We usually clammer for more people, more money and more tools as salvation. They’re not. Those things will solve today’s problems, but new ones will arrive tomorrow. No set of widgets, plug-ins or third party add-ons will stop the inevitable. No workflow, processes or project manager from heaven stands a chance. Can you think of any CMS so good that it doesn’t let anything through the cracks? I can’t. Can we supersize it to an EMS and lick the problem? That’ll probably make it worse.

I bring all this up because after two days of great information and conversations at the AMA Higher Ed Symposium, It’s clear that higher ed is lurching forward in fits and starts to leverage all the wondrous new tools and services appearing daily on the Web. But in all the excitement and drama lies the everyday needs of everyone’s website. You’ve gotta remember to take care of the small, non-glamorous details that keep your site alive and well. Don’t lose sight of the daily grind because entropy is always there with you.

Is there hope? Well… just about the only thing any of us can muster in defense is vigilance. Stay attentive, be nimble and don’t let small problems fester into big ones. Keep the daily grunt work moving along efficiently, but also keep an eye on what’s coming up ahead. If the new thing on the horizon goes unchecked until it’s too late to deal with effectively, you lose. It’ll turn your hard work and good intentions into chaos and doubt. Don’t let it get to that.Related Posts:

• Communicating With Students Beyond Email
• On Apple & Adobe Flash
• The 1-to-1 Relationship
• How To Turn Around A Problematic Site
• Flickr for Photo Workflow

// the end //

This site used to be a fun place and I’m bringing that positive vibe back. So while I may continue to talk about web matters, I’ll mostly just write about my observations of the world. I hope that suffices to any readers left out there.Related Posts:

• Health Care Bill(s) & (Many) Higher Ed Websites
• Link Journalism
• Virtues of “The Site”
• Content Management Systems Aren’t Just For Techies
• Teens & Email

// the end //

My current title is Web Designer/New Media Specialist, a moniker bestowed on me after our university’s restructuring. Before that, I was simply Web Designer. I’ll take a wild guess that these titles won’t be looked upon favorably by the admissions reviewers. After all, after 12 years in the business, I effectively have the same title as I did when I started. The cynics out there might say, well maybe you’re a crap designer. Yeah, maybe. But after 12 years in the business, my work must be somewhat passable. Maybe I’m a jerk and alienate myself into low level positions. Maybe my bosses have researched my online profiles and think I’m a liability. Whatever the real reasons, my own self diagnosis for a lack of impressive title is due to my personal motivations and the age of the web. 

So back to the meeting. I found myself in a strange, apologetic tone. Surely, I needed to excuse my lack of title. Ironically, after my meeting, I was to meet with the Chancellor and Provost to present ideas on how a new website would save the university money, allow us to be much more customer centric than ever before, produce content with less effort and, in general, be more nimble and current in our approach. Isn’t this the kind of presentation a mid level manager at a big company would give to senior management? I thought about this juxtaposition for the rest of the day. What’s in a title? Why are web world titles so… arbitrary? And how do we, as a community, effectively translate our contributions via titles to outsiders?

Do Web Titles Do Us Justice?

There’s no doubt that I’m on the low rung of my university’s hierarchy (though I consider that the university’s loss). I have a breadth and depth of experience that my organization could put to effective use. Instead, my school has proven unwilling, unable or, worst yet, indifferent to fully utilize me. Why? I certainly hope it’s not because of my title. How disappointingly sad would that be- not only for myself but for the school? Would my job, my credibility and my contributions be any different if I had a title like Director of Web Communications or Vice Chancellor of All Things Web? Given the web team’s tiny staff size, I don’t think my job nor my contributions would be much different, but credibility? Probably.

When you only have a couple warm bodies available to work on a site with tens of thousands of pages and millions of yearly visitors like we do, you can bet that lofty titles or not, everyone does grunt work, everyone sweats the details and everyone is accountable to visitors. That’s just how it is from a practical standpoint. In this regard, titles in our industry don’t matter. What does matter, at least in my experience, is the promise of making great things. The web world is littered with people who want to elevate the web, and hence the organization, to a higher level. That seems to be the major motivation rather than fancy titles, corner offices or windfall year-end bonuses (though I wouldn’t turn any of those things down along the way).

The View From the Outside

The web, as we know and interact with it today, is a very young industry- 15 years, perhaps? My executive MBA peers, in contrast, work in health, finance, sales, etc.- professions that have been around for centuries, even millennia. Is it any wonder our industry still debates what our titles should be? It’s still too young and needs to sort itself out. 

