Training, support, and workflows that help faculty, staff, and department editors publish with confidence.
Why this guide
Many university websites are not solely managed by a central web team. They are maintained by admissions counselors, department coordinators, faculty assistants, researchers, communications professionals, student services staff, and countless others across campus. These contributors update academic programs, faculty profiles, research initiatives, policies, events, and departmental information alongside their primary responsibilities.
The people closest to the information are usually the best people to keep it accurate. The challenge for most universities is providing them an environment that enables them to succeed.
It's safe to say that most contributors do not log into the CMS every day. They may update a faculty profile once a semester, publish an event a couple of times a month, or revise program information a few times a year. They are subject matter experts, not web designers, accessibility specialists, SEO professionals, or developers.
Yet many content management systems present every contributor with dozens of options, settings, and design decisions that have little to do with their actual responsibilities.
That creates unnecessary cognitive load.
Contributors should not have to think about page layouts. They should not have to decide where a call-to-action belongs. They should not have to choose fonts, spacing, or visual hierarchy. And they certainly should not be distracted by controls they do not have permission to use or are not expected to manage. Every unnecessary decision takes attention away from what contributors know best: the actual content.
An effective CMS removes that complexity. It gives contributors the tools they need, and only the tools they need, allowing them to focus on creating accurate, valuable content rather than navigating technical or design decisions.
Traditional publishing environments often encourage contributors to think like designers.
What do contributors tend do to when they need a heading? They make the text bigger. What if they want to emphasize something? They make it bold or change the color. What if they need more space? They add blank lines. And what if they want something to stand out? They may build a custom layout.
While these choices may produce the desired appearance, they often create inconsistent experiences, introduce accessibility issues, and make websites harder to maintain.
Content should communicate through its meaning, not its formatting. Presentation should be handled by the CMS.
When contributors focus on the information and the CMS handles layout, styling, and presentation, everyone benefits: Accessibility improves, brand consistency improves, content becomes easier to reuse, and information is easier for search engines and AI systems to understand.
The bottom line is that the CMS should own the presentation, while contributors should own the information.
One of the biggest misconceptions in content management is that giving every contributor complete design freedom creates a better website. In reality, it often creates the opposite.
When every contributor can drag, drop, rearrange, and customize pages however they choose, consistency gradually disappears. Navigation patterns change. Calls to action move from one page to another. Similar information is presented in completely different ways. Visitors must continually relearn how to navigate the website as they move from Admissions to Biology to Financial Aid to Student Services.
This becomes a user experience problem. Visitors should not have to figure out how each department decided to build its pages. They should be able to focus on finding information, confident that similar content will be presented in familiar ways throughout the site.
Thoughtful templates, reusable components, and structured content create that consistency while still allowing departments to communicate what makes them unique.
Governance is often associated with restrictions.
In reality, the best governance models empower contributors.
Rather than relying solely on permissions and approval workflows, they give contributors the knowledge, guidance, and tools to create better content from the start.
That might include:
Governance becomes less about enforcement and more about enablement.
Contributor success does not end after onboarding.
University websites are constantly evolving. Accessibility standards change, search behavior changes, institutional priorities evolve, and new technologies emerge.
The publishing environment should help contributors improve over time by providing ongoing education, recommendations, reminders, and visibility into content quality.
Instead of expecting contributors to remember everything they learned in a training session years ago, the CMS should provide guidance every time they publish.
The CMS should own presentation.
Contributors should own information.
When contributors focus on content instead of design decisions, everyone benefits.
Explore this topic in more depth:
In This Guide
Each part stands alone, but they build on each other in this sequence.
How a university site differs from a typical marketing site, and why it works as recruitment platform, service portal, and public face all at once.
Great University Websites Stay Great Because Of Governance
Why content modeled as structured data, not free for pages, is what lets large site scale and stay consistent.
Building an accessible experience from the start, not as a retrofit, so every visitor can use the site.
Structuring content so tools like ChatGPT, Perplexity, and Google AI Overviews can find, understand, and cite it accurately.
The day to day discipline (maintenance, quality checks, and continuous improvement) that keeps a large site healthy.
Tailoring content and messaging for different audiences, from prospective students to returning alumni, without duplicating pages.
A framework for evaluating a CMS by the institutional outcomes it enables, not just the length of its feature list.
Preparing a site's people, processes, and platform to adapt as technology and expectations keep changing.