Over the past several weeks, I have detailed six steps that go into creating a successful online strategy, and outgrowth of our Web Executive Seminar "Six Steps to a Successful Online Strategy". As I developed the list of six steps, I consciously left out some activities that are not as critical. This is not, however, to say they aren't valuable. To round out the story, then, I want to highlight two other useful inputs to an online strategy effort.

Baselines - So we know where we are going... but from where are we starting?
We commonly include a baseline assessment as part of our strategy work and it can sometimes be unclear how this task fits or if it is even necessary. The fact is that, at the end of the day, it is pretty hard to prescribe a direction for a journey without understanding fairly well what the starting point is. In my six steps, I assume some measure of this is part of a true evaluation of organizational assets. A more extensive exercise can be valuable, though, in some cases:

• You need to make a business case that a large investment is necessary and need evidence of significant issues
  
• You really don't know what you have for online assets (e.g., the web team has all left and there is little institutional knowledge left)
  
• You want to make sure you focus on the biggest issues first (i.e., you need to stage the investment in a smart way)
  

We commonly recommend a range of assessments, including reviews of:

• Site traffic statistics, with a focus on trends, not absolute numbers
  
• Site prominence, in other words, how likely it is that someone interested in your topic will find your materials
  
• Usability - a general assessment of usability issues based on best practices (or, ideally, true user testing)
  
• Content, looking at volume, types, trends in types and volume of content, etc.
  

Do not expect a great many earth-shattering / eureka! conclusions to come from this, but you can expect to have a clearer understanding of "points of pain" and available assets.

Competitors - Just because you aren't paranoid doesn't mean everyone isn't out to get you
We sometimes recommend a comparator analysis. This term has always bugged me a bit because I have spent a lot of time in the for-profit world and there the notion of comparators would be absurd - those like you are competitors (unless they are partners, but that's another story...). Too often in the world of cause-based organizations there is an assumption that there aren't competitors. Of course there are! Other organizations are competing for financial support, mindshare, policy direction, and so on. It can be valuable to make sure you know what else is going on.

The rant above being said, the biggest reason is to see what others are doing that appears successful. Basically, you should see if there are good ideas other organizations have implemented that you can, ahem, swipe. For this exercise, cast the net widely - even into for-profit sectors - to identify interesting online services that would have applicability. In some cases, the right solution may be to partner with one of these organizations rather than build something yourself. Don't discount this option!

In many cases, though, you really ought to make a list of organizations that are true competitors at some level and look hard at what they are doing. As you develop your list of services, then, roll competitive considerations into the mix. Think about how you can better control the debate, push your research or methodology, or attract funders. Online services can play a part in your competitive positioning, and others may well be winning battles you haven't even joined.