This recommendation report summarises a risk analysis undertaken to evaluate upgrading the university CMS to MySource Matrix without performing a full evaluation of CMS products in the broader market.

Authors Avatar
         UWA Website Project CMS Recommendation Report 25 May 2007          CMS Upgrade: Risk Analysis and Recommendation Prepared by: Sarah Delfante Library Web Coordinator Contents Executive Summary  …………………………………………………………….          3 Introduction  ……………………………………………………………………..          5 Methodology  ……………………………………………………………………..          5 Summary of results …………………………………...…………………………...         6 Recommendation  ………………………………………………………………….        7 Appendix 1: CMS Functional Requirements ……………………………………         8 Appendix 2: Risk Register ……………………………..…………………………          29 Appendix 3: Risk Treatment Plan…………. …………..…………………………          35 Appendix 4: Issue Register ………………. …………..…………………………          38 Appendix 5: Expected Benefits…………… ……………………………………          42 Appendix 6: Case Study: Department of Justice…………………………………          43 Appendix 7: Case Study: Monash University ……………………………………          45 Appendix 8: Case Study: University of Melbourne………………………………          46 Appendix 9: CMS Matrix Comparison of CMS Products………………………          47 Executive Summary MySource Classic Web Content Management System (CMS) was implemented by the University in 2002 and is currently used to maintain most official websites. The current CMS is now an aging system and a number of reports and reviews have identified issues with MySource Classic. Replacing the CMS is a significant and necessary step towards resolving other web-related issues. The University Library has 18 months experience with a newer version of the same product MySource Matrix (http://matrix.squiz.net/).  The Library Website Coordinator was seconded to the UWA website project to undertake a CMS evaluation to gauge the University’s CMS requirements based on existing reports and further consultation with critical stakeholders;measure the University’s requirements against vendor responses and the Library’s experience;identify risks and opportunities through three case studies of CMS implementations; compare MySource Matrix against prominent CMS products from other vendors; complete a risk and issue analysis of the upgrade path; and recommend whether the Matrix upgrade path is an appropriate solution for the University. The outcome from the evaluation process is all of the University’s mandatory requirements are met by MySource Matrix;all risks associated with the upgrade as minor or low; anda number of significant benefits will flow from an upgrade to MySource Matrix. On the balance of the evidence available, it is recommended that the University plan to upgrade its current CMS to MySource Matrix. Introduction This recommendation report summarises a risk analysis undertaken to evaluate upgrading the university CMS to MySource Matrix without performing a full evaluation of CMS products in the broader market. Issue to Resolve The MySource Classic Web Content Management System (CMS) employed by the University to publish most official websites was implemented in 2002. The Information Management Review project undertaken by Information Technology Services in 2006 recommended that, given the importance of the website as one of the University’s main marketing assets, the CMS should be regarded as a critical application. The issues and risks associated with the current CMS solution (as identified in the UWA CMS Review) revolve around the following shortcomings: UsabilitySystem to system integrationTransactional functionalityAccessibility VersioningScalability The following broad factors are considerations in resolving the current shortcomings and arriving at a CMS solution that will support the delivery of a website which aligns with the objective of the web site project to meet or exceed national and international exemplars and standards, and to meet or exceed the expectations of users: Platform agnostic Robust versioningTools to streamline content quality assurance XHTML compliant outputW3C compliant pagesLink validationMetadata enforcementAutomated content review cycles Highly usableHighly scalableNot necessarily a content delivery platformExtensible Flexibility of workflow Flexible deployment of contentCompatible with UWA portal initiativeExit path The options considered regarding the University’s current CMS were: Retain and undertake development of the current CMSGo to market for a replacement CMSEvaluate possible CMS upgrade path It was acknowledged that the time taken to replace the CMS could be compressed by upgrading to a new version of the current CMS, although it was identified that an analysis of fitness for purpose and the risks involved needed to be adequately assessed before making a decision. The University is currently using MySource Classic version 2.8.6 developed by Squiz.net. A number of other CMS solutions are in use around the University. The University Library undertook a requirements gathering and a ‘Request For Proposal’ process before implementing a more recent version of the Squiz.net product, MySource Matrix version 3.10 in January 2006. Given the Library’s experience with MySource Matrix, the Library Web Coordinator was seconded to the UWA website project to: gauge the University’s CMS requirements based on existing reports and further consultation with Information Technology Services;measure the University’s requirements against the Library’s experience;undertake a risk analysis of the upgrade path;recommend whether the upgrade path is an appropriate solution for the University as a whole. The results of this exercise are detailed below in this recommendation report. Methodology The methodology employed to evaluate the suitability of an upgrade path emphasizes existing knowledge and experience and includes the following approaches and phases. CMS Functional Requirements A comprehensive set of functional requirements for a replacement CMS were developed based on requirements developed by the University Library and additional requirements identified in the Web@UWA Review (2005) and UWA CMS Review (2007). Additional consultation was undertaken with critical stakeholders and an invitation for comment was sent to the University web-authors mailing list. Vendor responses and the Library’s experience were used to measure the performance of MySource Matrix against the functional requirements. Risk and Issue Registers and Treatment plans A Risk Analysis was undertaken in line with the University’s Risk Management process which is closely aligned to the relevant national risk assessment standard AS/NZS 4360. The following steps were performed: Step 1 – Establish the context - Understand the Business and Clarify ObjectivesStep 2 - Identify Risks (via a Risk Register and Treatment Plan)Step 3 – Assess Risks (via a Risk Register and Treatment Plan) In order to ensure a structured and consistent rating of risks and to ensure risk relativity across the organisation, the University Risk Matrix was be used to assess consequence, likelihood and calculate risk rating. Case Studies Three institutions with CMS implementations were selected for the purposes of identifying additional risks, requirements and opportunities.  