16 per cent) Cost was a particular issue for those who expressed a preference for Open Source solutions, with 94 per cent suggesting cost as a major factor The availability of external support, in turn, was a major factor for a large proportion of those preferring proprietary options (67 per cent)
23
Slide 24: SIR C End users
24
Slide 25: SIR C User experience
82 per cent monitor user behaviour or experience compared with 13 per cent who do not. Just over 70 per cent conduct user/usability testing and over a half (52 per cent) reported the use of student surveys. The majority of participants (82 per cent) were of the opinion that user behaviour is not monitored comprehensively enough. 25
Slide 26: SIR C Audiences
Unique to the HE sector is the range and breadth of the audiences
– Prospective students from overseas were perceived to be the most important audience (4.73 / 5) followed by – prospective students ‘at home’ (4.68 / 5) and alumni (3.71 / 5) – These audiences felt to be a greater priority than the current student body. – Commercial focus of HE sites also reflected in the importance attributed to business/ business partners (3.53 / 5) in comparison with academic staff (3.27 out of 5) – There was a recognition only by identifying and catering for the ‘market segments’ could content be structured to meet effectively the needs and requirements of the audiences.
26
Slide 27: SIR C The future
27
Slide 28: SIR C Future developments
The near future of web management in HE will be characterised by a number of connected developments, most notably
– the rise of ‘greater, richer media content’ (73 per cent) – a ‘greater provision of technologies associated with ‘Web 2.0’ (66 per cent) – A similar number of respondents (65 per cent) anticipated the ‘shift towards user-led, personalised websites’. – A substantial number of respondents (43 per cent) also predicted the rising influence of marketing on web content.
28
Slide 29: SIR C Web 2.0
Most respondents (72 per cent) reported their institutions having in-house provisions for video material (YouTube, iTunes U, vodcasts, etc.) 69 per cent said that their institution had inhouse provisions for online audio content. 41 per cent of respondents suggested that their institution had current provision for online social networking. Almost a quarter of institutions (24 per cent) did not Wikis were covered under current ‘Web 2.0’ provision in 61 per cent of the institutions surveyed, but again, close to a quarter (26 per cent) had no provision The featured aspect of ‘Web 2.0’ with the least amount of current provision were microblogs (Twitter, etc.)
29
Slide 30: SIR C Gaps in provision
When asked if their institutions had a development strategy and sufficient resources to keep pace with recent technological changes, 63 per cent of respondents said ‘no’ Only 20 per cent were confident that the appropriate strategies and resources would be available 30
Slide 31: SIR C Websites in an ideal world
Participants reported that in an ideal world they would mostly:
– Like to scrap the existing system and start afresh. – Adopt a more cohesive, joined-up approach to web content management in order to establish a more coherent image of the institution online. – Other interviewees emphasised the importance of a cultural shift towards a better understanding of the relationship between content and technology, and of the real potential of the web for Higher Education contexts
31
Slide 32: SIR C Positivity – an optimistic outlook for the future
When asked about the future of web content management in their HEIs:
– 14 per cent of survey respondents agreed that they were very optimistic (scoring 5 / 5) – A further 39 per cent scored their optimism at four – while 29 per cent scored a three – Only 3 per cent of respondents were ‘very pessimistic’ about the future of web content management.
32
Slide 33: SIR C Practical tips on web content management
‘Develop a thick skin. You are going to be dealing with a lot of politics and if you can deal with that side of it you are going to have a lot of fun and a lot of professional satisfaction from all the other aspects of it.’
33
Slide 34: SIR C
www.sirc.org
34
