How to Manage Department Websites
A repeated concern I encounter in higher ed marketing is how to address academic department websites. (I’m talking about the history department, the computer science department, etc.) Whether you are department faculty or staff, a VP of communications, or a college enrollment marketer, you’ve likely experienced pressure from leadership and faculty to account for these sites.
The honest truth is: visual design and branding for department sites are often of poor quality, content strategy is usually nonexistent, and they can unnecessarily complicate—or even hinder—enrollment marketing. The full cost of running individual department websites is also a massive drain on scarce resources. They do offer a few advantages, however, which we’ll cover below.
How do other colleges handle this problem? What’s best practice?
Three Models for Website Governance
Governance (the policies that govern how your website is updated) falls on a spectrum from tight to loose. Below, I outline the pro’s and con’s of three governance models I’ve noticed in college marketing:
The tight model
The hybrid model
The laissez-faire model.
Without question, a tight model is best practice. In a tight model, all departments use the same design, branding, and information architecture as the college or university’s website templates.
The tight model can significantly improve your recruitment marketing, college enrollment, and brand awareness.
Enrollment Marketing Benefits
The obvious benefit to websites for colleges that use the tight model can significantly improve your recruitment marketing, college enrollment, and brand awareness. But there are many other benefits for all parties, including the departments themselves. However, This approach might not be attainable for your institution. If you’re reading this, you already know that some departments are very attached to their own websites.
Understand that every college grapples with this challenge. If you can’t adopt a tight model due to internal politics, it doesn’t mean your college marketing will suffer. There are other solutions to minimizing costs and streamlining workflows.
Here is a decision-making tool that can help you decide on the best approach for your institution.
Model #1: Tight Governance
In this centralized model, departments use the university website templates. The communications office sets the design, branding, and IA—and all departments use it. Departments can update pages on their own, however the communications office has the ultimate responsibility for edits and page creation. A centralized IT office manages the server, security, compliance, and functionalist.
(Departments use the same template at Northeastern Engineering.)
Pro’s:
Beautiful, seamless, professional UX
Better SEO, traffic, and lead nurturing for everyone (departments AND the college)
Optimized recruitment marketing and admissions processes
Strongest brand impression and awareness
Less cost and staff time for departments
Less duplicative and inaccurate content
One source of analytics to track and report
Easier to integrate new technology
Less expenditure on design, security, content updating, maintenance, and training
Con’s:
More maintenance work for the communications and IT offices
Loss of some department control over content and visual identity
Limited info for applicants on degree programs and department culture
More expenditure up front when integrating
Best For:
Colleges that are new, small, or repositioning
Large colleges with communications or marketing teams of 8+ people and adequate redesign budgets
Colleges with marketing-focused deans that have allocated resources to spend on marketing
Examples:
Model #2: Hybrid Governance
Under this approach, departments have similar landing pages on the main site but link out to independent department websites. Another variation: department websites use the same masthead and colors but create their own IAs and page designs. These are often supported by a centralized IT office that works with each department on an individual basis.
(The hybrid model at University of Wisconsin – Madison shares some features across departments.)
Pro’s:
Strong brand impression and awareness
Improved UX, lead capture, and SEO for recruitment marketing
A more efficient workflow with communications and IT offices
Less expenditure on design, security, content updating, maintenance, and training
New features developed by IT can be adopted voluntarily by departments
Content sharing may be possible
Departments contain full control over their own content
Con’s:
High costs for IT office to support each department
Departments may lose their own visual brand identities
Content can duplicate or contradict info on the main site
More expenditure up front when migrating the websites
Best For:
Colleges with smaller communications or marketing teams (less than 7 people)
Colleges in the midst of or planning a website redesign
Colleges with strong IT and design services
Colleges with marketing-focus deans that experience strong push-back from faculty
Examples:
Model #3: Laissez-Faire Governance
This last model can be described as “every tub on its own bottom.” Departments are fully responsible for their own websites. The communications office has little to no influence on the department sites. Content sharing is rarely possible and IT offices may not have the resources to support the site. This is the least effective model across almost every aspect of web strategy.
(Harvard College uses a decentralized model.)
Pro’s:
Less time and expense for the communications office
Faculty have free reign to govern their website as they wish
Large departments can retain legacy visual identities
Sites can host large amounts of content (academic papers, faculty CVs, course materials)
Prospective students can dig deep into a department or program’s content
Con’s:
Cannibalizes SEO for the department AND the school
Confuses and frustrates prospective applicants, harming recruiting efforts
Dilutes the brand impression
Risks outdated design, technology, security, and compliance
Significantly raises the school’s expenditures
Creates redundant and contradicting content (especially with faculty bios and admissions info)
Few to no possibilities for content sharing (news, events, directory entries, etc.)
Best For:
Highly selective colleges with an iconic brand
Departments of 100+ faculty that have extensive resources and major legacies
Departments that have their own communications staff
Departments that want to work with external vendors for web support and design
OR, Colleges with limited communications resources or marketing strategies
Examples:
As a seasoned university marketing agency, Ellis + Eyre specializes in optimizing websites for colleges AND academic departments. Find out how we can assist you in adopting one of these governance models—or making the most of the model you have—to reach your enrollment marketing goals.
(AI Usage: No AI tools were used to create this content.)