The UX Service recently concluded a project to research staff requirements improve University staff profiles to meet the needs and requirements of staff. In this post, I share my reflections from running such a wide-ranging, interesting and important project for the University.

The Role of Profiles project ran from January to July 2025, led by the User Experience (UX) Service. More detail about the project can be found in the project website as well as a series of blog posts:

Access project details on the projects website:

The Role of Profiles WPS 021

Read the other blog posts in the series:

Collected blog posts on the Role of Profiles project 

This post summarises the project approach, findings and recommendations and includes my reflections as project manager.

A project recognising the importance of profile content to individuals and to the University

The University’s worldwide reputation stems from the exceptional work of our people. Information about our staff and what they do demonstrates the impact we have and provides insight into how we work. When our varied global audiences first encounter the University, they very often start by searching our website for people.

For many, finding a staff member’s University profile is their first connection with our institution. From this primary touchpoint, they may go on to apply for study, set up a collaboration, make contacts, or initiate research.

Online staff profiles are therefore crucial to support the operation of the University, to showcase our impact, approach and working methods to our diverse audiences. How effectively staff profiles can achieve this, however, is dependent on the actions of individual staff members, to publish content about themselves and their work. Early evidence suggested that while all University staff had access to a profile, many did not make best use of them to reach visitors to the University web estate.

In recognition of this, and to build on opportunities afforded by the University website recently moving to a new publishing platform, EdWeb 2, The Role of Profiles project was began in January 2025, led by the UX Service, with a remit to investigate directions for a future online profile provision, that would leverage the capabilities of the new platform whilst better serving the needs and requirements of staff responsible for publishing and managing online profile content.

Summary of project research approach, findings and recommendations

Through comprehensive research including analysis of 7,425 existing profiles, a survey completed by 262 staff, 40 individual interviews with staff, competitor analysis, and ideation activities including collaborative workshops, the project surfaced information about the existing University’s staff profile provision and identified various ways to improve it.

Acknowledging that successful profiles are underpinned by the actions of University people – including those who own profiles but also those who maintain and manage them, the project focused on looking for opportunities to improve the University’s profile provision from a thorough analysis of the ‘current state’ of profiles in EdWeb and by hearing from a diverse spread of University staff in a range of roles.

The research revealed that while 74% of staff had University profiles, many were underused due to restrictive design, complex updating processes, and suboptimal content management practices. Professional services staff, younger staff, and those from the College of Science and Engineering were particularly underrepresented in their use of profiles. Analysis showed 19% of existing profiles belonged to staff with inactive accounts, further indicating the need to improve approaches to profile lifecycle management.

Key findings from the research:

• Affirmed the need for a specific web-based profile provision
• Highlighted the need for flexible profile structures that accommodate diverse and descriptive content to better meet the needs of academic staff with varied portfolios as well as the diverse profile needs of professional service staff
• Highlighted a requirement for simplified updating processes, and for better data-sharing between external repositories like PURE and ORCID as well as synchronisation with content from staff systems.

Recommendations based on findings

Taking together the findings from staff research, analysis of EdWeb profile data, competitor analysis, and ideation activities, ten recommendations emerged. These covered requirements from the technical system, profile content and overall profile management –  recognising how these complementary elements could work together to create a profile provision that was attractive for staff to use to publish their profile content.

EdWeb 2 must include a staff profile content type or template

When interviewed, a large proportion of University staff with profiles cited various use-cases and purposes for them, affirming that there was a need for a profile provision on the University website.

This need required a specific page type or template and could not be sufficed by one of the existing content types in EdWeb 2 such as a generic page.

Functionality to create lists of staff profiles must also be included in EdWeb

Discussions with staff responsible for coordinating profile content on behalf of their School or business unit revealed a need to be able to group multiple profiles together, to present them in a list format or as a directory which could be searched by site visitors.

Profiles must contain minimal pre-labelled fields allowing for extra flexibility

Several pieces of evidence pointed to the need for a more flexible profile design to accommodate individual staff needs. Interviews revealed a requirement for staff to be able to control section labeling based on the content they wished to share and the audiences they wished to reach, which was likely to be highly individualistic, descriptive and changeable over time. Existing pre-labelled EdWeb profile sections (such as Biography, Research, Teaching, Publications) were found to be restrictive for professional services staff and were also found to be relatively underused (only 54% of EdWeb profiles included content in the Biography section). Competitor analysis showed the potential of a more adaptable design to enhance content presentation. It is therefore suggested that the initial profile content type should contain minimal pre-labelled fields: ‘Name’, ‘Job title’, and ‘Contact details’, to be tested with staff profile owners and iterated and refined accordingly.

Accordions/concertinas must be replaced with headings

Some staff commented that the EdWeb accordion-heavy profile design stood in the way of site visitors getting to profile content, since it relied on people actively having to open different sections. A review of profiles from competitor university websites showed few used accordions.

A more open design is therefore suggested, to present the content under simpler headings, enabling content within the profiles to be more easily scanned without running the risk of being hidden from view.

Profiles should support the display of content from other repositories using technical solutions where feasible

Most staff (74% of survey respondents) reported having profile content across multiple locations, and many some expressed a desire to streamline their profile content to reduce duplication.  Some staff referenced a previously operational PURE-EdWeb integration, however interviews and workshops revealed a growing number of sources of profile content, including: ORCID, Research Gate, PubMed, arxiv to name a few. Furthermore profiles could be populated with content from School databases and potentially, centralised systems like the Active Directory and People and Money.

Technical staff shared existing integration and data sharing methods, giving insight into the effort and resource required to maintain and monitor individual integrations, not least to keep track of changes within third-party products/ local data sources to ensure integrations continued to function.

