Different types of CMSs explained
The first CMS is widely acknowledged to be IBM’s FileNet system of the early 1990s, and since then many companies have developed CMSs for the market.
Over the years, different types of CMSs have been developed. They vary in their particular purpose (use case), their architecture and licensing models.
The key differences between them are laid out below.
Web Content Management (WCM)
versus
Component Content Management Systems (CCMS)
- With a Web CMS you can create, edit and manage web pages. These started out as HTML pages, served up on external facing websites, but soon became popular to serve internal audiences too on intranets. These systems used to be ‘page centric’, enabling you to edit a page as a whole. However, this model has severe limitations as it leads to copying/cloning content – for instance when a piece of information needs to be displayed in two areas of the website. Better Web CMSs now allow you to work with content as reusable items – the same content can be displayed in various places without having to copy it over each and every time.

- A Component Content Management Systems (CCMS) is used to manage highly componentized content such as technical product information (user manuals for example) that have traditionally been published in print or as PDFs. Content reuse is the big driver behind using content ‘components’. When Model B of a piece of equipment supersedes Model A, and only a few small content changes are needed, the majority of content can be reused without having to duplicate it. If for example the manual for Model A has 2,000 paragraphs of information, but you only need to edit 10 paragraphs to republish this as a new manual for Model B, you can quickly and easily reuse the other 1,990 paragraphs.
Nowadays the use case for CCMSs goes beyond print and PDF, since companies often want to publish this information online too as individual web pages or as snippets rather than as a chunky PDF. CCMSs are also increasingly being used for content broader than just technical documentation, such as the management of policies, procedures, guidelines etc. in non-technical industries.

As you can see, both systems have their strengths, and it is not unusual for organizations to use a Web CMS for their marketing, and a CCMS for their technical documentation.
Commercial versus Open Source CMSs
- Commercial CMSs are the ones you buy from a vendor. They offer you either a license that you buy (perpetual or term license) or a subscription model. Because they build and maintain the software for you, you can contact their support desk in case of any problems, and depending on priority, they will fix it for you within an agreed timeframe.

- An Open Source CMS is a ‘free’ CMS product. You can download the software and use it without having to pay a license fee. There is a community of developers that builds and maintains it. Obviously it being free is great, but be aware that it does require technical skills to deploy and maintain it (you’ll need IT professionals), and there is no guarantee that it will work for your unique circumstances. If it breaks, you’re depending on the community or your own IT staff to fix issues.
This model has evolved so there are now some open source products that can be used through a service provider, who can offer you a managed version of such a CMS, and provide you with a Service Level Agreement.
Headless versus head-on CMSs
You often hear the term ‘headless CMS’ being used. The idea isn’t new. In fact a number CMSs from the early 2000s were already ‘headless’.
So what is a ‘headless’ CMS?
The ‘head’ is the website (or ‘web application’) that runs on top of the CMS. So a ‘headless’ CMS does not have a website as a presentation layer, whereas a ‘head-on’ CMS does. A ‘headless’ system exposes content via APIs (often in JSON format) as its main way of delivering content, whereas ‘head-on’ CMSs deliver their content through HTML pages, direct to a website.
There are pros and cons to both approaches – like the ability to do in-context editing of a web page with a head-on CMS and the ability to deliver content in multiple formats to multiple devices with a headless CMS – so these days you’ll see hybrid CMSs being promoted, which combine the best of both worlds.
