Tony Byrne has posted an article entitled A Scenario-based approach to evaluating CMS vendors. It’s part of a website that examines/reviews content management systems. The post tells the story of how they evolved their evaluation of such systems from strictly functional evaluations to the addition of “vendor intangibles” and beyond.
Their reason for moving beyond this?
But still, the methodology remains incomplete, because it doesn’t explicitly answer key situational questions. When does a larger or smaller vendor make better sense? When does workflow matter more or less? More pointedly, when does a robust (read: complex) workflow subsystem become a drawback rather than an advantage?
Their solution is to add 12 common scenarios for implementing a CMS. Essentially 12 different type of contexts/organisations requiring a CMS and a list of the characteristics of those organisations that differ and may effect the selection of a CMS.
Obviously there’s a connection between this and the selection of a learning management system (LMS). Not all Universities are the same, not all Universities have the same aims or problems.
They need to think about their purpose and place