『Stuck in a Website Fixing Loop? Try This.』のカバーアート

Stuck in a Website Fixing Loop? Try This.

Stuck in a Website Fixing Loop? Try This.

無料で聴く

ポッドキャストの詳細を見る

概要

 I had a conversation recently with a web team at a college who were stuck in a painfully familiar trap. They had a sprawling, chaotic website that had grown like an untended garden over the years. They knew it was letting users down. They had plenty of ideas for how to make it better. And yet, every time they tried to improve things, they hit a wall.Sound familiar? I suspect it might.The team had been there for years, and they had developed what I call "institutional scar tissue." Every suggestion was met with an internal voice saying "we tried that once and it didn't work" or "I don't have the power to change that." They had been worn down by years of small defeats until the only option that felt possible was incremental improvement to what already existed.And incremental improvement, when applied to something fundamentally broken, is a bit like repainting a house with a crumbling foundation. Sure, it looks nicer from the street, but you're still one bad storm away from serious structural failure.The trap of fixing what existsWhen you try to fix an existing website, you inherit all the reasons it became broken in the first place. Every stakeholder who fought for their pet page is still there. Every "but we've always had that section" is still lurking. Every technical limitation that forced an awkward compromise is still constraining your options.Worse, you're starting from a position of defense. You have to justify why something should be removed or changed. The burden of proof is on you to explain why the current state is wrong, rather than on stakeholders to explain why their content deserves to exist.This is exhausting work. And it rarely produces genuinely transformative results.Wait, haven't I said the opposite?Now, if you've been reading my stuff for a while, you might be thinking "hang on, Paul. Haven't you spent years telling people not to do periodic website redesigns?" And you'd be right. I have. I've written at length about how the boom-bust cycle of website redesigns is damaging. How you end up with a shiny new site that slowly decays until someone throws a tantrum and the whole thing gets rebuilt from scratch.Incremental improvement is almost always the better path. Small, continuous changes based on real user data. No big-bang launches. No throwing out the baby with the bathwater.So why am I now suggesting we do exactly what I've warned against?Because sometimes the rot runs too deep. When you're dealing with thousands of pages of redundant, outdated, and trivial content, when every attempt at incremental change gets blocked by institutional politics, when the team has been so beaten down that they can't imagine anything better, you need a different approach. Not a traditional redesign where you migrate all the old problems into a new template. Something more radical.You need to imagine what you would build if you were starting from nothing.Start from nothingThe approach I suggested to this team was counterintuitive: stop trying to fix the website. Instead, imagine you're building from scratch.If you were launching this college's online presence tomorrow with no existing site, what would you build? What are the actual tasks people need to accomplish? What questions do they have at each stage of their journey? Strip away all the accumulated cruft and think about what a prospective student genuinely needs.For a college focused on student recruitment, it might be shockingly simple. Someone needs to find a course, understand if they can afford it, and apply. That's perhaps 200 pages of genuinely useful content. Not the thousands that currently exist.Frame it as a thought experimentDon't announce that you're redesigning the website. That triggers immediate defensiveness. Every stakeholder starts worrying about their territory. Before you've finished your sentence, half the room is already composing their objection.Instead, frame the whole exercise as a thought experiment. "We're not proposing anything. We're just imagining what perfect could look like. What would we build if we had no constraints? If we were starting fresh tomorrow?"This framing is disarming. People stop defending and start dreaming. They can engage with the vision without feeling threatened, because it's explicitly hypothetical. No one's being asked to commit to anything yet. It's like asking someone what they'd do if they won the lottery. They'll tell you all sorts of things they'd never admit to wanting otherwise.Make it a collective visionBut, don't do this thought experiment alone.Bring in a few trusted people from other departments early in the process. Ask them what excites them about what better could look like. Let them shape the vision alongside you.When you do this, something important shifts. It stops being "the web team's idea" and becomes a collective vision. Those collaborators become invested. They'll defend it in meetings you're not in. They'll sell it to their own teams. And if one of those collaborators ...
まだレビューはありません