Editing Content management (section)

==Governance structures==
Content management expert Marc Feldman defines three primary content management governance structures: localized, centralized, and federated—each having its unique strengths and weaknesses.<ref>{{Cite web|url=http://www.clickz.com/clickz/column/1715089/governance-issues-content-management|title = Governance Issues in Content Management|date = 12 January 2001}}</ref>

===Localized governance===
By putting control in the hands of those closest to the content, the context experts, localized governance models empower and unleash creativity.  These benefits come, however, at the cost of a partial-to-total loss of managerial control and oversight.

===Centralized governance===
When the levers of control are strongly centralized, content management systems are capable of delivering an exceptionally clear and unified brand message.  Moreover, centralized content management governance structures allow for a large number of cost-savings opportunities in large enterprises, realized, for example, through (1) the avoidance of duplicated efforts in creating, editing, formatting, repurposing and archiving content; (2) process management and the streamlining of all content related labor; and/or (3) an orderly deployment or updating of the content management system.

===Federated governance===
Federated governance models potentially realize the benefits of both localized and centralized control while avoiding the weaknesses of both. While content management software systems are inherently structured to enable federated governance models, realizing these benefits can be difficult because it requires, for example, negotiating the boundaries of control with local managers and content creators.  In the case of larger enterprises, in particular, the failure to fully implement or realize a federated governance structure equates to a failure to realize the full return on investment and cost savings that content management systems enable.