Managing content governance during a Machinery of Government change
When departments are restructured, merged or split as part of a Machinery of Government (MoG) change, digital teams face an immediate and pressing challenge: content governance.
In the latest episode of The MoG Effect, Salsa Digital’s Akhil Bhandari and Julia Topliss dive into this issue, asking the deceptively simple question: Who owns this page? It’s a conversation every government digital team will likely recognise.
Step one: audit before assumptions
One of the most effective first moves during a MoG transition is a quick content audit. Knowing what content exists, who created it, and whether it’s still relevant or duplicated, provides a solid base. Many government websites mirror the department’s internal structure—so content ownership often maps neatly to business areas. But orphan pages do crop up, and they’re often outdated or superseded. Publishing teams are usually the first to notice these.
Akhil notes, “If no one actually owns it, there might be a question about why it exists on the site at all.”
Assign ownership—formally and early
Having a simple ownership register—even just a spreadsheet—can make a huge difference. Mapping content sections to specific branches or individuals helps avoid ambiguity later. Ideally, owners sign off regularly to confirm accuracy, especially in high-profile areas. “We used to have monthly check-ins where business areas reviewed and signed off content,” Akhil recalls. “It came in especially handy for things like Senate Estimates.”
Publishing models matter
Governance isn't just about who owns the content—it’s also about how it’s published. Departments typically use either a centralised publishing model or distributed publishing across business units.
- In a centralised model, content is reviewed and uploaded by a core team—ensuring accessibility and brand alignment.
- In a distributed model (common in large departments), publishing is decentralised. This requires strong internal guidelines and a clear process to avoid inconsistency and duplication.
Whichever approach is used, knowing who the approver is—and having a fallback—is crucial to avoid delays.
Minimising bottlenecks
Approval delays are inevitable during a transition, but they don’t have to derail progress. The Salsa team suggests:
- Delegating approval to someone other than a busy SES officer.
- Using summaries to reduce decision fatigue—don’t make approvers read every word.
- Prioritising content—for example ministerial announcements should take precedence over general content.
- Tracking with a content log to support transparency and reduce back-and-forth.
And where there are two stakeholders vying for the same content? “Often, a quick conversation is all it takes,” Akhil says. “People are generally happy to give it up once you clarify function and purpose.”
Build in a review cycle
Once the dust settles, establish a content lifecycle—a schedule to revisit and review pages regularly. Whether it’s every quarter or once a year, this step ensures content remains accurate, timely and compliant, and helps prevent the bloated, outdated sites we’ve all inherited at one time or another.
In summary: A MoG change will always shake things up—but with structure, communication and a few practical tools, your website doesn’t have to suffer. Ownership clarity, publishing discipline, and ongoing review make all the difference.
Subscribe on to catch each deep dive, and share your own MOG moments with us at info@salsa.digital. Together we can turn every reshuffle into an opportunity for clearer, more resilient digital services.