Choose the Right CMS: Avoid a Public Sector Headache
A faulty CMS drains budgets, frustrates citizens, and can land agencies on the wrong side of the law.
Written by Vegard Ottervig on
Public sector organizations sit at a crossroads: citizens expect Amazon‑smooth self‑service, while new laws tighten the screws on accessibility, security, and tender transparency.
A modern CMS is the engine of that experience. Yet a poor choice locks in technical debt, invites compliance fines, and can crumble under peak traffic.
Below we frame the stakes, surface early pitfalls, and equip procurement leads with a quick self‑audit.
See also: 8 Checkpoints to Create Success for Your Digital Projects »
Digital Ambitions Meet Legal Reality
Norway now ranks 4th on the OECD Digital Government Index, reflecting a national push for user‑centred, joined‑up services . The Government’s 2024‑2030 Digitalization Strategy calls on every public body to build “seamless digital journeys” and reuse data across agencies . But that mission comes with guard‑rails:
- Universal design: Public sites must satisfy 48 separate WCAG 2.1 success criteria under EN 301 549 from January 2023.
- Accessibility enforcement: The Authority for Universal Design of ICT now carries an explicit mandate to sanction non‑compliant bodies.
- Procurement transparency: All high‑value ICT tenders must be published on Doffin and—above EU thresholds—on TED.
CMS 101: Why It Matters to Non‑tech Buyers
A content management system lets staff publish and govern web content without coding, while exposing APIs for integrations like ID‑porten or case handling systems.
In practice, the CMS becomes the digital front door for everything from crisis bulletins to permit applications. Choosing wisely therefore shapes user trust and operational costs.
Compliance Stakes You Can’t Ignore
| Requirement | What the law demands | Risk of a weak CMS |
|---|---|---|
| WCAG 2.1 / EN 301 549 | 48 criteria for public bodies, incl. keyboard navigation and contrast | Formal sanctions and reputational damage |
| GDPR & Infosec | Adequate security controls (Art. 32) or face fines | Data‑breach liability; negative press |
| ISO 27001 expectation | Many tenders cite certification to prove best‑practice infosec | Extra audit costs or disqualification |
Hidden Costs of “Good Enough” Platforms
- Vendor lock‑in: Proprietary stacks hamper future migrations and inflate day‑rate customizations.
- Performance meltdowns: Norway's Altinn-service once buckled under tax‑deadline traffic, spotlighting the price of limited scalability.
- Legal friction: CMS contracts that can’t slot into the Norwegian SSA‑L SaaS template trigger lengthy legal reviews and project delays .
Your Five Minute Self Audit
- User journeys: Do you know your top five citizen “tasks to be done”?
- Accessibility gaps: Have you run a WCAG 2.1 audit in the past 12 months?
- Integration map: Which back office systems must talk to the CMS?
- Security posture: Can vendors evidence ISO 27001 or equivalent?
- Procurement route: Open, restricted, or competitive dialogue: Have you aligned with competitive dialogue rules?
If any answer feels shaky, it’s time for deeper due diligence.
Next Step: Get the Full Checklist
This article primes the conversation; the real work starts with a structured requirements list. Read the free checklist “What You NEED to Remember in Public Sector CMS Procurement” for a step‑by‑step worksheet covering stakeholder workshops, evaluation matrices, and agreement clauses.
👉 See the checklist here—and move your CMS tender from guesswork to governance.
