150 likes | 280 Views
Content-led. ...a case study that examines, over a given period of time, how a content-led approach is carried out in a web development project, and what challenges, obstacles and successes it meets. A GRAP 2495 FINAL REPORT PRESENTATION. Gillian Rogers S3093806. Executive summary.
E N D
Content-led ...a case study that examines, over a given period of time, how a content-led approach is carried out in a web development project, and what challenges, obstacles and successes it meets.
A GRAP 2495 FINAL REPORT PRESENTATION Gillian Rogers S3093806
Executive summary • The organisation in which I work takes its web content seriously, and has, for as long as I’ve known it, been serious about its improvement and its suitability for the long term. • This is not always the approach organisations take for content. • Now that we’re in the midst of a very large transformation program,and content is being included in key developmental stages, I wanted to examine:
How does content fare, when it’s involved from the very start, as well as being expected to be around for the very long term?
So my case study does this... I provide a glossaryof the commonly used terms in my project, like… content types, metadata, information architecture, user experience. That’s just a few…
A literature review introduces my sources. Including Kristina Halvorson, Erin Kissane, Gerry McGovern, Sara Wachter-Boettcher, and more.
I provide the context. My project observes a few months in my organisation’s 3-year web transformation program. It’s a long project because the site undergoing radical change has some 200,000 pages, and over 100 editors/publishers.
I seek to answer 5 questions. What are the key content requirements? How successful was the Agileapproach? What are the benefitsof involving a content person? What do content reps do well, and what do they do less well? When should content reps step up, and step back?
I get my answers. I consult my sources I collected data from a survey of 12 people from my project team I asked for direct colleague input I made observations, many of which I recorded in my reflective journal
I draw conclusions. These are them in brief…
Introducing an Agile methodology into a workplace (particularly a large organisation’s) where a Waterfall approach is more consistently known can lead to friction and discontent. • When Agile is agreed upon as the methodology, appointing a Project Owner is critical. • The project was greatly slowed by the changes and reconfigurations of content types. • This project would have benefited from the content owners being enmeshed with, or at least closer to, the project team. • It’s incorrect and a distraction to assume developers will be hostile by default toward real content. • Developers need coaxing to understand the place of content and the value of testing with real stuff. • Content and UX people should see developers as valuable contributors at an earlier stage.
I make recommendations. And here are those in brief…
Prior to kick off, we need to get clarity on: • what we are building, ie, what the actual requirements of it are (and these should be documented and available to all) • any content principles or assumptions that are governing our approach. Who the key delegates will be, what other roles and personnel are involved • what pieces of work have been done and are ready to go. • We want to keep front-of-mind in the Project team that what they are dealing with is content, not ‘data’. • The methodology needs to be understood and agreed upon. • Remember, not all content CAN or SHOULD be Agile. • We will need a designated Project Owner. • Business rules, user roles and workflows need to be incorporated into the functional specification at the start.
And that’s it! I provide a bibliography, and I attach all my survey data.
I’ve made my case. I’ve done my study.