While I dont disagree with the approaches discussed, it occurs to me that
the most important step, the thoughtful analysis and prioritization of what
is most important in terms of outcomes (and not "features" --- these should
follow outcomes) has been leapfrogged.

My preferred approach is to do a "stakeholders' analysis" of what outcomes
are desired.

Stakeholders would be both internal (e.g. all departments and key staff) and
external (e.g. prospective visitors including older persons and families
with children, members, prospective donors (good chance to garner buy-in),
teachers, members of local press).

Prospective outcomes might include getting people to visit, generating
contributions, assuring and supporting press coverage, displaying
collection, conveying a certain spirit or persona for the organization,
retail through an online store.

With a match of outcomes to stakeholders one can then evaluate which
outcomes have the most return on their investment (financial, mission); some
might be "musts" and others might be prioritized...the web site  is more
easily built for accommodation of future enhancements if those prospects are
known in advance

Once you know the outcomes, it is fairly straightforward to identify the web
features that are needed to attain that outcome.

This may all seem more formal than it need be..it is essentially a sequence
of structured meetings and need not take more than a couple days to
complete.

Such a process can also lead to a better understanding of who within an
organization will have responsibility for what functions on the website, but
i am not trying to make more of this than your question requires.

All of this does serve to bring a depth and strength to the information you
can provide in an RFI to several vendors...and different vendors, issued the
challenge of designing a site which will meet both feature and outcome
requirements  will bring a variety of graphical and functional designs to
bear. It should also accelerate this part of the process.

One last thing about RFI's:  Send them to a variety of vendors who exhibit
different strengths; i dont worry about geographic proximity but some face
time throughout the project is vital,  and allow them to demonstrate their
creativity in design and cost-effectiveness.

I hope this helps.

Len Steinbach



On Wed, Jul 2, 2008 at 6:51 PM, Peter Turner <petert at northwestmuseum.org>
wrote:

