re: Standard list of WCMS features

>To use the _analogy_ of consumer electronics. If I go out to buy a
>PDA or a mobile phone obviously I think about how _I_ will use it,
>but I'm still interested in feature specs. to find out what I'm missing
>if I buy this model and not that one. The reason is that I have latent
>needs - there are often features that trigger my imagination and
>make me think of things that I could do that hadn't occurred to me before.

>I'm not arguing that business requirements aren't important, just that
>there is nothing wrong in business requirements being shaped by the
>possibilities offered by technology. In my view it's a two way street.

>Jason


If only I had a nickel for every feature clients thought they "were
missing", or thought they'd eventually use (and never did).

Featuritis shares its roots with the Thunderbird Problem (beyond the scope
of this reply, try Google).   The desire (compulsion even) to have that
which we do not have.  Consumer electronics and automobiles are two
excellent examples.  How often have we paid an extra $10, $100, or $1000
dollars for a feature which stirred our imagination--one that we used maybe
once, twice, or never?

Unfortunately, that compulsion carries over to the office where managers pay
an additional four, five, or six figures for products with features well
beyond their business needs.  In fact, they're likely to upgrade without
ever having used the breadth of features available in the previous version
of the product.

I'm not suggesting that you shouldn't compare data sheets, or imagine the
opportunities afforded by new products.  However, I do suggest that, in
addition to requesting a list of features to use as a benchmark, you ask
fellow practitioners which features they found useful, which they found
cumbersome, and which they never used at all.  Their answers may surprise
you.

joe