One of the questions that we are often asked by our prospects is ‘how do I build a business case to support the purchase of a Web Content Management system?’ Here is a three part series on one method that could be employed. The first metric that we looked at was Revenue. The second metric evaluated was cost savings. In this final installment, we will look at the Strategic Value of a Web Content Management system and what that means to your business.
Admittedly, the strategic components will tend to be the ‘softest’ and it is often hard to attribute firm numbers to them. But these items can be the difference that leads to business case approval. The strategic components have the highest emotional attachment and they get to the heart of your company and its values. That can be very compelling for an Executive management team to consider. Mind you, if the revenue and the cost savings are not significant, then the strategic components cannot carry the business case. But if the choices are ‘doing nothing’ or ‘wait another quarter,’ the strategic items can push the decision makers to a green light.
Take a step back and consider what is important to your company. What separates you from your competition? What do you want customers and prospects to say about you? How would you like analysts and the press to portray your company?
For Open Text, we have the following strategic benefits that we are pursuing.
1. A better site will facilitate an improved customer experience which will result in increased revenue, customer satisfaction and maintenance renewal rates
2. A better site will enhance our ability to respond to the needs of the business and the latest Web 2.0 functionality as the technology will be an asset, not a liability
3. A better infrastructure will allow us to create a dynamic site that can easily change with industry trends.
These are all noble goals and hard to argue with. The problem is quantifying them to provide validity.
An improved customer experience is something that every company is seeking. How would you measure your success? One objective data point to review is what improvements other companies have seen through implementing new web content management software. Your vendor may have Customer Success Stories that provide details of a customer’s problem and the results they achieved by implementing the software. Or you can study a heat map of your current site and detail the number of clicks that it will take a visitor to get from the home page to the desired information. If you can reduce the number of clicks with a new system and smarter design, then you will have improved the customer experience. You can associate a value to the number of clicks or the visitor’s time to get a numerical value.
The improved ability to respond to the needs of the business will make your website an asset instead of a point of corporate frustration. This strategic benefit might be easy to measure. How many microsites have been spun up in the last year? More often than not, microsites are not created because they are truly necessary. They are created because a microsite can be turned up quicker than updating the www site. It is a sad but true fact for many corporate sites. If it is happening in your company, calculate the number of microsites and the cost for each one. You may have employed an external agency so you can track the invoices for solid cost metrics. Then assume that you would be able to manage all (or a portion) of the microsite requests within your new web content management system and you have yet another quantifiable metric.
The third metric will only apply to certain types of sites. There are companies who want to change their look and feel regularly to keep up with industry trends or just to stay ‘fresh’ and vibrant. For these companies, the ability to easily change templates but maintain the content and navigation will enable them to be more dynamic. To quantify this, you could calculate the number of hours spent on your current site to make a change to the look and feel to calculate your cost savings.
The numbers are definitely important, but each of these items has an emotional attachment. How much would your CEO like to brag about an exceptional customer experience or a dynamic site that is vibrant and ever-changing? These are the strategic benefits that a web content management system can provide and they are the talking points. These strategic items will be discussed around the water cooler. They will be the components celebrated at the launch party. So weave them into your business plan, quantify them as best as you can, and talk about them. Make the decision makers really want a new web content management system to take your company to the next level.
As Robert Fulghum said ““… dreams are more powerful than facts - hope always triumphs over experience.” If you can appeal to the Executive hopes and dreams, you can leave the room with a “YES.” Or in keeping with the theme of this blog, a “You betcha!”
Wednesday, February 17, 2010
Monday, February 15, 2010
Building a Web Content Management Business Case Part 2 of 3
One of the questions that we are often asked by our prospects is ‘how do I build a business case to support the purchase of a Web Content Management system?’ Here is a three part series on one method that could be employed. The first metric that we looked at was Revenue. The second metric that logically follows is to evaluate Cost.
Cost, productivity and headcount savings are critical measures to include in a business case as they tend to be the highest valued metrics within the organization. Everyone loves revenue projections, but skeptical management, particularly with a background in IT, is naturally going to gravitate towards cost savings as a more reliable and achievable metric.
