Angels in the Outfield
Written July 23rd, 2008 by Thomas AmesIn the everlasting debate about a centralized vs. decentralized hierarchy of Web management, there comes the realistic perspective that our oft-small departments can be easily overwhelmed by thousands of pages of information, not to mention a seemingly infinite power struggle to produce more interactivity and more “shiney gadgets” for our sites. Such advancements take time and resources, both personnel- and money-wise, and eventually we end up with a network of associates and colleagues we trust. But finding those “angels in the outfield” can be difficult.
With a Web site of over 5,000 pages, an e-newsletter, an “Ask-a-Nurse” section, and having to constantly update departmental information, how can a one- or two-person team manage the entire Web site?
One word: delegation.
That isn’t to say you completely delegate every task to someone, but rather that they are your helpers — your angels — who give you the information needed to go on the Web. Instead of acting as an investigative reporter, it’s your job to manage the information and where and how it’s best presented on the Web site. While you might not know a thing about craniosynostosis, a nurse or physician does. In this case it’s much easier — and probably more accurate — to have a medically-inclined person to write the information, while you edit it for Web presentation, and implement it in the appropriate areas of your Web site.
But how do you go about finding these angels? Oftentimes our work is induced, meaning people come to us with requests for additional information or better presentation of information. There isn’t any shame in asking that requester if he or she has an assistant or knows of someone who has the information they need presented. This often leads you to your angel.
Taking the craniosynostosis example, perhaps it’s a neurosurgeon or plastic surgeon who comes to you wanting more information on the Web about the procedure. If the physician doesn’t have time to give you the information, he or she will need to direct you to someone who does — perhaps it’s their NP, another nurse, or an assistant. That person becomes your contact point for information regarding this and any other related procedure.
Whether you want to give them editing access to your Web site is up to you and your organization. If there is a competent editing process in place, there’s little reason not to as long as you have the capacity and resources to train these individuals. The easiest way is through a luncheon or Webcasts given by your vendor or Web department.
So is a centralized hierarchy a fallacy? In a sense, yes: you’ll always be calling on informed individuals for the information; it’s just the question is whether you want your technology to be decentralized. But without a little help from our “angels in the outfield,” a small Web department can easily be overwhelmed with many requests and inaccurate information.
How does your department go about finding its angels? How do you train them? How do you keep them around and happy?
July 24th, 2008 at 8:32 am
No doubt, this is an ongoing issue with everyone out there. We all want our sites to be fresh and shiny with new and continually updated content, but I am certainly no medical writer. That’s why we have a decentralized authoring system in place. Great, we have the system in place, now how do we find our “angels?”
We redesigned our site in 2005. I made it a point to sit down face to face with every hospital and service line in our system with a stake in the site. That was a grueling series of 40+ meetings. Part of our process included each stakeholder identifying a content author for their sub site. We then had to train each of these authors.
It’s now three years later and wouldn’t you know it, it just didn’t take. Out of our now more than 50 sub sites I have a handful or authors, maybe 5, who actually maintain their content on a semi-consistent basis.
We realized back in November that it was time to take action. We requested two new positions for our Web team, which now consists of just one, me. We are in the process of interviewing right now and I can’t wait to get them on board.
We are taking a little bit of a new approach, around here anyway. We are moving towards more of a centralized content management process where our Web content specialists will be assigned specific hospitals and services lines. Those hospitals and service lines will be their clients. They will meet with them on a regular basis to help identify needs and to help them publish their content. We are looking specifically for writers. No, none of them are medical writers. We will still have to rely on our clinicians to be our content experts.
July 24th, 2008 at 12:21 pm
@Todd: we’ve seen the same thing here and find also that centralized editors are required to press the clients/experts to get us updates that we then make. A handful of distributed editors continue to stay active, but he majority do not.
Is anyone out there having success with decentralized editors? By success I mean that they see the benefits of keeping the Web content up to date and actually do so.
July 25th, 2008 at 6:19 am
At Aurora we had two kinds of content providers, those who focused on services and product lines, and those who managed classes and events. The latter group was pretty good at keeping those things current. Probably more in their sweet spot anyway, and the system automatically deleted events that had passed, which made it easy.
Of the first group, though, fewer than 1 in 10 took it seriously. Those who did were wonderful, and not surprisingly, their sections of the site got the most traffic. The rest, you’d have to remind, beg and cajole on a regular basis, usually to no effect. Why they don’t get it is a mystery to me.
But they would be the angriest when somebody in leadership or a doctor would complain about something in their section being out of date. Go figure. I thnk it’s just a fact of life, at least until those folks get replaced by individuals for whom the Web is a way of life, and not just one more thing to do. It makes your “Web culture” all the more important!
Neal
July 25th, 2008 at 10:03 am
I know exactly what you mean Neal. Traditionally our best contributors have been those updating the events calendars. But I have noticed that more and more of our new employees have some type of web authoring experience. With a little bit of guidance these people are becoming great content drivers. In one case we have a blog-type site that is totally managed and run by them as a communications vehicle for our physicians. By and large though, I “delegate” content management rights on a case by case basis, depending on the level of trust. Of course if that person ever leaves the organization then the responsibility becomes “centralized” again, that is, I have to do it.
July 28th, 2008 at 6:09 am
As staff turns over and younger employees take their place, I think this problem will slowly evaporate. They are used to doing things on the Web, not intimidated by it at all, and fully understanding of it’s importance. You know what they say, “Cultures change one funeral at a time.”
Neal