<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Contented Management &#187; Interwoven</title>
	<atom:link href="http://contentedmanagement.net/blog/tag/interwoven/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://contentedmanagement.net/blog</link>
	<description>Become contented about Content Management</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 20 Aug 2010 09:48:09 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4</generator>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
			<item>
		<title>WCM season preview</title>
		<link>http://contentedmanagement.net/blog/wcm-season-preview/</link>
		<comments>http://contentedmanagement.net/blog/wcm-season-preview/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 20 Aug 2010 09:42:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Philippe Parker</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Technology selection]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[WCM]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Interwoven]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://contentedmanagement.net/blog/?p=247</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[
The new Premier League season is upon us in England and it was with some surprise that I noted Tottenham were being sponsored by Autonomy, purveyors of Bayesian probability and content management systems.
Professional integrity dictates that I shouldn&#8217;t exclude Autonomy from shortlists just because of who they sponsor, but this deal may cause those of [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><img title="Leon playing football © Philippe Parker 2010" src="/blog/wp-content/uploads/2010/08/leon-football.jpg" alt="Leon playing football" width="300" height="400" /></p>
<p>The new Premier League season is upon us in England and it was with some surprise that I noted Tottenham were being sponsored by Autonomy, purveyors of <a title="Autonomy: meaning-based computing" href="http://www.autonomy.com/content/Autonomy/introduction/introduction-meaning-based-computing/index.en.html">Bayesian probability</a> and <a title="Interwoven: TeamSite" href="http://www.interwoven.com/components/pagenext.jsp?topic=PRODUCT::TEAMSITE">content management systems</a>.<br />
Professional integrity dictates that I shouldn&#8217;t exclude Autonomy from shortlists just because of who they sponsor, but this deal may cause those of you with taste to reconsider whether Autonomy are meeting their corporate and social responsibility targets. Yes, I am an Arsenal fan.<br />
I was going to write an article that mapped each Premier League team to a <acronym title="Web Content Management">WCM</acronym> product, but realised I&#8217;d be sued by anyone I associated with Blackburn Rovers or Stoke City. Nevertheless, I think their are a number of useful analogies to be drawn</p>
<h4>Beautiful doesn&#8217;t always mean effective</h4>
<p>Some WCM products have editorial interfaces that entice you to play around with them: thoughtfully designed with user-friendly tools like drag and drop, red-lining, or <acronym title="Digital Asset Management">DAM</acronym> integration. Others practically repulse: ugly web forms with incomprehensible labelling and non-sensical reference data.</p>
<p>But don&#8217;t assume that a beautiful <acronym title="Graphical User Interface">GUI</acronym> makes for more effective content management processes. Just as Bolton Wanderers are restyling their footballing approach under Owen Coyle to be more appealing, this won&#8217;t mean they&#8217;ll finish higher than they used to under the ugly pragmatism of Sam Allardyce. Give free reign to your editors&#8217; creative spark and you may find your content strategy going down the pan.</p>
<h4>A solid financial basis</h4>
<p>Virtually no Premier League football club is without debt. WCM vendors are in a less financially perilous situation but hardly paragons of financial stability. This should make you wary in your contractual dealings with them. Always hold proprietary source code in Escrow. It&#8217;s not much of a security but it&#8217;s better than none at all. Check the financial stability of services partners and weigh this against their ability to deliver: a team that&#8217;s doing badly is likely to have disincentivised staff and the best of them may be looking to leave.</p>
<p>Be wary too of cutting deals that actually disincentivise your suppliers: if you cut their profit margin too much they&#8217;ll focus on more profitable accounts when the going gets tough. And the last thing you want to do is see your team go into administration like Portsmouth last season.</p>
<h4>Living off past glories?</h4>
<p>Just as some Premier League clubs look down on new entrants and see themselves as the established top tier, some WCM vendors subscribe to a similarly blinkered view. Don&#8217;t choose a team just because they&#8217;re an established player and appear in an analyst&#8217;s magic quadrant. Take a look at the wider field and figure out what it is you&#8217;re really after from your supplier. Having a vendor with a good reputation in the industry won&#8217;t improve your website any more than <a title="Last won the title in 1961" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1960%E2%80%9361_Football_League">winning the league 49 years ago</a> makes you a better club today.</p>
<h4>The long-term view</h4>
<p>So if you&#8217;re ignoring the past, what abou the future? No need for <a title="An octopus who predicted World Cup winners" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_%28octopus%29#2010_FIFA_World_Cup">Paul the octopus</a>: take a look at company history. Has there been a recent big-money acquisition? If so, you can be certain that the vendor is going to be focussing more immediate efforts on proper integration of that product rather than on new features. Assimilating new players takes time, as Manchester City discovered last season.</p>