Will a new Web Content Management system result in cost savings? You betcha. Here are several easily quantifiable data points to consider:
1. A better site, operating in an infrastructure with a single stack will be less expensive because it will require fewer resources and less expensive resources to maintain. This measurement is relevant if you are operating today with many disparate systems that are cobbled together. You lose productivity because experts in one system may not be able to provide support in another, so you have to have more resources with different specialties. The more systems that are in use, the more complex the environment and therefore, the more expensive the IT resources that will be required to maintain it. A simple system with a single architecture will be less expensive. Period.
2. A better site will reduce costs in customer support because it will empower users with more customer self-service capabilities via the web site. This measurement speaks to the ability for customers and partners to be able to open, track, update and close trouble tickets via the web, as opposed to calling a call center and speaking to a customer support rep to log a ticket. This is just one example of how customer self-service can reduce costs and you may have other examples that make the metric even more compelling.
3. A better site will be less expensive because the time and brain-power to manage integration points with other software will be reduced due to a common platform. This measurement is very real and often overlooked when preparing a business case. If you have three content management systems and you purchase lead management software or a CRM system, you will need to integrate those purchases with each of your content management systems. That is expensive, time-consuming and can lead to costly mistakes. You don’t want to be the company who loses web leads because the integration point with your lead management platform broke down and took weeks to discover.
4. A better site will be less expensive due to automated content expiration and triggering updates via workflow, rather than manually auditing content (or not auditing at all). This measurement could be a ‘soft’ cost unless you have headcount dedicated to auditing your site. But the value is critical. With a web content management system, you can design workflow that alerts a business owner that their content is stale and due for a refresh. You can also establish business rules that ‘expire’ content automatically after an event or a certain time period has passed. The value of this can easily be under-stated because the cost of old, tired content reflects poorly on the whole customer experience.
5. A better infrastructure will allow users to create smaller content units that can be stored and re-used beyond the web site. This item speaks to the heart of the web content management value proposition. How many places do you save your key messaging? And when it is updated, how many places do you have to make that change to ensure it is reflected across the board? We have great customer stories where the re-use of content units is done remarkably well. Key messaging points are saved in the web content management platform and fed to the web site and data sheets and event descriptions from a single source. So when the messaging changes, with one update, so do all of the impacted assets. This too can be hard to quantify, but if you look at the hours and cost involved in creating collateral and you consider how much content re-use would reduce that time, you should be able to create a defensible cost savings number.
These five metrics will apply to most organizations, but there are other measures that might apply to your Web Content Management business case as well. If you are hosting the site externally, or paying a 3rd party to manage or monitor your site, or if you have out-sourced translations or localization issues, these costs can contribute as well. The best place to start is to review your P&L or your historical POs. Where are you spending money to support your web site? Could those costs be reduced with a web content management system that was easy to maintain, update, audit and integrate? My guess is that you will say “You betcha!” and be able to build a compelling business case based on significant cost savings.
Our final installation in this series will discuss the strategic goals and how to incorporate those into your business case. Stay tuned…
Cost, productivity and headcount savings are critical measures to include in a business case as they tend to be the highest valued metrics within the organization. Everyone loves revenue projections, but skeptical management, particularly with a background in IT, is naturally going to gravitate towards cost savings as a more reliable and achievable metric.
Will a new Web Content Management system result in cost savings? You betcha. Here are several easily quantifiable data points to consider:
1. A better site, operating in an infrastructure with a single stack will be less expensive because it will require fewer resources and less expensive resources to maintain. This measurement is relevant if you are operating today with many disparate systems that are cobbled together. You lose productivity because experts in one system may not be able to provide support in another, so you have to have more resources with different specialties. The more systems that are in use, the more complex the environment and therefore, the more expensive the IT resources that will be required to maintain it. A simple system with a single architecture will be less expensive. Period.
2. A better site will reduce costs in customer support because it will empower users with more customer self-service capabilities via the web site. This measurement speaks to the ability for customers and partners to be able to open, track, update and close trouble tickets via the web, as opposed to calling a call center and speaking to a customer support rep to log a ticket. This is just one example of how customer self-service can reduce costs and you may have other examples that make the metric even more compelling.
3. A better site will be less expensive because the time and brain-power to manage integration points with other software will be reduced due to a common platform. This measurement is very real and often overlooked when preparing a business case. If you have three content management systems and you purchase lead management software or a CRM system, you will need to integrate those purchases with each of your content management systems. That is expensive, time-consuming and can lead to costly mistakes. You don’t want to be the company who loses web leads because the integration point with your lead management platform broke down and took weeks to discover.
