Migration is for the birds, not your content

I’ll bet that anyone who has ever worked on a website redesign has heard the phrase, “content migration”- moving content from the old website over to the redesigned site. So let me ask you, what would serve your users best? Would moving all of your content over as-is make sense? Or can your team curate the content to reflect the improved usability of the new website?

Typically, migration is defined as just moving all content over from the old site to the new one, like a flock of digital geese. Typically, this means even out of date content gets moved, junking up your beautiful new site and rendering the re-design moot. So if migration doesn’t quite fit, then what? As a content specialist DTI fellow, I’m interested in how other cities organize their content. Specifically, how they ensure organize their content so users see the most up-to-date information.

What I’m finding is migration may be fine for birds, but when it comes to content, taking the time to revise and transition information makes a lot of sense. Last week Céline and I spoke with two entities who have transitioned to new sites, and in the process, changed how authors manage their content.

The first person we spoke with was Richard Prowse, Head of Digital at the University of Bath. His team framed the process of moving content to the new site as transitioning the content. During their content inventory, they reviewed all of the University’s pages and decided what needed to be archived, what should be re-written, and what could transition as it currently exists. Through this process, they were able to:

• Design a system that worked intuitively for users who otherwise did not consider themselves content specialists,
• Create a thorough on-boarding process,
• And manage content much easier than their previous process.

After the initial transition, Prowse and his team figured out that framing the content management in terms of resources would have the biggest impact. When their users asked for a new page or content type to be created, they were asked if they had the time to maintain this page up to the new standards. If the answer was not a confident yes, then a new page was not created. As a result, this vetting process has clarified resourcing and staffing needs for the University and the content is consistently updated!

Similarly, the team behind the redesign of Boston.gov also knew that to migrate all existing content would take them back to square one. Instead, they transitioned and re-wrote content themselves, archiving what they didn’t need. By handling the content themselves, Boston.gov is able to:

• Keep the language simple and not jargon-y,
• Hold 1:1 web-writing classes with those interested in writing for their departments,
• And get buy-in from departments who may be resistant to the new site.

The goal is to have the individual authors in each department write and publish their own content within the writing and style guidelines set out in Boston.gov’s writing guide.

Perhaps one of the biggest benefits of transitioning, versus migrating, is that it builds some pushback when it comes to creating new pages after the transition is complete. Authors must have strong arguments- and plenty of time- to create and maintain a new page. Because of this, there is significantly less Redundant, Outdated, and Trivial (ROT) content than it if pages were created without keeping in mind the goals of the website or the most precious resource- the author’s time.

Both the University of Bath and Boston.gov have seen a significant improvement in the usability of their website. By transitioning only the content that passed the standards of the digital teams, department editors are able to maintain pages more efficiently, and end-users are able to find what they need faster. So let’s save the migration for the birds, and instead transition only the best content for your users.