There’s been an ongoing debate among about the merits of using Open Source Web Content Management Systems (WCMS), vs. commercially developed versions. Each has benefits and liabilities, and both introduce some often overlooked complexities. We believe that both options should be considered not on the perceived financial or social aspect, but rather on which delivers the fastest and most-cost effective outcome. Today, I want to offer some perspective on open source and I’ll take up the commercial alternatives in a future post.
It’s absolutely true that the source code is available at no cost. But source code is a complex tool, not an outcome (website). What you then need to factor is the costs associated with using that tool which may be significant.
Before you can lay down your first line of code, you have to install and maintain a hardware environment that’s compliant. Next, you’ll need professional, technical resources that can develop that source code into a functional framework for your sites. There are literally thousands of redevelopers making a healthy living out of making open source work and that money is coming from somewhere. Or you may have this skill in house, but chances are that’s not free either—you’re probably paying your employees. At the very least, there are opportunity costs of using your IT staff for website deployment and maintenance.
Once your code diverges from the core, you’re less able to leverage updates, features or bug fixes that are happening in the open source core. You can certainly mirror those items in your own version, but that won’t be free either. If you don’t keep up, there’s a risk that your sites end up on a burning platform. With web practices and standards ever changing, this risk is real.
At this point, you’ve also created a couple dependencies. Your development partner (if you’re not doing it yourself), owns the keys to your web kingdom, and you’ll be fully dependent on them for functional changes. While you may be able to manage your own content easily, your ability to develop new navigation and incorporate other customized elements could be severely constrained. We have quite a bit of experience picking up projects from companies that have taken a DIY approach or have been sold promises on the cheap only to find later they needed to start all over. Most franchisors and associations aren’t prepared for this commitment as it draws resources away from their core business.
So what are the advantages of Open Source? Well, to begin with it is free and if you’re a technically robust organization, it’s a viable alternative especially when you have ample resource bandwidth in IT. And you can do whatever you want with it, but it’s a long-term commitment of resources. This should lead to some high-level questions:
Question #1 is:
Do we have plenty of technical resources to apply to this project?”
If not, then Question #2 is: “
Do we have ample funding to acquire the outside technical resources for this project?”
If you’re still going, then Question #3 is:
“Are we ready to commit financial and/or personnel resources for the long-term, as this will essentially be a build (vs. buy) commitment to technology?”
And finally, Question #4 is:
“Do we have plenty of time for prototyping, testing and code revision?”
In summary, open source is not a solution that pops out of the box ready to go. If you’re searching for a web-based CMS to enable your non-technical users to communicate online, then there’s something self-defeating about needing a lot of technical support. It’s like inheriting a set of mechanics tools. . .just having them doesn’t confer the ability to repair automobiles. This is where commercial CMS packages may have a much clearer advantage, providing they don’t replicate the same liabilities of cost, time and technical care and feeding of site and content management. They aren’t monolithic in their abilities and require diligence when evaluating as well.
I’ll be addressing the commercial CMS option in next week’s posting and we’ll explore total cost of ownership factors for both open and commercial CMS.