Two universities and one state government department were selected. One using MySource Matrix, two using another CMS, one of which is using the same portal technology recently selected for the UWA portal. The institutions selected were University of Melbourne, Monash University and the Department of Justice. Feature Comparison of CMS Products The decision not to go directly to market for a replacement CMS introduced a risk that other systems that might meet or exceed our requirements would be excluded from evaluation. In order to highlight additional requirements, a feature comparison of some leading CMS products was conducted via the comparison tool at CMSMatrix.org. CMS products compared were MySource Matrix, Drupal, Interwoven Teamsite, and RedDot CMS. Expected Benefits Brief statements of expected benefits accruing from an upgrade to MySource Matrix were compiled into a list. Summary of results CMS Functional Requirements Functional requirements for a University CMS were compiled from: The Library’s CMS functional requirements (adapted for University-wide solution) Web@UWA ReviewUWA CMS Review Information Management ReviewLiaison with ITSLiaison with Schools currently outside the CMS From Squiz.Net’s response, the experience of the University Library and that reported by the University of Melbourne (Appendix 8), it was determined that all mandatory functional requirements were met by MySource Matrix. (Appendix 1) Risk and Issue Registers and Treatment plans A risk analysis was performed in-line with the University’s Risk Management process which produced a Risk Register and Risk Treatment Plan. Additionally an Issue Register was started and expected benefits documented. Feedback into the risk analysis was sought from Safety and Health (Stuart Spouse), ITS (Peter Morgan, Paul Blain, Roger Hicks), those with technical expertise and experience with the current CMS (Dan Petty, Mark Tearle) and Faculty representatives (Di Arnott, Narelle Molloy, Heather Merritt, Jason Pascoe).   Risks identified concerned GovernanceScalabilitySecurityCustom functionalityExtensibilityIntegration with other systemsComplexityInfrastructureShort time-frame of projectProduct support and developmentUsability It was established that all identified risks with upgrading to MySource Matrix had existing controls or treatment options, and that all identified risks were assessed as minor or low. (Appendices 2, 3, & 4) The risk and issue registers and treatment plans are intended to be live documents that would evolve as an implementation was planned and as each risk and issue was addressed. Case Studies and Feature Comparison of CMS Products The decision not to go directly to market for a replacement CMS introduced a risk that other systems that might meet or exceed our requirements would be excluded from evaluation. For example, Gartner Research lists Interwoven TeamSite in the leading quadrant of Enterprise CMS solutions. References were sought from the Department of Justice (Appendix 6) and Monash University (Appendix 7), both of whom use Interwoven TeamSite as their CMS. Screenshots and live demonstrations of the Interwoven TeamSite editing interface revealed it to be significantly more complex to use than front-end, in-context editing in MySource Matrix. This may have been a factor in the relatively small number of staff trained to use the product at each site examined relative to the 2,000 staff using the current version of MySource Classic at UWA. However the Interwoven MetaTagger product used at both the Department of Justice and Monash University was of particular interest. MetaTagger can be trained to classify documents according to agreed schemas, thereafter automatically classifying documents with a high degree of accuracy. MetaTagger would significantly reduce the work entailed in classifying web information and would very likely improve the quality of classification. Local vendors have confirmed that MetaTagger is available as a standalone product with an interface that should allow integration with a range of enterprise applications including MySource Matrix. A comparison was conducted by CMSMatrix (http://www.cmsmatrix.org) between MySource Matrix, Interwoven TeamSite, Drupal and RedDot CMS. The case studies and CMSMatrix comparison did not uncover any functionality missing from MySource Matrix that would be desirable. Although the University should investigate the feasibility of integrating a standalone classification tool such as MetaTagger with the CMS. Expected Benefits A number of benefits (Appendix 5) may or will accrue from the University’s upgrade to MySource Matrix. Generally these benefits fall into two categories: benefits derived from upgrading from an older to new version of a related product and benefits of MySource Matrix versus other CMS products including MySource Classic. Simplification of site migration through the vendor’s experience in supporting this upgrade path, reduction in retraining through familiarity of some aspects of the user interface and processes and reduction in time and cost to migrate custom functionality in Classic to Matrix through common elements of the architectures are some significant benefits flowing from an upgrade to Matrix. Reduced cost through open source licensing, utilisation of existing infrastructure and architecture, access to comprehensive CMS feature set and better support for legislative requirements. Recommendation Based on the vendor response to the University’s