Why juggle multiple CMSs when one headless CMS can meet all your needs?
Does updating a single piece of content mean making changes across several CMS platforms? Are multiple CMS systems still required, or are they creating unnecessary obstacles? If you regularly copy content and check multiple versions, it may be worth considering CMS consolidation, bringing content management together on a single platform. A headless CMS can deliver content to multiple websites and applications from a shared backend, making it easier to reuse approved content.
Did you know that, according to the State of CMS 2024 report, 47% of respondents said their organization used two or three CMS platforms at work? Even more surprising – 27% admit managing 4 or 5 CMSs! Only 19% stick with just one. Storyblok’s report surveyed more than 1,700 CMS users across five countries. This provides a useful benchmark for assessing the role each platform plays in your organization and identifying where work is being duplicated.
These numbers suggest an industry-wide challenge in content management efficiency. In this article, we’ll break down why this issue arises, how it affects your business, and how the headless option can help.
Omnichannel is essential, but multiple CMSs aren't.
The leading reason businesses turn to multiple CMSs is to achieve omnichannel capabilities. They aim to deliver consistent content across websites, mobile apps, digital screens, smartwatches, and whatever device comes next, ensuring it reaches users on all platforms.
It’s understandable. In an era where digital interactions go beyond the web, a single-platform focus is no longer sustainable. Businesses today need their content everywhere. However, the need for multiple CMSs reflects a problem rooted in a monolithic system. Their tight integration with a single frontend makes multi-platform delivery difficult. The result? Companies end up adopting many content management systems to address different requirements of each channel, creating silos, fragmenting user experiences, and complicating workflows.
A headless CMS delivers content through an API, an interface that enables data exchange between systems. A website and a mobile app can retrieve information from the same source while maintaining their own design and functionality. Editors manage content in the CMS, and each channel uses it according to its own configuration.
When choosing a solution, consider how it handles content modeling, integrations, and editorial workflows. We explore the architectural differences in more detail in our comparison of headless CMS and traditional content management systems.
Other reasons for using several CMS platforms
Another reason to choose multiple CMSs is to ensure reliable content delivery. This can mean implementing backup options or addressing diverse front-end needs with specialized CMSs. If one content management system fails, another will take over.
On the other hand, organizations keep testing new CMS solutions, hoping to find a better alternative before fully committing. In reality, this approach creates unnecessary complexity, inefficiencies, and higher operational risks rather than solving the core issue.
Meanwhile, some businesses prioritize CMS systems that integrate seamlessly with emerging, faster technologies.
At first, these reasons may sound convincing, but we’ll show you how they’re actually costing you more than benefiting you.
Review how each CMS is used across the organization. This makes it easier to identify which functions can be consolidated and which areas still require separate management.
The hidden costs of multiple content management systems
↳ Content silos: Without a headless CMS, content remains locked within department-specific tools, making it difficult for teams to access and reuse it efficiently.
Instead of fostering collaboration, these silos cause delays in decision-making and responsiveness.
Imagine a scenario where different teams or departments store and manage content separately, without integration or easy sharing. For example, the marketing team might create content in one system, while the eCommerce team uses another, and the SEO team has yet another repository.
As a result, the information has to be manually transferred or recreated across different platforms and devices. On the other hand, when content isn't centralized, different teams might unknowingly create duplicate versions, leading to inconsistencies and wasted effort.
↳ Fragmented user data: Without a single source of truth, you get inconsistent analytics and a weaker understanding of your audience compared to competitors with integrated systems.
Each channel might track users separately so businesses lose the ability to see a complete customer journey. You might only capture bits and pieces of user interactions.
Modern marketing relies on unified data to create personalized customer experiences (e.g., product recommendations, targeted emails). Conflicting or fragmented data makes it difficult to segment audiences accurately, reducing the effectiveness of marketing campaigns.
↳ Inconsistent experiences: When content is managed separately for different platforms, there is a high risk of inconsistencies. Customers may see different messaging, branding, or even functionality depending on where they interact with the brand.
