Web Development and Information Technology
These days I find myself pondering this question more and more: What does Web Development have to do with Information Technology? The more I think about it, the less they have in common. Now more than ever I am confident that Web Development should never be organized under IT.
IT is a necessary part of keeping the web alive, but one that is so separate from the creation of a website that it makes me laugh every time I think about it. Information Technology is, and always should be, concerned with the reliability, stability, and effectiveness of serving a website. Those creating websites should focus their complete attention on the effectiveness of the message, the design, the interface and the content.
When you get down to it, any website, and I mean any website, is all about communication. Communication has never been the expertise of IT, nor should it have to be. Communication is the job of marketers. It should be done by those deeply connected to the product.
One common solution to this disconnect is to have the website architected, written, and designed by marketers, and then turn it over to the IT folks to be developed. But this is still unsatisfactory in my eyes. A website’s face and structure may come from it’s design and organization, but its soul comes from the developers. Until developers understand and connect with the message and goals, and can put themselves in the shoes of the target audience, that soul will be lacking.
Additionally, even the best traditional marketers won’t fully understand what’s possible on the web. It’s the people deeply entrenched in the technology that will help to create the most effective solutions. So the responsibility falls on the developer to align themselves with the marketing strategy for any website, and be able to concept and develop matching solutions. In other words, a good developer won’t just follow guidelines, they’ll contribute to the message.
As a developer, there are simple ways to test if you fully understand a website you’re building. At any point, you should be able to identify the target audience(s) and primary goal(s) of the site. You should be educated on the browsing habits of that audience, and any technical ways to achieve these goals. Be user-centric when developing interfaces, but not just generic ‘users,’ always be mindful of your specific audience.
If you’re a web developer who’s only experience is programming, I would encourage you to educate yourself on the newest marketing techniques. If you work in an organization with a marketing department, talk to them, and learn from them.
If you’re a web marketer who isn’t a programmer, be sure to help your developers understand your strategy. Once they do, they will be a tremendous asset to the construction and the message of your site.
And finally, if you’re in a position of management over IT and/or marketing, please don’t align the responsibility of web development of any kind with Information Technology. The two will work hand in hand, but they are certainly not the same.
Post and Author Info.
Published August 07, 2006 by:
Commenting is currently off for this post.
So far there are 17 comments.
Amen brother! Very well said. You’ve put this idea into words that I just couldn’t come up with before, especially “A website’s [...] soul comes from the developers.” It’s not always easy being a web developer/programmer in a marketing group, especially when the IT group thinks that type of activity should only be done in their area, but it’s the correct organizational structure.
Great post Steve! Thanks!
August 7th, 2006
I’ve had a few clients who treat their website like a hot potato. The marketing team don’t understand the web and don’t want to look stupid, whilst the IT department is too busy teaching employees how to save word files. I’m trying to avoid these clients.
I would go futher and say that web presence is important enough to be a managerial matter and that employing someone who knows their craft will get better and quicker results.
August 7th, 2006
Dave: You’re welcome. Glad to hear you agree!
George: An organization whos website has no owner is even more dangerous. And you’re correct, management is a neccesary part of the development process, also.
August 7th, 2006
Too true. I’ve been on both sides of this fence, and there’s a marked difference in priorities and understanding of needs.
August 7th, 2006
Another twist! I’ve been reflecting on the difference between web development vs. web design (and design vs. art):
http://www.bioneural.net/2006/07/16/web-development-vs-web-design/
My own feeling is that you need ITC skills to do web development, but not to do web design. Perhaps a helpful way to visualise things is a central circle called “development”, with “IT” being an overlapping circle on one side and “design” overlapping on the other—but with no direct contact between design and IT.
August 7th, 2006
That is a great post Steve. I agree with you and everyone else. Marketing is not the same on the Web as it is in more traditional ways. Same goes for content. Brochure-ware does not work online either. Separating IT from design/usability/content is very key for all organizations today, yet many don’t understand that. I would add that whomever is the “owner” of the Web site (and yes, there definitely needs to be one) that they also have a business background too (outside of marketing/design/or any other key requirements). Business decisions also drive content, design, and branding of effective Web sites.
August 8th, 2006
Good points but I am not sure how much I agree. I would like to see web design under management on it’s own, but worse comes to worse under IT.
Developers understand usability ad somewhat accessibility. For them the content is prioritized. Logic rains.
Marketting experts are more narrow minded. Marketters want their “Holy Grail” intact. They think only in images and in Branding. They wanted their branded font even if no one on the planet has that font installed! They want their branded logo colors exact but do not understand that the user controls the contrast color and ighting and each monitor is different. Marketters want their web site to look like thier slick brochures… so squeeze and force the text sizes to fit as they want it seen, not as the user needs to see it. Marketters think the web is TV, few really understand the web, how browsers work or even that the customer is likely to have any one of numerous disabilities. Have you ever heard a marketter look at a slick brochure or poster and say “Gee, 1 in 10 of our target group is color blind, that may not work for them.” I really doubt it.
Web sites represent a business and cöearly need to reflect the branding to an extent and they are clearly the people to write the best content for the site… but they do not/will not understand that this is not print or TV, we work under different rules and the user has far more control over what they see then TV or print allow. The user controls most of everything on web sites and so web sites must reflect their needs and not marketting wishes. IT types understand this more so I prefferably work with IT over marketing. Good article.