> This discussion is of great interest to me as we are in the situation here
> at "the MAC" where our current web host is quitting the web hosting
> business.
>
> There are 2 pieces of information I would appreciate from anyone with an
> opinion:
>
> 1 - Is there anyone in this community who has used or created a RFI
> (Request
> For Information) that would be willing to share that document with me ??
> Please send to me directly at the email below. I would be very grateful.
>
> 2 - Who hosts your site (one stop shop, self host or split design, CMS,
> Host) and how happy are you ??
>
> Any comments and help very gratefully accepted as we have a fairly
> aggressive timeline to move hosts.
>
> Peter Turner
> Information Technology Specialist
> Northwest Museum of Arts & Culture
> 2316 West First Ave
> Spokane, WA 99201
> Phone   509-363-5327
> Fax     509-363-5303
> Email   petert at northwestmuseum.org
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: mcn-l-bounces at mcn.edu [mailto:mcn-l-bounces at mcn.edu] On Behalf Of
> Holly Witchey
> Sent: Tuesday, July 01, 2008 9:08 AM
> To: Bstokes at mosthistory.org; Museum Computer Network Listserv
> Subject: Re: [MCN-L] Organizational Question
>
> Dear Bill:
>
> I agree with Barbara's comments below with a caveat.  Museum leadership
> should be called upon to make the decision on who manages web site but
> they should make the call from a position of educated strength.  My
> recommendation is, unless you are simply rolling in money, that the
> responsible path for any cultural heritage organization to take in 2008
> is to send out an a Request for Information (RFI) as opposed to an
> Request for Proposal (RFP) to several developers asking them to comment,
> in a brief document, on what they do for your institution, how they
> would propose to do it, how you would manage it, and what, in general,
> it might cost--you should also include your current favored vendor in
> the process.  When all the responses come back in you then weight the
> pros and cons, sometimes a favored vendor will come in higher than
> others, but a good working relationship might compensate for the
> additional cost.  This information is then presented to the museum
> leadership, or reviewed in conjunction with museum leadership, depending
> on the size of your institution, and a decision is made.
>
> If it comes down to a choice between one or two, then you might want to
> go with a full blown RFP, but I've always found RFIs are just as useful
> and not as time consuming for all parties. Then...once you've chosen
> your vendor the most important thing is to MANAGE EVERYONE'S
> EXPECTATIONS.  This means creating a specifications document for the
> final project that sets out what you are going to do, what they are
> going to do and assure that everyone one understands the parameters of
> the project.
>
> Hope this helps,
>
> Holly Witchey
> Cleveland Museum of Art
> 11150 East Blvd.
> Cleveland, OH 44106
> 216-707-2653
> hwitchey at clevelandart.org
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: mcn-l-bounces at mcn.edu [mailto:mcn-l-bounces at mcn.edu] On Behalf Of
> Barbara Stokes
> Sent: Monday, June 30, 2008 10:59 PM
> To: 'Museum Computer Network Listserv'
> Subject: Re: [MCN-L] Organizational Question
>
> Your museum leadership should make the decision on who manages the
> website.
> In our museum, website management is part of marketing and development.
> As for your proposal to submit specs to several website vendors rather
> than stay with the current vendor in revamping the site, it depends on
> how reliable and service-oriented your current vendor is and what their
> capabilities are. Not a definitive answer, I know, but there are a lot
> of factors to be considered.
>
> Barbara Stokes, Senior Curator
> Archives, Collections, and Programs
> Museum of South Texas History
> 200 N. Closner Boulevard
> Edinburg, TX 78541
> bstokes at mosthistory.org
> 956/383-6911
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: mcn-l-bounces at mcn.edu [mailto:mcn-l-bounces at mcn.edu] On Behalf Of
> william jahsman
> Sent: Tuesday, July 01, 2008 9:47 AM
> To: mcn-l at mcn.edu
> Subject: [MCN-L] Organizational Question
>
> Hi, list members.
> I'm a recent subscriber. I work at a museum-in-progress, The Leonardo,
> in Salt Lake City. As with all startups, there are a million things to
> do. My short list is programming for Body Worlds and beyond, procurement
> of a membership system, new website development, and infrastructure.
> The exhibits director is proposing we sole source our website
> development to our current vendor. Our current website
> (www.theleonardo.org) is beautiful but not very functional. I'm
> proposing we submit our requirements to several vendors and choose the
> best one. Is it customary for an exhibits manager to specify website
> development? How is it handled in your organization?
> TIA,
> Bill Jahsman
> The Leonardo
> 801-531-9800
> _______________________________________________
> You are currently subscribed to mcn-l, the listserv of the Museum
> Computer Network (http://www.mcn.edu)
>
> To post to this list, send messages to: mcn-l at mcn.edu
>
> To unsubscribe or change mcn-l delivery options visit:
> http://toronto.mediatrope.com/mailman/listinfo/mcn-l
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> You are currently subscribed to mcn-l, the listserv of the Museum
> Computer Network (http://www.mcn.edu)
>
> To post to this list, send messages to: mcn-l at mcn.edu
>
> To unsubscribe or change mcn-l delivery options visit:
> http://toronto.mediatrope.com/mailman/listinfo/mcn-l
>
> _______________________________________________
> You are currently subscribed to mcn-l, the listserv of the Museum Computer
> Network (http://www.mcn.edu)
>
> To post to this list, send messages to: mcn-l at mcn.edu
>
> To unsubscribe or change mcn-l delivery options visit:
> http://toronto.mediatrope.com/mailman/listinfo/mcn-l
>
> _______________________________________________
> You are currently subscribed to mcn-l, the listserv of the Museum Computer
> Network (http://www.mcn.edu)
>
> To post to this list, send messages to: mcn-l at mcn.edu
>
> To unsubscribe or change mcn-l delivery options visit:
> http://toronto.mediatrope.com/mailman/listinfo/mcn-l
>

Reply via email to