EDUCAUSE CENTER FOR ANALYSIS AND RESEARCH
The 2014 Enterprise Application
Market in Higher Education
Web Content Management Systems
Web Content Management Systems
Contents
What You Need to Know
3
Market Share 5
Market Shift: 2011–14
6
Management Strategy
7
Deployment Strategy
8
Case Study
9
Conclusion11
Acknowledgments11
Authors
Leah Lang, EDUCAUSE
Judith A. Pirani, Sheep Pond Associates
Citation for This Work
Lang, Leah, and Judith A. Pirani. The 2014 Enterprise Application
Market in Higher Education: Web Content Management Systems.
Research report. Louisville, CO: ECAR, July 23, 2015. Available from
http://www.educause.edu/ecar.
©2015 EDUCAUSE. CC by-nc-nd.
EDUCAUSE is a nonprofit association and the
foremost community of IT leaders and professionals
committed to advancing higher education.
EDUCAUSE programs and services are focused
on analysis, advocacy, community building,
professional development, and knowledge creation
because IT plays a transformative role in higher
education. EDUCAUSE supports those who lead,
manage, and use information technology through a
comprehensive range of resources and activities. For
more information, visit educause.edu.
Enterprise Application Market: CMS
What You Need to Know
The web content management system (CMS) market is the second fastest changing
market in higher education (figure 1). This high ranking is reflective of the volume
of institutions that plan to replace their system in the next three years (21%; third
behind IT service desk management and faculty and staff e-mail) and the relatively
recent average year of implementation (2009).
most change
Customer relationship management
71% customized
24% outsourced
Web content management
Business intelligence reporting
IT service desk management
system area rate of change*
Data warehouse
Room scheduling
E-mail: student
Facilities management
Learning management
E-mail: faculty/staff
Grants management: preaward
Human resources information
Grants management: postaward
Admissions: undergraduate
Procurement
Library
Advancement/fundraising
Financial management
Financial aid
Student information
least change
'01 '02 '03 '04 '05 '06 '07 '08 '09
mean year of implementation
systems customized
0%
100%
systems outsourced
0%
100%
*Rate of change is an indicator of how rapidly a system area is changing. It is a composite score
based on year of current implementation and on plans to implement new systems or replace
existing ones. Systems with the highest rate of change typically have been implemented
recently or are expected to be implemented or replaced soon.
Figure 1. Characteristics of core information systems
EDUCAUSE CENTER FOR ANALYSIS AND RESEARCH
3
Enterprise Application Market: CMS
Churn in this market is expected to continue as institutions attempt to keep pace
with new technology; a system implemented in 2009 would have been implemented
before the iPad, before HTML5, and before responsive web design. Currently,
one-fifth (21%) of institutions with a web CMS are planning to modernize their
system in the next three years; of those that aren’t planning to replace their solution
in the next three years, one-third (34%) have implemented a solution in the past
three years (figure 2). As institutions move from a brochureware web presence to
one that facilitates engagement with students, faculty, staff, and alumni, they are
looking for solutions that support mobility, social interaction, interoperability, and
open content creation.
Unit responsible for providing system
Another unit on campus
has primary responsibility
Central IT has primary responsibility
63%
33%
Plans to replace in the next three years
The system or district office
has primary responsibility 2%
Yes
No
21%
Unknown
18%
This system is not 2%
provided
60%
Implemented solution in the past three years
Yes
34%
No
66%
Figure 2. System provision and plans for change
EDUCAUSE CENTER FOR ANALYSIS AND RESEARCH
4
Enterprise Application Market: CMS
Market Share
With just over half of the market (56%) using a solution from one of the top 5
vendors—Drupal (20%), Hannon Hill (13%), WordPress (11%), OmniUpdate
(7%), and Microsoft (4%)—the web content management system market is fairly
heterogeneous (figure 3).
