The company

ADVENTURE Real Estate (ARE) provides real estate services to vacation, leisure, and destination properties including sales, leasing, and management; corporate services, facilities, and project management; mortgage banking; investment management and capital markets; appraisal and valuation; and research and consulting. Headquartered in Boulder ARE has nearly 500 employees in more than 20 offices in the western US and 2 other countries. The company reported net revenues of $400 million in 2019.

The challenge

Having an up-to-date Web site and social media strategy are critical to accurately promoting ARE, its vertical service lines, and its international network of real estate professionals and properties. In addition to providing corporate information, research data, and client tools, the site promotes the services of its 20 offices with dedicated Web pages. Personal profiles for each real estate professional and manager, individual sites for teams, and case studies are available for each location.

The company had decided on a locally hosted cloud-based content model for its corporate Web site, which was most recently updated in 2017 using another content publishing solution. The software had to be installed on each Web publisher's computer and proved to be incompatible with the company's Microsoft Office environment, causing frequent crashes when users tried to load images or attachments. Users were unable to use the work-flow component provided, making approval tracking time and labor intensive. Urgent needs for content changes were often requested through phone calls and e-mails to Web managers. Because new pages could not be previewed before publication, all content had to be reviewed and edited manually after publication, and often pages were approved in error.

ARE needed a stable platform that could accelerate the review, approval, and publishing process while maintaining control over the site's design and formatting. It also needed to enhance the site's internal search feature, be able to monitor Web site analytics, and ensure the site was indexed by Web crawlers and search engines so it would be returned prominently in response to searches.

ARE used Microsoft consultants to transfer the existing content, to provide customized templates and a new workflow process to support training. Two members of ARE's IT staff attended training in Redmond, and a Microsoft consultant was used on site to train additional trainers ? the corporate Web staff and two divisional Web managers. These Web managers quickly rolled out training to the 18 offices in the United States during a 2-week period, and followed up with regional support calls and an intranet page for Web publishers that supplied manuals, FAQs, and style guides.

Key benefit areas

Deploying Microsoft Content Management Server to support its corporate Web site has enabled ARE to improve the quality and quantity of information on the site while reducing the time needed for content review and publishing. Key benefits it achieved include the following:

? Increased IT staff productivity. Moving to a more stable content management system and a cloud-based environment reduced system crashes and downtime and enabled IT staff to focus on other value-added projects.

? Increased Web manager productivity. Reduced time spent reviewing, approving, and declining Web content allowed for greater time to enhance site features.

? Increased Web publisher productivity. The performance, speed, and simplicity of the new software motivated Web publishers to produce content. Because they were able to preview pages, they focused on quality and reduced the amount of time spent submitting and revising content for the Web editors.

? Reduced recruiting efforts for publishers. The system's ease of use and limited training demands made it easier to recruit Web publishers, who perform the role as part of their existing duties without additional compensation.

? Increased security and access. Compatibility with Web crawlers and more effective internal search tools supported by the MCMS based site better enable those accessing the site to find information they need yet providing better internal and external security.

Key cost areas

Personnel made up the greatest portion of the company's investment in Microsoft Content Management Server, amounting to 48% of the 3-year cost of the project. Other cost areas included software, hardware, consulting, and training.

Lessons Learned

Using a stable environment has helped ARE to recruit more publishers, motivate internal users, and reduce frustration for IT and Web services staff ? while improving site functionality and usability. A better user experience should increase the number of return visitors to the site.

Calculating the ROl

Three main benefit areas were quantified in calculating the ROI from ARE's investment in the Microsoft Content Management Server: reduced administrative overhead, increased IT staff productivity, increased general employee productivity, and improved customer satisfaction. One person responsible for managing international content was eliminated, reducing administrative overhead. IT and general employee productivity savings were calculated based on the fully-loaded employee cost. ARE calculated IT and general employee time savings associated with the new content management solution and compared them to the former one. Customer satisfaction was captured in a post-web use survey.

The Numbers Scenario 1 Annual Benefits Initial Yr1 Yr2 Yr3 Direct 26,000 26,000 26,000 Indirect 2,279,729 2,279,729 2,279,729 Total Benefits per period 2,305,729 2,305,729 2,305,729 Depreciation Schedule Acquisition Yr1 Yr2 Yr3 Software 200,000 40,000 40,000 40,000 Hardware 24,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 Total Depreciation per period 224,000 45,000 45,000 45,000 Expensed Costs Initial Yr1 Yr2 Yr3 Software 30,000 30,000 30,000 Hardware 5,000 5,000 5,000 Consulting 45,000 Personnel 64,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 Training 20,981 Other Total Costs per period 129,981 135,000 135,000 135,000 Assumptions: 15% discount rate Case Questions 1. Calculate the following: a. Annual ROI b. Total Cost of ownership c. Average annual cost of ownership d. Net present value in year 3 e. Payback period