4. A better site will be less expensive due to automated content expiration and triggering updates via workflow, rather than manually auditing content (or not auditing at all). This measurement could be a ‘soft’ cost unless you have headcount dedicated to auditing your site. But the value is critical. With a web content management system, you can design workflow that alerts a business owner that their content is stale and due for a refresh. You can also establish business rules that ‘expire’ content automatically after an event or a certain time period has passed. The value of this can easily be under-stated because the cost of old, tired content reflects poorly on the whole customer experience.
5. A better infrastructure will allow users to create smaller content units that can be stored and re-used beyond the web site. This item speaks to the heart of the web content management value proposition. How many places do you save your key messaging? And when it is updated, how many places do you have to make that change to ensure it is reflected across the board? We have great customer stories where the re-use of content units is done remarkably well. Key messaging points are saved in the web content management platform and fed to the web site and data sheets and event descriptions from a single source. So when the messaging changes, with one update, so do all of the impacted assets. This too can be hard to quantify, but if you look at the hours and cost involved in creating collateral and you consider how much content re-use would reduce that time, you should be able to create a defensible cost savings number.
These five metrics will apply to most organizations, but there are other measures that might apply to your Web Content Management business case as well. If you are hosting the site externally, or paying a 3rd party to manage or monitor your site, or if you have out-sourced translations or localization issues, these costs can contribute as well. The best place to start is to review your P&L or your historical POs. Where are you spending money to support your web site? Could those costs be reduced with a web content management system that was easy to maintain, update, audit and integrate? My guess is that you will say “You betcha!” and be able to build a compelling business case based on significant cost savings.
Our final installation in this series will discuss the strategic goals and how to incorporate those into your business case. Stay tuned…
Thursday, February 11, 2010
Building a Web Content Management Business Case Part 1 of 3
One of the questions that we are often asked by our prospects is ‘how do I build a business case to support the purchase of a Web Content Management system?’ Here is a three part series on one method that could be employed. Obviously, business cases are unique to each company and the specific drivers that matter most to them but here is one approach.
First, one must look at Revenue. Revenue is that thing that funds all other things and that is why we love it so much. It pays our salaries, keeps the lights on and enables us to have blackberries to feed our ‘always on’ addiction. Revenue is good.
So will a new Web Content Management system drive an increase in revenue? You betcha! Of course, measuring that can get complicated and there are a myriad of parameters that could be considered, but here are a few:
1. A better site will produce more qualified leads through a better customer experience, easier to find information and clear calls to action.
2. A better site will facilitate the sale of some products end-to-end via the web.
3. The speed of deals through the sales cycle can be enhanced with a better site, as prospects will be able to do more thorough research on their own.
These particular items can be measure by metrics like: number of web leads, conversion rates, average deal size, length of sales cycle, etc. These are easily (relatively) quantifiable and data probably exists for you to benchmark against your particular industry. An easy way to capture the value of the revenue impact is to measure what you are currently doing, compare it to industry benchmarks and then set realistic targets with a new Content Management system.
There are other metrics that may impact revenue, depending on the type of site that you have.
1. Increasing time on site could be critical as people who stay longer have higher conversion rates.
2. Participation in a community, posting comments, reviews and rating can be great indicators of engagement and higher engagement equals higher conversion.
3. Adding rich media elements like video and flash demos can increase the conversion rates as buyers are more able to shop and compare.
4. Creating personalized content that can be delivered as you learn more about your visitors through their clicks says to a buyer that you ‘get’ them and that translates to sales.
And there are many more that you can consider. The key to building a business case around revenue is to choose the impacts that drive the highest revenue, align with your strategy and will enhance the customer experience. Then find measurable analytics that you can apply to those revenue drivers. Be consistent and use the best data available. Benchmark against industry standards, if you can. And don’t artificially inflate the numbers. Nothing will kill a proposal faster than the appearance of impropriety in the numbers. And further, a solid business case truly should stand on its own.
Is there more to consider than revenue? You betcha! And we will talk about those next time.
First, one must look at Revenue. Revenue is that thing that funds all other things and that is why we love it so much. It pays our salaries, keeps the lights on and enables us to have blackberries to feed our ‘always on’ addiction. Revenue is good.
So will a new Web Content Management system drive an increase in revenue? You betcha! Of course, measuring that can get complicated and there are a myriad of parameters that could be considered, but here are a few:
1. A better site will produce more qualified leads through a better customer experience, easier to find information and clear calls to action.
