WE DON’T NEED NO
Web Governance Through On-Demand Online Training
@shelleykeith - WPCampus 2016
SUR VEY SAYS…
• Governance journey and making the case?!
• Training plans and materials?
• ~150k pages!
• ~250 site managers - no training!
• political navigation!
• high exit rates and 90%+ bounce at key decision points!
• poor search results!
• accessibility problems, broken links, spelling errors!
• lots and lots and lots of old ﬁles and outdates pages!
• no funnel, no goals, no success measures, very little signal
Noel-Levitz E-Expectations Report - 2014
77%said the web was
influential in college
97%said web was the
preference for the
school website over
the Facebook page
CONTENT AUDIT FINDINGS
• Content not focused on audience, hindering readability and ﬁndability.!
• Content difﬁcult to ﬁnd. Problems with information architecture,
navigation, search, labeling, and on-page content hierarchy.!
• Content off-brand, painting an inconsistent and inaccurate picture of
• Content not written for the web. Long, dense copy; non-descriptive link
text; non-optimized digital assets.
People who “said web was the most reliable resource for
researching colleges” (97%) are entering the funnel
where “content is off-brand, painting an inconsistent and
inaccurate picture of UMW.”
Approximately 75% of new, off-campus trafﬁc
does not come through the homepage.
This has direct and quantiﬁable revenue implications.
USE STORYTELLING TO
Create good stewards of a mission critical
GOVERNANCE BILL OF RIGHTS
• Stewards (Managers)!
• Help with and training on tools
and best practices!
• Clear interpretation and
supported implementation of
• Assistance establishing goals and
• Access to data and analysis
• Accessible content and
• Current information supporting
their ability to perform
• Usable interfaces!
• Access to support they should
Fit for use
HOW CAN YOU HAVE ANY
PUDDING IF YOU DON’T
EAT YOUR MEAT?!?!
• other duties as assigned!
• manage expectations - including yours!
• culture change is hard
2016-2017 Website AdministratorTraining
Lesson Topic Completion
Planning for Change
Getting Started Quiz
What to Expect
The UMW Web Toolbox
Intro to Content Strategy
Content QuizWriting for the Web
Search Engine Optimization
Compliance QuizCopyright Basics
Expectations & Best Practices
Creating & Editing Content
AdvancedTraining *in development
Homepage Content Grid
Tabs & Accordions
Using the Quality Assurance Tools
Department Speciﬁc Training
Residence Life - Managing Residence Halls
Great Lives - Managing Lectures
Admissions - Graduate Admissions Pages
Build on the starter
kit. Create and share
your own versions of
lesson plans and
• Lesson plans!
• Scripts & Slides!
• Video Links!
• Resources (sources)!
When I got the job I was all about making iterative changes based on data and best practices, not coming in like a wrecking ball and being all EVERYTHING MUST GO. Pretty quickly I realized I’d inherited a house from Hoarders. My predecessor did a lot of great work bringing the site as far as she did, but her service model left some lingering issues.
Order takers vs. strategic resource
Notice that these are all essentially content & governance problems. Much of this can be trained and at least improved.
So as we built the case for Siteimprove, Optimal Workshop, content strategy, and governed processes, I was taking our data and industry reports, and weaving narratives.
I was making a case for real change - not just landscaping a hoarder house, which would literally solve none of our problems.
Other case-making tools:
Quality search engine results is something they can wrap their heads around. I made improving them a matter of training and governance, not a “fixable” thing we could do in my office.
Same with a11y issues, quality assurance issues, etc.
I was also talking about how those 250 site managers hadn’t had adequate training or support - they’d just been handed the keys and told good luck - leading to the mess we were in.
People want to do good work. You just have to give them an accessible way to do it.
Reinforcement: during the content strategy stakeholder interviews the #1 most consistent comment was about the need for training and clear expectations.
I’d spent a year researching, fixing low hanging fruit (tangible things like some nav updates and mobile responsive launch), making the case for systemic strategic change, using words like “mandatory” when talking about training, and talking about how the current system was unsustainable. We had infrastructure problems exacerbated by content management processes. I knew it was a matter of when, not if. I didn’t know “when” would come quite so soon. As we were working toward iterative improvements the system was cracking under the strain. First day of fall semester 2014 the site crashed. It spent most of the rest of the semester crashing pretty consistently.
But in the “turn that frown upside down” column, it put the website at the forefront - and resources we’d previously been trying to build a case for just magically appeared. Magically. So we moved to an enterprise host provider to shore up the supports and slapped some duct tape on that baby and started working on next steps. All that iterative talk was out the window. We couldn’t iterate with the whole thing crashing down around us.
So, in January 2015 with a crumbling infrastructure in one hand and shiny new content strategy documents in the other, we dove headfirst into strategic redevelopment initiative. We launched phase 1 of the new website August 15, 2015 with zero idea how we were really going to govern this new implementation. Training was obvious, but accountability and authority were less so. I’d spent enough time saying “mandatory training” with no push back that I was confident I could make that fly.
Instead of focusing on roles and and accountability and processes, we focused on the core goal: building a stewardship model. It’s the only way we’re going to make this work. We needed site managers clear on their responsibilities, invested in WHY they were responsibilities, and able to meet those requirements.
All the process documents and approvals and administrative buy-in mean nothing if they can’t be enforced. Whatever we do needs to be practical. There are 2 of us. We cannot be the web police.
But what we can do is identify how to support our users, all of them, in ways that also feed the stewardship model and institutional goals.
In short: We want to be enabling, not disabling.
This is the framework we used to build out training. The compliance pieces, understanding of user needs, and clear expectations for those responsible for managing UMW web properties all needed to be included - not just use of tools.
what are your goals, how do you measure success
who are you talking to & why
what are the compliance requirements & how do you meet them
expectations for site managers
using the tools
getting help & the role of digital comms
Most site administrators are “other duties as assigned” and don’t have web in their EWP.
I am not going to be able to make everyone care about doing great work - most just want to get their supervisor off their back. You can’t make them experts.
We’re facilitating a culture change not only in how the institution views and manages the web presence, but also in how my unit provides support and expertise to the campus community. It’s important to take advantage of every opportunity to further that effort.
3 years in and a lot of progress has been made. We’ve completed a content strategy initiative, launched and successfully landed phase 1 of a redevelopment effort based on our content strategy efforts, and really made headway in the move toward a strategic web leadership model vs. the service model. With the introduction of the online training system we hope to move from this…