August 8th, 2006
LSW: Sounds like you’ve had some bad experiences with marketers. As one myself, I can assure you that in my experience, getting a traditional marketer to understand web marketing strategy is much easier than getting your standard programmer to understand the same.
I could say that IT programmers will never understand that a website is a medium for communication, and the message and interface is far more important than IT jargon or proceedures. Both generalizations, but I feel in my experience that a website is far more ‘marketing’ than it is ‘technology.’
August 8th, 2006
I think IT or Information Technology is just like a namespace under which comes the web site design and development. You mention that web design is about communication. Right, a web site is all about communication and IT means just that too: IT makes communication more accessible and faster. If you are using heavy content on your web site such as flash content, its the IT infrastructure that you target i.e. the connection speed with which most users of the site will be accessing it. So, imo, they are very much together and related to each other.
Just my quick opinion =)
August 10th, 2006
All IT is about exposing information via technology – the vast array of systems all involve communication in some form (not just the marketing/promotional kind).
Intranets and Extranets are more obviously more that “just promotion” – they are like traditional line-of-business software – integrating CMS, DKMS, CRM, HR systems etc. I would argue that websites are taking on some of these aspects too.
The field of web development includes more that serving content to a public audience – it includes any application which is web-based (traditional CMS, Wikis and other collaboration tools, Business Intelligence reporting, Interactive staff assessment etc I’m sure you know many others).
I know in several industries the marketing dept maintain the website (using a CMS) and the IT dept doesn’t want to touch it. You are right to say both parties would benefit from talking. In the worst cases when they don’t – IT sees the site as empty brochure-ware (doesn’t help them in any way just adds to their user support commitments), Marketing sees it as the digital equivalent of their printed material. Of course there are companies who are more savvy, and are doing really smart things with web-based apps.
August 10th, 2006
Kamran: You’re right that the communication is empowered by the technology, and the marketing department certainly needs the IT department. But the mistake is made when the IT department is no longer simply empowering the communication, but also in charge of the communication. That’s Steve’s point. The people actually crafting the web site need to be marketers because that’s where the communication should come from.
The counter-argument I’ve heard a few times is the canvas-paint analogy: the IT department creates the canvas and the Marketing folk paint on it. That’s a false analogy when it comes to the web. It’s not just the words or graphics on the page that are communicating to the visitor: it’s also the info architecture, the interaction design, every piece of functionality (including what’s not there), the error messages (and the way they’re delivered), flexibility of the layout, etc. And the soul of the experience/communication “comes from the developers.”
In one situation I’m familiar with, the IT department views marketing as the people who fill in the content, and themselves as application creators. There is such a huge gap between those things and that’s precisely where the user experience lives or dies. Look at what “broken” means to these two groups. To an IT person, it means the page wasn’t there, there was a programming error (maybe a variable wasn’t passed correctly), or the server was inundated with too many requests. To a marketing person, it means that the user experience failed and someone was frustrated or disappointed or got a false impression and the brand value depreciated.
That said, I think there is a largely unexplored area where the marketing and IT groups work as a team on things like wikis, CMS’s, etc. But first everyone needs to get on board with who should be developing the core web site.
August 11th, 2006
the question is probably:”is it usefull to draw this distiction? Does it help people, individuals, users or the web? I recall he story of 10 blind man a king asked to tell him about the nature of an elephant. the one at the tail said “it is like a brush, the one at the legs said no it is like a big tree, the one at the head said no no it is like a big snake. and soon they started arguing very angry. i ve seen publications on the web that looked not very stylish not well designed, but they worked. and through the kind of what they published they showed the real thing they were doing, their business or whatever. i want to say, when it makes people glad, it is good. the best style is: “having something to say”
the rest is just filling the blog and an academic waste of time!
August 17th, 2006
Marketing needs to look at the web!!!
August 17th, 2006
Bravo for addressing this issue . . . I am a marketing manager charged with bringing in leads to my company via the web – I work with a website development/SEO vendor, and an in-house IT department, but marketing ultimately controls the design, development and implementation of the website at my firm because the website needs to deliver leads, bottom line. I am in constant communication with my development team inside and out – we license a CMS and I continually push for upgrades and new pieces – we work as a team, I don’t program, they don’t market, but we both understand each other’s strengths and limitations and in my mind this is the only way to have success on the web. Websites have to make money. I do expect my IT department to understand my expertise and goals, and I strive to understand and accomodate theirs, and I know that I can’t accomplish my goals without their help, and they can’t achieve success unless I understand what they can and can’t do.
To achieve this, I keep up on technology and I continually ask questions – I know they want to keep learning and growing too, and so I ASK “can we?” and “what if?” a lot and so do they. My expertise is as a communicator, not a programmer, and I don’t even pretend to know how to do their job . . . I just make sure I understand it. I know that my success depends upon them, and mutual respect is key. The rest, you can make up as you go along.
August 18th, 2006
@JR What about web marketing? Who do they look at? :-p
August 19th, 2006
Websites are not always only about communication
and marketingbut and ever more often about applications that deliver functionality. And user interface design is not really a skill found in communication or marketing departments.In any case I think developing a website should be done by a team where every member has it’s role and repsonsibility. If that’s the case and all work together, it doesn’t really mattern which manager is responsible. In my company, marketing is responsible for content and design and IT for architecture, realisation and project management. And it works well.
As with a lot of things in an organisation, it is not a one department show.
August 20th, 2006