functional requirementsrisk analysis performedissues and benefits identifiedreferences from other intuitions and government departmentsCMS Matrix comparison of CMS products  it was determined that: all mandatory functional requirements were met by MySource Matrix all identified risks with upgrading to MySource Matrix were assessed as minor or low a comparison of CMS products did not uncover any functionality missing from MySource Matrix that would be desirable Based on the evaluation of MySource Matrix against the University’s requirements and the risk analysis of the upgrade path performed it is recommended that the University upgrade to MySource Matrix. Appendix One: CMS Functional Requirements http://teams.admin.uwa.edu.au/sites/projectserver_114/Identification/Architecture/CMS%20Functional%20Requirements%20(Squiz).doc ItemDescriptionTechnical issuesCriticalityCodeRespondent’s commentsGeneralThe solution must fully support the W3C Web Accessibility Initiative (WAI) for compliance with disability access to online information.Is this facilitated through HTML Tidy or are there additional mechanisms?MandatoryY/FCMySource Matrix may be used to publish sites that conform to W3C Web Content Accessibility guidelines. Prompts authors to add additional info for accessibility req. (e.g. ALT tags)Allows authors to publish alternate versions of material (PDF, Flash)Automatically corrects invalid tags (HTML Tidy)The admin interface of Matrix is itself not web accessible however it is possible to create templates that allow web accessible updating of content through the front-end ‘Simple Edit’ interface.Built using open standards with a license that allows UWA staff to make modifications.Please describe.MandatoryY/FCThe software is free and has no licensing fees. Clients have full access to the source code which is open and available for modification by you. Matrix is an open source product which operates well on an open source platform (Apache, Linux and PHP) and uses other open source software to offer additional functionality.There should be a clear exit path from the CMS where content can be exported in a variety of flexible formats (e.g. XML).Please provide detail on the way in which content can be exported from the CMS.MandatoryY/FCMySource Version 4 is an entirely SOAP orientated architecture and there will be an upgrade path between versions 3 and 4.Some assets include XML interfaces, however these need to be built with the asset when it is created.Matrix is an open source product and the API to the system is available, allowing you to write a script to perform a complete export of content in whatever format is preferred. Squiz can provide a script to export content in an agreed format if required.Squiz provide a script that allows you to export the entire contents of your MySource Matrix repository and move it to external storage. Content may also be sent to other backup media such as tape. Content is exported either as a dump file (tar.gz), in a proprietary XML format (which can then be imported) or in a custom format as defined by an asset listing. The asset listing allows you to print all information about an asset in whatever format you define using MySource Matrix keywords.Content can be exported from Matrix in XHTML format, for use in third party document management systems (TRIM).A pricing model where a flat fee for unlimited end-user licenses can be issued.Highly desirableY/FCThe software is free and has no licensing fees.InterfaceSeparate layers for managing content, presentation and site structure must exist in the CMS.MandatoryY/FCDesign templates.Navigational functions in the CMS must be presented consistently and be understandable by the novice user.MandatoryY/FCNavigation is provided via an intuitive asset map which looks like Windows Explorer.Content CreationEasy and intuitive WYSIWYG interface where content may be edited with no prior knowledge of HTML and minimal training.MandatoryY/FCIncludes WYSIWYG editor. System does not require programming skills to operate.The content creation/editing interface should be accessed through a standard web browser and not require a separate dedicated client or software application. The requirement of browser plug-ins is acceptable.MandatoryY/FCWindows: IE 6+ and Mozilla 1+.Mac: Safari 2+ and Mozilla 1+.Camino also supported for Windows, Mac and Linux.Requires Java JRE 1.4 or above.The content creation/editing tool should be configurable in its functionality and appearance with the ability for system administrators to “lock” certain formatting options to preserve an institution-wide “look and feel”.MandatoryY/FCMatrix includes the provision of a filtered functionality view. Administrators can restrict the amount of functionality a content author can see so they only need to learn the elements that are relevant tot heir job.Standard authoring features such as spell checking, search and replace, undo and redo and clipboard with cut, copy and paste functionalities should all be supported.MandatoryY/FCThe editor supports spell checking, search and replace, copy and paste and table editing.Authors need to be able to preview and test content prior to live delivery as they would appear in their published state. This should be either supported from within the tool or in a target web browser.MandatoryY/FCMySource Matrix allows an author to preview a page as it will appear in the published site by selecting the ‘Preview’ function for the given asset.Supports creation and deployment of JavaScript, ASP .NET, J2EE, Perl, Python, PHP, SSI, C and cgi scripts.Please describe.Highly desirableP/ALTMatrix can interface with other development
Join now!
environments but the creation and serving would not occur within Matrix.Functionality can be added to Matrix through the use of modules (also known as custom assets) which are applications written in PHP. PHP is capable of calling information from many other application types, such as applications written in Java or scripts called from system calls. http://www.php.com A COM interface on a dedicated Windows server could be developed to provide .NET integration.Additionally the Remote Content tool could be used.Ability to import files, such as HTML, XML, JavaScript and CSS, created in external authoring tools.Please describe.Highly desirableY/FCClients may choose to add a ...

This is a preview of the whole essay