Tools get too much focus. I guess it's natural, and I also fall for the allure of a good tool discussion. But we should get a bit real on our spotlight on tools, and concentrate on what it takes to successfully implement or migrate a web site. I've written about how to migrate before, but not tried to describe the success factors in priority order. So what are the keys, in priority order, of a successful implementation?

Let's take the example of photography. Go to photography forums, and the discussions are about cameras, just like most of the discussions around web sites are tools ("Do you prefer Drupal or Joomla?"), or maybe the end result ("I love the new CNN redesign"). In photography, successful photos probably rely on something like the following, in priority order: 1) vision of the photographer, 2) timing and lighting, 3) format (medium format digital, 35mm digital, mobile phone camera), 4) support (tripod, steady hands, holding camera out the window of a moving car), 5) lens, and somewhere way far down in the list is the actual camera. Of course, it's not as much fun or sexy to talk about it this way, but the first items in the list are more important. Give an excellent photographer a pinhole camera with perfect pre-dawn glow, and you'll wind up with a better photo than a two year old in harsh noon lighting with the "best" camera on the planet.

So, what are the keys to a successful web site then? Here's my stab at the answer, in priority order:

1. Vision

Before implementing a site, you need a strong, widely communicated vision of why you are going through the effort. Otherwise, your whole endeavor could be misguided or just lack the direction needed to keep the whole project moving forward.

2. Support (the "tripod")

Can you actually implement and then maintain this thing? Do you have the governance, processes, and teams in place? During and in preparation for the migration, you need to train the relevant teams. Are you following a sound process for your implementation?

3. Product Management (the "lens")

You might have the vision and staff in place, but in practice during implementation (and on an ongoing basis), there are lots of seemingly-small details that need to be worked through that affect the overall quality. Note that this is not only about project management of delivering to originally-defined scope, but the continuous tweaks that need to be determined as the project goes forward. For an infrastructure product like a CMS, the tool must also be managed architecturally to ensure it is sustainable. Strong product management also means being able to clearly define the essential requirements, and concentrating on defining your requirements will also naturally help you in selecting your technology as well. See more on product management.

4. Class of tool (the "format")

You aren't going to build Amazon.com on Wordpress. If you need to build a website in the next hour, you're not going to build a new infrastructure from scratch but might use Drupal. More important than the specific tool is probably making sure you're in the right ballpark with the type of tool you are using.

5. The exact tool (the "camera")

I would suggest that the exact tool is not as important as the items above. That said, if you have strong product management clearly defining what needs to happen to meet the vision (and the processes to make this happen), then you'll more likely wind up with a strong tool. Another point: in the choice of whether to change tools or not, it's probably more important to first make sure you expend effort in the higher-priority areas. Of course, any of the above issues could derail a project, but I would argue that you can recover from the "wrong" tool if you are at least using the right class of tool. But you can't recover from a poor vision and improper support.

What do you think the priorities are for implementing a successful web site?