For example, I’m considered a generalist in the field- someone whose skill set crosses many specialized functions. Other people consider themselves specialists- someone who knows all the ins and outs within a particular area like Flash or Ruby on Rails. Which is the right approach? Is one type of person more “senior” than the other? Should one manage the other, but not vice versa? The web is so collaborative and job functions are so permeable, a sense of hierarchy hasn’t solidified and this causes people outside of the business to easily misunderstand what it is we do and the importance of our work to an organization. Those things are changing, but it is slow. As Jesse James Garrett in the podcast linked above says, things won’t markedly improve for us until our group begins to house the VP and C-level ranks of major organizations.

Until then, I would argue that titles act as shorthand for your professional status. That’s why people are so concerned with their titles (since I’ve largely worked in smaller organizations surrounded by like minded people, titles haven’t mattered much). But I don’t find this race to the top as prevalent in the web. Maybe our young age has everything to do with that. Since we’re all relatively young, perhaps there’s a generational shift away from placing so much power and respect into titles. I don’t know. All I do know is that the admissions people who review my executive MBA application may not understand what my title of Web Designer really means or confers upon me. Hopefully they do, but until I’m sure, it goes without saying that I need to ensure that my title doesn’t arbitrarily stereotype me, demote my contributions or limit my worth.Related Posts:

• Use link titles as a check on your architecture decisions
• Marketing ≠ Visitor Experience
• Link Journalism
• Higher Ed Sites Have A Huge Advantage: A Captive Audience
• Tension Between Marketing and Usability: Part 1

// the end //

I’ll structure my review on the 2-2 style popular in the MBA program I’m in- two compliments, two criticisms. First up, two compliments.

It’s useful today—As a notoriously slow reader, I can happily state that this one is quick and easy. It’s less a narrative and more a bulleted list with lots of screengrabs. If you want expert opinion, support for your own work or just plain good advice, this is the book for you. Best of all, because it’s in such an easy to digest form, you can apply the insights the same day you read them. And, of course, it’s targeted to the higher ed space- a piece of the online world that normally doesn’t get center stage attention. That means everything you read, EVERYTHING, is practical and applicable.

Best of the best—I suppose it goes without saying, but I’ll state it anyway because it’s important. The book highlights some of the preeminent higher education sites out there. There’s no doubt that higher education suffers from poor management, poor focus, and poor ______ (you fill in the blank). Having a single place to examine the best of the best is both informative, but inspiring too. And as higher edu workers, inspiration can make the exceptionally hard days we all encounter easier to take. For that, I thank the authors.

Next up, two criticisms.

Universal takeaways—Like many sites, truly good cross pollination of content necessitates good metadata (data about data). It’s hard to do well, but when it is, a site can seem to read your mind as a visitor. It’ll anticipate what and where you want to go next. This book tries to do so by offering multiple ways- by school name, by student population, by type (public vs. private) and by region- to access all the reviews. Each school’s page also gives you a “comparable institutions” sidebar where you can cross reference any school with others in as close an apples to apples comparison as is possible. It’s an admirable approach and works, but it seems to come at a cost. I wish it had a single page or section devoted to high level takeaways- a quick reference of universal do’s and dont’s, if you will.

More background—This might be an unfair criticism, but I’ll put it out there anyway. As a usabilty/design centric book, it’s not about in-depth case studies. However, each school mentioned (there are 20), does come with an “about” page that highlights information like what CMS powers the site, who the members of the team are, what technologies are used, etc. I kept wishing the authors would elaborate or, at least, standardize what behind-the-scenes information was presented. As someone who has built websites for 10+ years, the back story can be some of the best takeaways to learn.

My final thought is, as is the custom for us web workers, a call to action. Buy the book. It’s a nice companion to the eduStyle site and highlights some of the best higher ed sites out there today. As such, we can all learn a few things from it. If my review doesn’t quite convince you to buy, you can always get a sample taste and decide for yourself. For me, it’s a winner.Related Posts:

• The Step Before Defining A Website’s Goals
• Higher Ed Sites Have A Huge Advantage: A Captive Audience
• A New Take on How to Find a Higher Ed Degree
• Centralization Around Audience
• How To Turn Around A Problematic Site

// the end //

• Use link titles as a check on your architecture decisions
• What Higher Ed Sites Could Learn From Barack Obama
• There’s A Happy Medium Between Centralization & Decentralization
• A New Take on How to Find a Higher Ed Degree
• How To Turn Around A Problematic Site

// the end //

As a related task, I’ll also inject some energy into my oft neglected other web haunts. You can get to those from the icons at the top of the page.

So with that, welcome back old readers and hello new ones. As always, please be nice in the comments area.Related Posts:

• The Case for Centralization
• Stick To Your Guns
• The New University of Denver Site In A Nutshell
• The Step Before Defining A Website’s Goals
• The 1-to-1 Relationship

// the end //