There’s No Need to Feel Bad About Your Site
Posted by Anna Belle on 20 Aug 2007 at 04:40 am | Tagged as: Church Websites
The other day I got an email from a church webmaster who was embarrassed about the site he manages. I can’t tell you how often this happens, and I’ve been there too. Typically the site in question is out-of-date, both in content and look, or it’s missing critical information. But almost without exception, there’s no need to take on the added burden of remorse.
In fact, I can only think of one exception, and that was a long time ago. Back around 1999, I had to pick up the pieces left by a webmaster who had promised the moon and delivered next-to-nothing. He was inexperienced, so that in itself wasn’t so bad. What made me want to go into scolding mother mode was that he locked the site down, wouldn’t share the password and made it impossible for others to help. Of course, he wasn’t embarrassed at all.
But that’s not the norm. Your average church webmaster is conscientious and doing the best he or she can. Many have been saddled with a site that barely works and looks woefully out-of-date. Often they don’t have a lot of background, but are plucky enough to be willing to do what it takes to improve the site.
So what are the keys to overcoming being self-conscious about a site you manage?
- Understand to your core that the website is the responsibility of the whole church, not just you. I really can’t say this enough, and chances are you too are going to have to spread this message to others. Church leadership is especially accountable for the site, and often they don’t realize it. This is most obvious when they aren’t getting their content to you, but it’s true in other ways too. For example, the minister of my church is great to work with. While as best I can tell she doesn’t have a tech bone in her, nonetheless she’s appreciative and willing to manage staff on the rare occasions there’s a need for that.
- Do the best you can. There are always things about the site that need work, so just get organized, set reasonable goals, and get going.
- Enjoy. Celebrate what you’ve accomplished with others who have helped. It’s a joy to see a new technology you’ve installed work or to overhear a visitor say, “I found your church on the web.”
Having said this, it cuts both ways. When the day comes that your church site is fabulous, you can’t puff and preen and take all the credit. Be prepared to share the glory. In any event, it turns out that’s more satisfying. What better feeling is there than to crow with others who have helped? And what more likely way is there to ensure that the site will continue to be first-rate?
Subscribe in a reader
“There’s no need to feel bad about your site.”
Good advice, but I’m not sure there’s always a choice. I remember doing my initial diagnosis when I first inherited our church’s site. All I could think was “I have to fix this. I really have to fix this. I really have to fix this, RIGHT NOW.”
I know Dan Harper has proposed having a group of UU geeks maintain a standard Drupal installation so our churches can get a content management system running quickly. It might also make sense to have someone (UUA? Someone else?) maintain a bare-bones, ‘good enough’ fill-in-the-blanks church home page template, just so a new webmaster can stop the bleeding (and fretting) quickly.
Chris — You’re right. That’s exactly what I thought and did after inheriting one disaster of a site. Fortunately it was small — under 100 pages. Another time I inherited a several thousand page disaster. Needless to say, no matter how much I wanted to take care of it, it took time.
Have you seen the The UU Web Templates? They might work for the scenario you describe.
I’d tell the emailer to take heart - even web teams at large companies with dedicated design staff often feel bad about their websites. Let your desire for a better church website motivate you to improve it, but also remember that most church members are willing to cut volunteer site producers some slack. Focus on making the basics work and then add visual improvements later.
Very sound advice, Mark. I guess when you do feel good about a site, rejoice — especially with all those who make it possible.
One other point that might save some anxiety — a church Web site should reflect the kind of church you really are. If you’re a big church with lots of staff and money, my feeling is that you should have a site that reflects that. But I’m in a small church, where we don’t have much money, and all our volunteers are maxed out, but we’re freindly and fun. So we have a site that’s technically clunky (a little ugly, the CSS doesn’t always work well, and it’s not 100% valid XHTML) but we try to make it friendly-looking and fun to read — which is a pretty accurate representation of who we are.
In short, I think we should feel good about our Web sites when (1) the site accurately reflects our church, and the people who show up at church after seeing our site feel immediately at home — and (2) when our current members and friends can find the info they need. And (1) is the most important for me….
Thanks, Dan. This is soooo true. I would add that for the poor webmasters who cannot manage even your #1 point, that they try to assess as best they can how much this is really their doing and personal responsibility. If there is not much they can do about it, I advise quitting as the webmaster. It’s not worth it. Yes, the site will suffer even more, but hopefully only for a few months until leadership gets their act together.
In my experience, once in a while (maybe 20% of the time) it is, in fact, the webmaster’s responsibility that the site is not functioning well, but more often it’s despite the webmaster’s best efforts. Your church is very lucky to have a minister who gets it and is supportive of web efforts. My church is similarly blessed with a leadership that is supportive. And I should add, our site is far from a model, but it’s good enough (using your excellent criteria) and should improve with a judicious redesign.