Users expect a seamless and familiar experience across all touchpoints. A brand’s credibility relies on cohesiveness – whether a customer visits the website, uses the mobile app, or interacts with a chatbot, the experience should feel the same.
If the experience is different on a mobile app versus a website, it creates confusion and erodes trust in the brand.
Get more insights on today’s CMS challenges. Read on our blog.
How does a headless CMS help consolidate content management?
Once content management has been consolidated, you can create shared content in one environment and reuse it across multiple websites and applications. The key is to define the content model: what information each piece of content contains, what it is linked to, and where it can be published.
For example, a company location may have an address, opening hours, and a phone number. You can maintain these details as a single set of information used by the contact page, location finder, and mobile app. Updates are then delivered to the relevant destinations according to the configured integrations and publishing rules. This is an example of a shared content model.
As part of CMS consolidation, you can:
- define shared content and versions tailored to individual brands and markets,
- assign team permissions and define content creation, approval, and publishing stages,
- connect websites and applications to agreed content sources.
A single platform can include multiple repositories, providing separate spaces for content managed by different teams. How content is shared between them depends on the capabilities and configuration of the selected CMS.
Explore the key advantages of headless CMS for users, marketers, and developers.
How do you determine the right scope for CMS consolidation?
| Situation in your organization | Approach to consider |
|---|---|
| The same content is manually copied across multiple websites | A shared content source with integrations to individual websites |
| Brands use shared information but have their own editors and publishing schedules | One platform with separate spaces, permissions, and publishing rules |
| Individual websites have different access, maintenance, and integration requirements | Separate environments or retaining some CMS platforms with a defined scope for content exchange |
| Existing systems effectively support independent projects with little content sharing | Assess the benefits of integration and process improvements first, then define the scope of consolidation based on the findings |
When comparing different approaches, consider the cost of the platform, content transfer, website and application updates, integrations, training, and the period during which systems will need to run in parallel. Any potential savings should be assessed across the entire solution.
Making the switch: How hard is it?
Instead of managing multiple CMSs and navigating unnecessary complexities, it's time to simplify.
At Tandemite, we've helped numerous companies transition smoothly from the complexity of multiple CMSs to streamlined headless solutions.
We specialize in three industry-leading headless content management tools:
- Storyblok CMS: User-friendly visual editing, perfect for marketers.
- Contentful CMS: Enterprise-grade flexibility, ideal for scaling.
- Strapi CMS: Open-source customization, great for technical teams.
Want to find out which CMS platforms are worth consolidating and how to keep your teams working efficiently throughout the transition? Let’s talk about your websites and publishing processes. Together, we’ll define the scope of consolidation, the integrations required, and the order in which content should be moved.
FAQ
Can individual brands retain their own teams and publishing rules after CMS consolidation?
Yes, provided the selected platform and its configuration support the appropriate separation of content, permissions, and approval stages. Brands can use separate spaces while sharing selected content. Before implementation, it is worth defining which content will be managed centrally and which will remain under local control.
How should you manage updates when old and new CMS platforms are running in parallel during consolidation?
For each group of content, define which system holds the current version at each stage of the transition. Establish how changes will be transferred, when editing will move to the new system, and who will approve the result. Before completing each stage, compare the content in the source and target systems and verify its publication across the supported channels.
Does moving to a single headless CMS require changing domains and page URLs?
Domains and URLs can remain unchanged if the target website architecture allows it. If URLs do change, prepare URL mappings and redirects, update links, and check indexing. CMS consolidation and changes to the URL structure should be assessed separately.
How should you plan for business continuity after CMS consolidation?
Define what should continue to work if the editorial interface or API becomes unavailable, how long websites can rely on previously published content, and how data will be restored. The plan should cover backups, recovery procedures, monitoring, and testing. A fallback environment also requires prepared data, configuration, and a defined process for switching services.