2. A better site will facilitate the sale of some products end-to-end via the web.
3. The speed of deals through the sales cycle can be enhanced with a better site, as prospects will be able to do more thorough research on their own.
These particular items can be measure by metrics like: number of web leads, conversion rates, average deal size, length of sales cycle, etc. These are easily (relatively) quantifiable and data probably exists for you to benchmark against your particular industry. An easy way to capture the value of the revenue impact is to measure what you are currently doing, compare it to industry benchmarks and then set realistic targets with a new Content Management system.
There are other metrics that may impact revenue, depending on the type of site that you have.
1. Increasing time on site could be critical as people who stay longer have higher conversion rates.
2. Participation in a community, posting comments, reviews and rating can be great indicators of engagement and higher engagement equals higher conversion.
3. Adding rich media elements like video and flash demos can increase the conversion rates as buyers are more able to shop and compare.
4. Creating personalized content that can be delivered as you learn more about your visitors through their clicks says to a buyer that you ‘get’ them and that translates to sales.
And there are many more that you can consider. The key to building a business case around revenue is to choose the impacts that drive the highest revenue, align with your strategy and will enhance the customer experience. Then find measurable analytics that you can apply to those revenue drivers. Be consistent and use the best data available. Benchmark against industry standards, if you can. And don’t artificially inflate the numbers. Nothing will kill a proposal faster than the appearance of impropriety in the numbers. And further, a solid business case truly should stand on its own.
Is there more to consider than revenue? You betcha! And we will talk about those next time.
Sunday, February 7, 2010
What's in a word? (aka Why is Messaging so hard?)
I recently read a great (old) clip of Abbott and Costello buying a computer. It is hysterical. If you haven’t read it yet, you must check it out. And it got me thinking – why is it so hard to convey what we mean? Why is messaging so difficult? This is something that we are really struggling with at Open Text and I don’t think I am revealing some big corporate secret, because Messaging has been a challenge at every company and in every industry that I have worked in. Why is it so hard? Maybe our definition of who we are, as a company, hasn’t evolved with the same flexibility that applies in our personal life. Or maybe it’s that, as people, we are expected to be multi-dimensional with lots of different interests and corporations aren’t allowed the same latitude.
In any given day, I play many diverse roles. Wife, Mother, Sister, Daughter, Boss, Subordinate, Person venting, Person giving counsel to others venting, cheerleader, thought leader, mini-van driver, runner, dog owner, etc. So how would I describe myself? Well, it depends on the situation and what is required at that moment.
Why can’t that same philosophy apply to our corporate identities? We spend so much time and energy trying to distill our messaging down to a single catchphrase that encapsulates everything we do and everything we are. I understand the importance of Brand and I am not suggesting that having a clear brand identity is anything less than critical. But the layer beneath that can be more fluid. At Open Text, we are experts in web content, back-office operations, workflow, social media, storage, e-mail management and much more. Beyond the products that we offer, we aim to provide a holistic customer experience, a fulfilling sales cycle, quick and accurate installation, superior service after the sale, thought leadership with regards to future direction of the market place and, again, much more.
I think the real challenge is finding the link, or the messaging, that ties together the different pieces into a cohesive whole so it doesn’t just feel like a bunch of fragmented tangents with no commonality. It’s easier on a personal level because all of the aspects of me are just who I am. “I yam what I yam.” For a corporation, those lines of commonality needs to be more clearly drawn so customers, analysts, investors and the press can see a vision and the executives can articulate a strategy.
So we will keep working on our Messaging. And I have no doubt that we will solve it…and then it will age and we will have to define it again. Maybe that is the lesson here. I want to keep growing and changing so that my life is dynamic. And I want the company that I work for to keep growing and changing so that its life is dynamic. So I guess “Messaging” isn’t leaving my To Do list any time soon.
In any given day, I play many diverse roles. Wife, Mother, Sister, Daughter, Boss, Subordinate, Person venting, Person giving counsel to others venting, cheerleader, thought leader, mini-van driver, runner, dog owner, etc. So how would I describe myself? Well, it depends on the situation and what is required at that moment.
