Introduction
In recent years we've seen an increase in the number of Headless Content Management System (CMS) vendors entering the market. Most of the leading CMS solutions have raised significant funding, and analysts are bullish about the growth trajectory for the sector. But as this article will argue, for Headless to go "mainstream" developers and tech leaders need to do a better job of articulating the value proposition in non-technical terms.
Emergence of Headless
Headless has emerged in recent years as an attractive alternative to traditional monolithic (or legacy) CMS like WordPress. As a more bespoke and technical approach to all-in-one website builders, early adopters have tended to be larger companies with sufficient resources to deploy a more technical solution.
There have also been push and pull factors driving adoption. Issues with WordPress are well known; and range from performance issues to security vulnerabilities, to usability (clunky interface). On the other side, the benefits of moving to Headless include the ability to create a beautiful bespoke website using modern technologies and frameworks, improved performance, enhanced security and to enjoy the resultant benefits from the the omnichannel capability of the architecture.
However, it is very much a "horses for courses" discussion when it comes to CMS selection. For the more budget-constrained company, a website builder will likely suffice, as the bespoke nature of a Headless CMS-backed website pushes the overall cost up.
The key question is whether Headless can appeal to a more mass-market audience beyond Fortune 500, and B2C brands with complex requirements.
It is after all a very different way to run a website, and some may fall into it blind- unaware that the CMS is just the "content management" element. Part of this goes back to the confusing name for the category- "Headless" but also the fact that as a concept it is (a) simply not widely known, nor (b) easily understood.
Similarly - for the non-tech user, images like the one below do little to educate them as to the differences between the two approaches - not to mention how these differences generate business value.
Fig 1 - Differences Between Traditional and Headless CMS
Developer Centric Nature
For someone coming at this from the marketing side of the fence, the gap is all too stark. The adoption of headless has very much been developer-led to date, and as I argue herein, more widespread adoption can best be achieved by educating a non-tech audience as to the values of the approach.
Visit any of the websites of the leading Headless vendors and the language, messaging, and graphic choices are almost exclusively focused on developers. Even the social proof (case studies and testimonials) is primarily from those in highly technical roles.
Of course, this all makes sense, as developers represent the primary buyer persona. However, my argument is that in plenty of other contexts, the marketing leader is the primary decision-maker when it comes to site upgrades (and if they are not, as stakeholders may be influencers) and more generally is much closer to the ongoing users than the Dev team.
As a former Chief Marketing Officer myself it is all too easy to stick with WordPress.
Firstly, it is the only CMS your peers in the C-Suite are likely to have heard of.
Secondly, there is every chance your marketing team will be comfortable using it, after all, many of them will have encountered it on their journey up the marketing ladder.
Thirdly, given the size and strength of the WordPress ecosystem, you'll have plenty of people championing it as the best option.
Finally, you may feel overwhelmed by choice and default to "doing nothing".
If you do decide to raise your head above the parapet and check out a Headless website you'll likely backtrack quickly - overwhelmed by messaging that doesn't resonate. However, these reasons for choosing WordPress, quickly fall away for those in the know. WordPress has its place - but powering scaling businesses is not one of those. Thus the key point then becomes:
How can headless vendors do a better job of educating time-pressed marketing leaders that headless represents an attractive option to future-proof their website with a cutting-edge tech stack?
Buyer v User Personas
In part, this goes back to the distinction between the buyer and the user. From my experience, the user is rarely a factor in the upfront decision to select a CMS. When it comes to Headless the "job to be done" for the Dev lead is to select a CMS and to get a website live. They are rarely worried about what happens afterwards. It is the same when agencies are brought in. Often the engagement is transactional and relates to a specific project and launch date - "getting a new site live". But commercial sites are not one-off build, "launch and forget" deliverables. Sites need to be managed and maintained - and usually, it is the marketing function which is entrusted to manage a site after launch.
When it comes to the likes of WordPress retainers are common - having a dedicated freelancer or agency to manage updates and to keep the site from falling over. With a Headless CMS-backed website, it is important to have access to a Front-End dev (ideally in situ in the marketing team).
Most Headless CMS solutions have missed a trick though in failing to address non-technical stakeholders (be that as users or influencers). This starts with on-site messaging, but it also filters through to the feature set and user interface. There are some attempts to recognise the distinct personas (often in onboarding set-up flows), but despite this, the reality is that more needs to be done to close the gap.
Contento CMS Interface
Fig 2 - The Contento interface - designed to be intuitive for non-technical users
By way of an example to illustrate the point - if you compare the pricing page of a website builder like Squarespace and a Headless CMS like Contentful, you'll feel you are looking at completely different solutions, even though ultimately they are both CMS.
Making Headless More Accessible
So what can be done?
1/ As CMS vendors, it is incumbent on us all to better articulate the value of moving to headless in terms that non-tech stakeholders can understand. This means clearly outlining the value in business terms (while also ensuring the drawbacks are also explained).
2/ Graphics, illustrations and videos need to be "less technical" and they need to illustrate how a Headless backed site is a better fit for clients in terms that can be understood.
3/ The product leaders of Headless CMS solutions need to better understand the needs of ongoing website management and maintenance ensuring that "the main jobs to be done" are easy to accomplish (ideally without a developer dependency).
4/ Finally, we must all take lessons learned from the early headless adopters so that new converts don't make the same mistakes e.g.
- Ensuring they are aware of the need to have access to a front-end developer on an ongoing basis
- Ensuring that content modelling is done properly at the start
- Ensuring that appropriate guard rails are put in place to deliver on the value proposition (e.g. site performance is a key benefit of Headless, so anyone uploading excessively large images, animations or videos should be red-flagged).
Summary
While WordPress continues to dominate the global CMS market, the category of Headless has emerged in recent years as a credible alternative in certain commercial use cases. Up to now, the category has been primarily associated with major brands who understand the value and can successfully deploy a Headless backed website.
However, for the sector to "cross the chasm" towards more widespread adoption, it has to do a better job of communicating to a non-technical audience. All Headless vendors have a collective responsibility here - otherwise, the legacy monolithic approach will continue to dominate, despite the limitations.
About the Author
Alan Gleeson is the CEO and Co-Founder of Contento, a modern Headless CMS focused 100% on websites.
Top comments (0)