Other
Drupal
24%
20%
Hannon Hill Cascade Server
WordPress
11%
TERMINALFOUR
Site Manager
3%
dotCMS
3%
PaperThin
CommonSpot
3%
13%
Ingeniux CMS
3%
Homegrown solution
Ektron CMS
(including Ellucian
Edition)
3%
Microso SharePoint
Open source
7%
OmniUpdate
OU Campus
4%
Vendor
7%
Other/homegrown
Figure 3. 2014 web content management system market
EDUCAUSE CENTER FOR ANALYSIS AND RESEARCH
5
Enterprise Application Market: CMS
Market Shift: 2011–14
The market share for open-source solutions (Drupal, WordPress, dotCMS) has grown
from 17% in 2011 to 34% in 2014 as institutions switch to PHP-based products
such as Drupal (20%) and WordPress (11%) (figure 4). Share for vendor solutions,
for homegrown solutions, and for solutions at less than 3% of institutions (“other”
solutions) has declined since 2011 (43% in 2011 to 38% in 2014, 11% in 2011 to 7% in
2014, and 30% in 2011 to 24% in 2014, respectively).
It is unclear whether share growth for Drupal and WordPress represents software
preference or platform preference. PHP share (Drupal, WordPress) increased from
2011 to 2014 (15% to 31%). Share for Java-based solutions (TERMINALFOUR
Site Manager, OmniUpdate OU Campus, Hannon Hill Cascade Server, dotCMS)
increased from 19% in 2011 to 25% in 2014, while share for ASP.NET solutions
(Ingeniux CMS, Microsoft SharePoint, Ektron CMS, Sitecore, OpenText Web Site
Management) declined from 18% in 2011 to 14% in 2014.1
40%
20
Hannon Hill
Cascade Server
Homegrown
Drupal
10
Percentage of respondents
30
OmniUpdate
OU Campus
WordPress
Microso SharePoint
2011
Open source
2014
Vendor
0%
Homegrown
Figure 4. 2011–14 web content management system market (top 5 solutions,
homegrown, and other)
EDUCAUSE CENTER FOR ANALYSIS AND RESEARCH
6
Enterprise Application Market: CMS
Management Strategy
Although most institutions (75%) still opt for an in-house implementation, one-sixth
(16%) have a software-as-a-service (SaaS) implementation, which may provide
benefits such as cost savings and scalability. Of the top 5 vendors (listed in order of
market share in figure 5), OmniUpdate OU Campus is most likely to have a SaaS
implementation (36%).2
100%
75
50
25
0%
Drupal
Hannon Hill Cascade Server
100%
75
50
25
0%
WordPress
OmniUpdate OU Campus
100%
75
50
25
0%
Microso SharePoint
In-house
Vendor-hosted IaaS
Vendor-managed PaaS
Vendor-managed SaaS
Hosted or managed by another institution
Figure 5. Management strategies in use for top 5 solutions
EDUCAUSE CENTER FOR ANALYSIS AND RESEARCH
7
Enterprise Application Market: CMS
Deployment Strategy
To support mobile demand, institutions are using responsive web design (52% of
institutions), mobile-specific websites (16%), and mobile applications (11%). Of
institutions using one of the top 5 vendors (listed in order of market share in figure 6),
those with OmniUpdate OU Campus are most likely to have responsive web design,
mobile-specific websites, or mobile applications.
100%
75
50
25
0%
Drupal
Hannon Hill Cascade Server
WordPress
OmniUpdate OU Campus
100%
75
50
25
0%
100%
75
50
25
0%
Microso SharePoint
Mobile app
Mobile-specific website
Responsive web design
Application virtualization
Other
Figure 6. Deployment strategies in use for top 5 solutions
EDUCAUSE CENTER FOR ANALYSIS AND RESEARCH
8
Enterprise Application Market: CMS
Case Study: Transitioning to WordPress at the
University of Central Florida
About three and a half years ago, Information Technologies and Resources (IT&R)
at the University of Central Florida (UCF) began to reassess its web CMS strategy,
particularly for the main ucf.edu website. Over time, web content morphed organically, resulting in different web CMSs, operating on different servers across campus.
Coincidentally, at about the same time UCF IT&R began university-wide initiatives to
consolidate servers in its main data center and to develop shared services to enhance
efficiency and security. These initiatives, combined with an outdated vendor web CMS
solution, created a perfect retooling opportunity.
Having discussed website development over the years, IT&R’s Computer Services &
Telecommunications (CS&T) division and Communications and Marketing decided
to tackle this project together. Their plan: Communications and Marketing handles
the front-end web development process and CS&T maintains the back-end hardware/
server/support pieces. The collaboration required considerable discussion, compromise, and consensus, taking a year and a half to plan and coordinate system and
backup requirements. Both groups believe this lengthened the transition in web
server platforms but considered it a worthwhile investment of time. The payoff: a
smooth implementation and a solid working relationship.
