When shopping for a CMS platform, organizations should consider several factors, including security, compliance and cost. A friendly UX would be nice, too.
Choosing a content management system is more than simply comparing a feature checklist to the marketing pages of leading CMS vendors. The decision should be taken seriously and arrived at methodically, as it affects customer experience, brand agility, compliance and total cost of ownership of a company's content practice.
Executives should follow certain, comprehensive steps to move from business goals to a confident CMS selection process that provides visibility and engagement across the content stakeholder community and delivers a CMS that meets the needs of the enterprise.
The recommendation is that executives use a disciplined, KPI‑driven selection so the CMS serves business strategy, not the other way around. The result will be a lower risk, faster delivery and a CMS that can adapt to organizational changes without costly updates or the enterprise entangled in vendor or feature lock-in.
Here are seven steps organizations can follow to select the best CMS platform to fit their needs.
1. Build a team to collaborate on objectives, governance and metrics.
Identify core stakeholders for choosing a CMS platform. This group could include members of the following teams: executive sponsors, legal and compliance, marketing, product, IT and security and regional leads. In this process, clarify who owns the CMS roadmap, approval workflows and publishing rights. Work within this team to document the content governance model and decide whether content operations will be centralized or federated.
Ultimately, the team must define what the CMS must enable and what it must allow. For example, the content team might want improvements in product launch velocity, omnichannel content distribution, content personalization or editorial efficiency, which most CMS offerings will enable. But company management, compliance and information security teams may need security and compliance features that might not be enabled or even allowed by every CMS.
Next, define measurable outcomes. How will the team objectively prove that it successfully met its goals, such as time to publish, page load speed, conversion rate, campaign cycle time, localization turnaround and support ticket volume?
Prioritize the top three objectives. These will guide tradeoffs between features and prevent scope creep. Beyond those top three must-haves, create a weighted list of goals against which to evaluate potential products and services.
2. Define security, privacy and compliance requirements early.
When evaluating vended products against requirements and objectives, treat regulatory obligations -- such as GDPR, data residency and retention policies -- as non-negotiable. Additionally, specify security controls the system will need to have, such as single sign-on, Security Assertion Markup Language, OAuth, role-based access, audit trails, encryption-at-rest and in-transit, and secrets management.
Require certifications -- such as SOC 2 Type II, ISO 27001 and FedRAMP, if applicable -- and ask vendors for recent documented penetration test reports and cadences. Evaluate incident-response service-level agreements (SLAs), vulnerability disclosure, backups, disaster recovery, and defined Recovery Point Objective and Recovery Time Objective.
For any vendors under serious consideration, obtain lists of any subprocessors and their data access and Data Processing Addendum terms, and request contractual confirmation of breach notification commitments.
These steps will make security, privacy, compliance and risk management key value propositions of the CMS.
3. Model content and channels.
Inventory the enterprise's required content types. These may include product pages, documentation, blogs, landing pages, help centers, mobile and app content, in‑store screens and partner portals. Decide whether the enterprise needs structured content with reusable components, translation memory and schema discipline or other key content structures.
Determine whether the CMS must deliver across channels via APIs to web, apps, email and social. Choose between page‑centric authoring and component or entry‑centric authoring. These choices will help refine a shortlist among traditional, headless and hybrid platforms.
4. Align architecture, integrations and performance.
Traditional, coupled CMS platforms can accelerate website launches and simplify non‑technical workflows, but are less flexible for omnichannel publishing. Headless CMSes expose content via APIs for multi‑channel delivery, performance and developer velocity, but require a strong DevOps team to build and maintain the front‑end website. Hybrid platforms blend WYSIWYG authoring with APIs; but maturity varies and many hybrid CMS vendors have an uneven product, either stronger on the back end and APIs or on the front end.
Map the enterprise's required integrations -- such as CRM, marketing automation, Digital Asset Management (DAM), e-commerce, search, analytics, translation and localization -- and note which are out-of-the-box vs. custom integrations. Assess maintenance overhead, webhook, automation support and middleware compatibility.