<p>Or was the last release community-driven? If you don&#8217;t have the means to engage actively with that community, how are you planning on getting the enhancement (and fixes) you need the product to deliver? You&#8217;re unlikely to hold any sway over the selection despite your investment.</p>
<h4>Where&#8217;s the support?</h4>
<p>A crucial consideration must be who&#8217;s going to support your team once you kick off. Is there a loyal and knowledgable fan base? Are they likely to up sticks for another trendier team the minute the going gets tough? And where are they? If all your support is in a different timezone, you&#8217;re going to have problems.</p>
<p>In my experience, transatlantic services particularly suffer from this <a title="Anywhere but Manchester..." href="http://www.muscsurrey.co.uk/">Manchester United syndrome</a> of long-distance support. Many European vendors have struggled to provide north American clients with the same levels of support as clients in Europe and the reverse is certainly true. The problem is is seldom resolved by takeovers, when a larger company may bring a much larger support team, but product experts remain few and far between.</p>
<h4>It&#8217;s not about loyalty</h4>
<p>In the end, remember the crucial difference between implementing a WCM and following a football team: you&#8217;re a client, not a fan. I&#8217;ll support Arsenal even when the players all inevitably collapse with cruciate ligament injuries before Christmas; I&#8217;m a lifelong fan. But if you&#8217;re not getting what you need from your team, relegate them and seek your glory elsewhere.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://contentedmanagement.net/blog/wcm-season-preview/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>CMS trade-in deals</title>
		<link>http://contentedmanagement.net/blog/cms-trade-in-deals/</link>
		<comments>http://contentedmanagement.net/blog/cms-trade-in-deals/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 16 Jun 2009 13:29:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Philippe Parker</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Technology selection]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FatWire]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Interwoven]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Vignette]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://contentedmanagement.net/blog/cms-trade-in-deals/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Fatwire is waiving licence fees for clients who migrate to its CMS from Vignette or Interwoven. Both these vendors have traditionally had quite expensive licensing models so there are potentially big savings to be made, although FatWire has a feature set that is probably closer to Vignette than to Interwoven.
The catch is that you need [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Fatwire is <a title="FatWire Launches Rescue Program for Vignette and Interwoven Web Content Management Customers" href="http://www.fatwire.com/cs/Satellite?c=FWText&#038;childpagename=FW%2FLayout&#038;cid=1218037054147&#038;p=1218036432307&#038;packedargs=cname%3DFatWire%2BLaunches%2BRescue%2BProgram%2Bfor%2BVignette%2Band%2BInterwoven%2BWeb%2B%26ulclass%3Dapproach-list&#038;pagename=FW%2FWrapper">waiving licence fees</a> for clients who migrate to its CMS from Vignette or Interwoven. Both these vendors have traditionally had quite expensive licensing models so there are potentially big savings to be made, although FatWire has a feature set that is probably closer to Vignette than to Interwoven.</p>
<p>The catch is that you need to procure migration services through FatWire, but they&#8217;ve partnered with content migration specialists who you&#8217;d probably use anyway. You just lose some flexibility on negotiating the price, but you&#8217;re going to be saving money anyway.</p>
<p>But does that make it a worthwhile exercise? As Irina Guseva points out, <a title="Implementing a CMS Costs More Than Buying a CMS" href="http://irinaguseva.wordpress.com/2009/06/15/implementing-a-cms-costs-more-than-buying-a-cms/">the project inevitably costs more than the licence</a>, so the cost of migrating may well be more than your existing Vignette or Interwoven maintenance costs.</p>
<p>More importantly, the reasons for migrating are wrong. You shouldn&#8217;t abandon your CMS just because you can get a better deal elsewhere. It&#8217;s not like switching an electricity supplier to get a better rate. Just moving from one CMS platform to another is unlikely to resolve the content management issues you&#8217;ve been experiencing. You need to think about which problems you&#8217;re going to solve then pick the processes and technologies that will address these.</p>
<p>FatWire&#8217;s <cite>rescue package</cite> doesn&#8217;t make a business case to move away from Vignette or Interwoven, but it does put the product on the shortlist if you are migrating. For dynamic-driven Java websites, you have to consider FatWire, but it&#8217;s not a shorlist of one. Remember, open source products don&#8217;t have licence costs either.</p>
<p>So let&#8217;s commend FatWire for their marketing effort, and if you&#8217;re looking to migrate from a platform other that those mentioned, ask FatWire if they&#8217;ll cut you the same deal. But don&#8217;t trade in your existing CMS just to get a better price. Address your issues, conduct due diligence and pick a product that meets your requirements.</p>
<p>A couple of useful links:</p>
<ul>
<li><a title="FatWire CMS portfolio" href="http://www.fatwire.com/cs/Satellite/Page/Main/Products/BrowseByProduct">FatWire products</a></li>
<li><a title="A FatWire In Shining Armour" href="http://jonontech.com/2009/06/15/a-fatwire-in-shining-armour/">Jon Marks&#8217; view</a></li>
</ul>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://contentedmanagement.net/blog/cms-trade-in-deals/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
