Additional comments
- The technical aspect is only one component of an effective and influential website. Content creation needs to be included in University of Waterloo's overall web strategy.
- I maintain only some of the pages on our site. My Managing Director and I are in the process of exploring web maintenance.
- The survey did not mention the importance of strategy in the decision to do a redesign project. Website redesign is nearly always a bad idea because it reflects a project-based management approach. The best websites are not managed simply as projects but rather as processes. A website redesign approach is usually embraced by organizations who are reacting to the fact that their websites have fallen into disrepair. Something is not working and the belief is that a nice redesign, some nice new graphics and colors, and perhaps the purchase of some fancy content management software, will solve it. This approach is papering over the cracks. The cracks are a lack of resources to professionally manage the website on a day-to-day basis. The cracks are a lack of genuine customer focus, and a lack of continuous testing and evolution. The cracks are a lack of a rigorous review process to ensure that only quality content remains on the website. Website redesign is also often a product of boredom or new management. The web team or marketing department is bored with the old website. They want to freshen it up. I wonder how long such people would last at Google if they said they were bored with the Google homepage? Website redesign should be a last resort. If your website is an absolute disaster and your customers detest it so much they're leaving in droves, then a redesign and radical overhaul may be in order. I have seen perfectly okay websites go through a redesign for all the wrong reasons. And do you know who such redesigns hurt most? Your most loyal customers. Because they use your website most. A redesign is nearly always bad strategy. In fact, website redesigns are often pursued by organizations who don't have a web strategy.
- the templates should better address printing from various browsers and platforms.
- Implementation of the Common Look & Feel (CLF), whether existing or changed should depend on the skill levels of the individuals implementing. Several options should be available. Flexibility is highly desired, and the target audience should be considered in all aspects of design. The outside world, especially potential students and technology graduates, have high expectations of their online interactions with Waterloo and we are not keeping pace, and it must hurt our reputation for innovation.
- If possible, allow for the flexibility of new emerging web-based technologies to be incorporated into a CLF framework.
- The text used in this survey is very difficult to read. Please consider something else next time.
- While a CLF is good, it shouldn't be strictly adhered to. Best practices should be introduced, and support provided by Information Systems & Technology for people who need help setting up their site on a Waterloo-sanctioned CLF, but the best practices should be used as a guideline for advanced users not interested in using the CLF.
- Perhaps develop a team of co-ops lead by a web professional who are able to give ready to use websites to groups and train them one on one how to edit them. The current cost and difficulty for groups to adhere to the standard make the standard unusable for some. If you look at our research groups you see that none come close to compliance, and to make matters worse they put up really bad websites in their place because they went with the lowest bidder...in order for the CLF to be successful it must be the lowest bidder.
- While the CLF accomplishes many, potentially competing objectives,the net result is an uninteresting site
- There are other easy to use web development programs that could be considered, such as Wordpress
- Section 6, Number 1 - I fall between a refesh and a major facelift . The navigation in the current CLF is quite problematic, especially on the academic side of the institution. I also think it's important to look closely at how web sites across campus are managed, and by whom. I really struggle in my faculty because each department maintains its own site, and the individuals involved vary widely. Rarely are they developed or managed as the communications tools they are. Unfortunately, I do not have the capacity, personally, nor the resources to take on every unit's sites. It is important there be a consistent, sufficiently-qualified person actively and continuously engaged in all four areas of web development and maintenance: (1) design (i.e. not just colours, images, etc. but also - more importantly - navigation, organization, structure); (2) content production (i.e. researching and writing web-appropriate and accurate copy); (3) content maintenance (keeping information accurate and up-to-date) and (4) IT support. And areas 2&3 require an understanding of communications principles to do well. I am currently looking to figure out how to make that happen in my faculty... suggestions welcome!
- I support/develop/maintain web sites and web based applications, as well as support other people who maintain web pages within my department. I have felt that Waterloo needs a more complete department whose sole responsibility is managing the needs of our collective websites. A department headed by a full time manager, with two to three professional developers, project managers/department liaisons and support this with co-op students. The developers can guide and train the co-ops to complete projects and be used to retrain staff. The largest problem we have on campus to date is web sites and web applications/forms which are created quickly in 1-2 terms by co-ops students within a department and once gone, there is a lack of documentation and support for these applications/forms. A central department could be used to create, document and train department staff how to maintain their own web apps and serve as technical backup in cases of issues or updates. This could be a tremendous benefit as applications/forms could be reused by departments instead of being reinvented, duplicating efforts. Another issue is keep these forms/apps secure and up to date with the latest code to ensure web servers are not vulnerable. * When looking to refresh , it would be nice if it were almost an upgrade in which a new set of templates simply replace the old set, with a little testing after the fact to ensure links transferred, and that text lodges in the correct space. Naïve?
- It newer hurts to update/facelift a site as readers like to see that the site isn't stagnant. However, this has to be done with accessibility in mind as persons with disabilities rely on consistency to navigate websites - hence the CLF in the first place.
- We find the maintenance of our site pages is too complicated with templates - we are considering using PHP includes instead so that one master file change is automatically reflected in all docs with that include, instead of having to find all the pages and apply the template change.
- We need to take an audience-centric approach to the web for the WHOLE university. We are seen as a technologically-advanced university and our web pages do not portray that image at all. I feel that we've relied too heavily on the technology and its limitations instead of looking at it from a user perspective and designing a site that meets the needs of its users no matter what the technology backbone is.
- We need more resources such as a dedicated web developer and access to content web writers to handle the volume of work to better brand Waterloo as the innovative leader it's perceived to be.