Forecast traffic and regions. Evaluate content delivery network strategy, caching, image optimization and edge compute. Scrutinize SLAs for uptime, performance targets and failover. Request benchmark data from such tools as Core Web Vitals and Lighthouse, as well as API rate limits and reference architectures at similar scale.
The key consideration in the architectural evaluation is to find a balance between built-in features and customizations and integrations that can deliver the cost expectations and goals of the enterprise.
5. Prioritize editorial UX, localization and accessibility.
CMS platforms often fail to meet corporate goals when authoring experiences are poor. To avoid this problem, invite authoring users to examine key features, such as inline editing, component libraries, content reuse and localization workflows, so they can help guide the process to enable quick adoption without breaking governance.
With input and buy-in from content creators, adoption risks will be minimized.
Be sure to validate collaboration features like versioning, comments, approvals, scheduled publishing and rollback. Also, ensure non‑technical usability as well as reliable previews across devices and locales. Confirm key integrations for the content teams, including translation integrations, locale fallback rules, terminology management and review loops. With input and buy-in from content creators, adoption risks will be minimized.
6. Address CX through personalization, experimentation, analytics and data governance.
Enterprise CMS tools must support the content development team, as well as customers and the sales and marketing teams responsible for engaging with them. Key to this business goal is content personalization and content performance management.
To avoid overlap, decide where personalization logic will live -- in the CMS, Customer Data Platform or marketing platform. Work with sales and marketing to decide what level of support is needed for audience segments, contextual rules and A/B or multivariate testing.
To support evidence-based iterations on quality and usability for end customers, ensure that editorial analytics will cover content performance, findability and schema quality. Define event instrumentation and first‑party data strategies with consent and cookie management integrated.
Don't forget governance. Enable lifecycle policies that include archive, deletion, retention and legal holds. Demand auditing and reporting that satisfy compliance and provide executives with at‑a‑glance KPIs.
7. Plan TCO, vendor viability and delivery via an RFP and PoC.
With all these different steps in mind, evaluate the viability of the product, the vendor, the delivery of the platform and the TCO. This will require an extensive request for proposal (RFP) and proof-of-concept (PoC) process, leading to a confident decision in a platform vendor or solutions provider.
TCO management must go beyond license fees and include the cost of implementation, migration, training, support and any add‑ons, like DAM, translation and search. Be sure to include indirect costs such as developer time, integration maintenance, performance tuning, content operations and security and compliance overhead. Compare cloud, on‑premises and SaaS options, considering the elasticity, scalability and avoided infrastructure with cloud and SaaS tools.
Build a three- to five-year TCO with baseline, growth and omnichannel scenarios. Include the effects of any financial stability or customer engagement issues with the vendor. Consider exit costs as well as content and data portability and what an unexpected migration would cost.
In addition, evaluate roadmap alignment, release cadence and backward compatibility. To reduce lock-in, favor open standards, export capabilities and decoupled content models, which lead to lower TCO risk of relying on any vendor.
Run an RFP with weighted scoring across security, editorial UX, integrations, performance and TCO. Require demos with relevant content and workflows, a security questionnaire and an architecture review.
Time‑limit the PoC and consider building two high‑value templates, one omnichannel use case and one localization flow. Measure KPIs like authoring time, page performance, integration effort and governance fit. Document any risks including vendor skill gaps, customization debt and integration complexity, and assign owners and timelines.
A good CMS choice will have clear governance, proven security and compliance and a TCO that can be defended with confidence.
Sometimes polished demos will dodge governance or localization issues. A vendor may offer "unlimited" plans, but under the hood have hidden rate limits or exorbitant fees for essential add‑ons. Key features -- necessary for reliability, compliance or content portability -- may be lacking. Or important features such as approval, scheduling or rollback may rely on custom code for basic content workflows.
A good CMS choice will directly support the team's top objectives, have clear governance and rely on measurable gains in productivity or quality as outlined by the team. In a good CMS choice, integrations will be both documented and maintainable, security and compliance will be proven via third-party certifications and backed up by contractual SLAs. Finally, a good CMS choice will have a three- to five-year TCO that can be defended with confidence.
Jordan Jones is a writer versed in enterprise content management, component content management, web content management and video-on-demand technologies.
Dig Deeper on Content management software and services