Front-end web CMS requirements include flexibility, good visualization, and a
large user-base community to provide needed resources and support. UCF chose
WordPress because Communications and Marketing already maintained a smaller-scale implementation. Meanwhile, CS&T created 10 virtual servers housed
in its data center on a VMware server cluster and deployed a Linux operating
system, which was more scalable than UCF Marketing’s Windows implementation. The decision to use Linux represented a new direction for UCF. The university had not previously run Linux at a production level for web servers, but both
CS&T and Communications and Marketing decided to use Linux after discussing
the pros and cons.
Both groups believed that it was especially important to proactively address security measures, given WordPress’s potential open-source security vulnerabilities.
For example, the UCF system uses Security-Enhanced Linux and HTTPS/SSL.
A “lock down” feature for the ucf.edu site prevents accidental or malicious code
changes. Tiered security roles allow content managers to perform their jobs with
required access level; only a top-level WordPress administrator controls code installations and reviews plugins. Ongoing security measures include regular WordPress
server and application updates and routine security vulnerability scans for servers
and applications. If a security problem occurs, a dedicated e-mail channel hastens
response and coordination between WordPress site administrators and technical liaisons. Developers regularly share best practices and lessons learned.
EDUCAUSE CENTER FOR ANALYSIS AND RESEARCH
9
Enterprise Application Market: CMS
Since the launch of the WordPress CMS in 2013, Communications and Marketing
developed a fast and efficient web-production process, backed by CS&T’s stable and
reliable infrastructure. They can launch a new website in under a week if needed, and
they can quickly redesign websites, as university situations require, by replicating
minor WordPress theme styling changes.
Over time, other UCF colleges, administrative departments, and the library took
notice, replacing homegrown or outsourced solutions with the Communications and
Marketing/CS&T model. Today, the main ucf.edu website and its applications remain
in a separate system, and Communications and Marketing manages a second hosted
WordPress system instance to handle this additional demand. Together both instances
support 60 sites, which is projected to grow to 217 sites over the next fiscal year. Over
time, two particular benefits have emerged: a reduced number of CMSs used at UCF,
and a more consistent look and feel for the content and the website presence.
For now, both parties are extremely satisfied with their WordPress environment and
their shared services arrangement. No major changes are currently planned, though
migration from the data center to the cloud could be a longer-term consideration.
EDUCAUSE CENTER FOR ANALYSIS AND RESEARCH
10
Enterprise Application Market: CMS
Conclusion
In response to mobile proliferation, many institutions are replacing their web content
management systems with solutions that foster community interaction and system
interoperability. With this shift, market share for open-source options, PHP solutions,
and Java-based solutions is increasing. Although in-house solutions are still the norm,
many institutions have chosen a SaaS implementation. New implementations may
require cross-institutional collaboration and coordination. As UCF found, investing
the necessary time in collaboration can lead to a robust, consolidated system implementation with buy-in from multiple stakeholders.
Acknowledgments
ECAR wishes to thank Patrick Burt, Interim Associate Vice President and Creative
Director, UCF Marketing; Robert Yanckello, Chief Technology Officer, CS&T; and
Joel L. Hartman, Vice Provost and CIO, IT&R, at the University of Central Florida for
their help with this case study.
Notes
1.
For more information on solutions and associated platforms see the list of proprietary
software at the Wikipedia page that lists content management systems.
2.
Vendor-hosted options include infrastructure as a service (IaaS), platform as a service
(PaaS), and software as a service (SaaS).
About the Enterprise Application Market Series
The Enterprise Application Market report series from the EDUCAUSE Center for Analysis and Research
focuses on data from the EDUCAUSE Core Data Service (CDS) to better understand how higher education
institutions approach various information systems. Market share and system rate of change are among the
metrics highlighted in this series. Information provided for this series was derived from Module 8 of CDS,
which asked several questions regarding information systems and applications. For reports in the 2014 series,
responses from 560 institutions were analyzed. Only U.S. institutions are represented in this series. EDUCAUSE CENTER FOR ANALYSIS AND RESEARCH
11