Why can’t that same philosophy apply to our corporate identities? We spend so much time and energy trying to distill our messaging down to a single catchphrase that encapsulates everything we do and everything we are. I understand the importance of Brand and I am not suggesting that having a clear brand identity is anything less than critical. But the layer beneath that can be more fluid. At Open Text, we are experts in web content, back-office operations, workflow, social media, storage, e-mail management and much more. Beyond the products that we offer, we aim to provide a holistic customer experience, a fulfilling sales cycle, quick and accurate installation, superior service after the sale, thought leadership with regards to future direction of the market place and, again, much more.
I think the real challenge is finding the link, or the messaging, that ties together the different pieces into a cohesive whole so it doesn’t just feel like a bunch of fragmented tangents with no commonality. It’s easier on a personal level because all of the aspects of me are just who I am. “I yam what I yam.” For a corporation, those lines of commonality needs to be more clearly drawn so customers, analysts, investors and the press can see a vision and the executives can articulate a strategy.
So we will keep working on our Messaging. And I have no doubt that we will solve it…and then it will age and we will have to define it again. Maybe that is the lesson here. I want to keep growing and changing so that my life is dynamic. And I want the company that I work for to keep growing and changing so that its life is dynamic. So I guess “Messaging” isn’t leaving my To Do list any time soon.
Tuesday, February 2, 2010
Minimalistic or Fewer Clicks?
We have a debate going on with our Web UI team about the benefits of a minimalistic approach to content versus a full page of content so data can be reached with the least number of clicks. Have you struggled with this? If so, I would love your advice or opinion.
On one hand, we have all been taught that data should be available with the fewest number of clicks. If we ask users to dig too deeply in our web sites, we have failed and we will lose them. I honestly get this and I agree.
But (there is always a but, isn’t there?) I have also learned from numerous sources and publications about the benefits of having a single “call to action” on a page and leading users to their recommended content based on the path they choose. We have created a new flow for a specific section of our site that encourages visitors to self-select their organization – Marketing, IT or Knowledge Management. I know that self-selection is not optimal and ideally you would know your visitors and guide them to the right content, but we are going to try this self-selection idea and test our feedback.
After they self-select their organization, we present them with business problems common to that organization and then we provide practical, tested solutions to those problems. Thus, there are definitely three clicks to get to the answer – Choose your department (click #1), choose your Business Problem (click #2) and get some answers (click #3). The page designs are very simple, light on text with strong visuals that guide users to the Call to Action for each page. We reviewed the design with several teams and gathered positive feedback.
However, the designs were not well-received with the UI team. They felt that more data per page was necessary to give users multiple options and one-click access to a variety of content. To me, the page was cluttered and confusing but I cannot argue with the fact that the ‘busier’ design definitely has fewer clicks.
I need your advice. What do you think? Do you like the Google-like home page with a minimalistic design? Or do you prefer something like the Yahoo! Homepage with a plethora of content paths to take? What factors should we consider when making this decision? I know it depends on the particular message that you are trying to convey, but I would love to hear your opinions and experience.
On one hand, we have all been taught that data should be available with the fewest number of clicks. If we ask users to dig too deeply in our web sites, we have failed and we will lose them. I honestly get this and I agree.
But (there is always a but, isn’t there?) I have also learned from numerous sources and publications about the benefits of having a single “call to action” on a page and leading users to their recommended content based on the path they choose. We have created a new flow for a specific section of our site that encourages visitors to self-select their organization – Marketing, IT or Knowledge Management. I know that self-selection is not optimal and ideally you would know your visitors and guide them to the right content, but we are going to try this self-selection idea and test our feedback.
After they self-select their organization, we present them with business problems common to that organization and then we provide practical, tested solutions to those problems. Thus, there are definitely three clicks to get to the answer – Choose your department (click #1), choose your Business Problem (click #2) and get some answers (click #3). The page designs are very simple, light on text with strong visuals that guide users to the Call to Action for each page. We reviewed the design with several teams and gathered positive feedback.
However, the designs were not well-received with the UI team. They felt that more data per page was necessary to give users multiple options and one-click access to a variety of content. To me, the page was cluttered and confusing but I cannot argue with the fact that the ‘busier’ design definitely has fewer clicks.
I need your advice. What do you think? Do you like the Google-like home page with a minimalistic design? Or do you prefer something like the Yahoo! Homepage with a plethora of content paths to take? What factors should we consider when making this decision? I know it depends on the particular message that you are trying to convey, but I would love to hear your opinions and experience.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