It is therefore recommended that the work began in the workshops should continue to further ideate and develop middleware-based technical solutions combining central and site-level expertise. Interim solution: display content from other locations with less-technical approaches – for example, with descriptive content or links to content in external locations.

EdWeb 2 should include functionality to include tags in profiles if requested

In interviews and in the ideation workshops staff from different Schools shared  how they used tagging and taxonomies in profiles in order to group multiple profiles into categories, to facilitate searching for staff in ways other than by their names (for example, to search for all staff working in a specific research area).

Agreeing and defining sets of tags and taxonomies, setting these up and maintaining them required effort, collaboration and support at the School or business-unit level. If this was requested, however, it is recommended that the functionality to support this is available in EdWeb 2.

If feasible, profiles should be located within existing EdWeb 2 sites

Survey data indicated many staff (74% of respondents) have more than one online profile, with some (11% of respondents) unsure if they had a profile at all. Many staff interviewed confirmed having multiple profiles – including profiles on School or Institute sites as well as in the existing EdWeb profiles.

Of the 7425 profiles in EdWeb in 2024, 19% belonged to staff with inactive UUNs, suggesting this content was not monitored or looked after, further verified by random content sampling , which revealed empty profiles and profiles belonging to absent staff members.  In interviews, many staff said they struggled to update profiles because they forgot where they were and how to update them.

Taken together, these data indicated that, unless necessary or dictated by the EdWeb 2 configuration, it was not preferable to adopt the current model – where thousands of profiles are published in a specific profiles standalone site of the University web estate.

Instead, if feasible, profiles would be better placed in sections within existing EdWeb 2 sites (such as ‘People’ or ‘Our Staff’ or ‘About us’). Assuming the middleware solution referred to in an earlier recommendation is achievable, data would not be stored in EdWeb 2, instead it would be drawn from the source repositories. A move to this approach would prompt assessment of the 7425 existing profiles to check if they were still required. It may also facilitate closer, more context-specific management and upkeep of profiles under the governance and monitoring of individual sites by site owners/lead publishers.

Staff should opt in to having a profile, instead of opting out

Project findings indicated a need for more mindful profile creation decisions to prevent neglect and outdated content.  Analysis of 7425 existing EdWeb profiles revealed many were sparsely populated, with minimal content. Additionally, 11% of survey respondents did not know if they had a profile or not. Staff interviews indicated internal team-based profiles (for example on SharePoint), were sometimes a preferable alternative to externally facing profiles, serving staff needs while preventing unwanted external contact.

Therefore, it is recommended that University website profiles shouldn’t be automatically created, instead, staff should be able to choose whether to have a profile or not, based on the nature of their role and desired means of content sharing. Guidance should be provided to web publishers as part of content management and digital sustainability best practice and could be delivered as part of the UX Service’s Content Improvement Monthly sessions.

Staff should be offered training to write profile content for audiences

Reflecting on their reasons for not updating their profiles or making use of them, several staff reported uncertainty about presenting information about themselves and their work to reach their target audiences. Professional services staff were particularly underrepresented when it came to use of profiles and interviews revealed their hesitancy often stemmed from being uncertain about how to prepare content for their profiles.

Following a successful pilot training session through the UX Service Content Improvement Monthly training programme, it is recommended that further content design training should be developed and rolled out. This would help staff write effective profile they are proud of, to achieve desired audience  impact. Training sessions focused on writing academic profiles could be developed collaboratively with the Institute for Academic Development, one of the parties interested in this project.

AI experimentation should continue, to find ways to manage profile content more efficiently and effectively

A study by Safa Alsalaman for Edinburgh Innovations conducted in 2023 showed how an AI tool could be used to generate profiles in a consistent format, using data from a given source. This study, along with other AI investigations in the field of web content management have showed the potential of AI to help with many of the stages involved in the profile lifecycle (from creation, to maintenance and ultimate removal or archiving).

It is therefore recommended that, building on AI experimentation already begun, further tests with AI are carried out to aid some of the tasks associated with managing profiles – for example, generating tags and taxonomies based on content, writing profile content in a structured, easily searchable way, adapting content for different audiences, and flagging when profiles need to be updated or archived. It is recommended that specific use of the University’s large language model, ELM is considered for its potential in shaping and improving profile content.

My reflections from running the project

Drawing the project to a close prompted me to reflect on the methods we used, the data we gathered and the implications and impact of the project findings going forward.

Applying a UX lens encouraged thinking beyond technical solutions

The User Experience (UX) Service exists to improve digital experiences of the University’s systems, products and services. More often than not, our work is prompted by a technical changes like system updates that invite research into existing experiences to look for opportunities for improvement.

On the face of it, the Role of Profiles project was no different, the move to an updated Drupal 10 platform (EdWeb 2) offered the chance to focus on a building a replacement profile provision – somewhere for staff to publish content about themselves as a way to showcase their work. As with other UX projects, we began by analysing the current provision and gathering user feedback from staff .

As we began hearing from staff, however, this project proved different. The userbase was much larger and more diverse than other systems – all University staff can have a profile. As we interviewed more and more staff, they provided unexpectedly different perspectives: Some staff spoke about their own profiles, others discussed their processes to manage multiple profiles, others talked of their needs when searching profiles to find other staff. Furthermore, we discovered varying requirements across different roles and career stages. Analysing published profiles against University population data we were able to start building a very rich picture of who used profiles and who didn’t. Doubts I had about interviewing such a large number of staff were assuaged.

When an organisation takes the time, it can really sharpen its tactics for supporting people [this way]. By defining the most prevalent or profitable patterns, it can spotlight whom it wants to support. It can follow a tighter path to development, rollout, and maintenance of an idea. It can put in exactly the right amount of effort towards exactly the right audience for this particular timeframe. – Practical Empathy – for Collaboration and Creativity in your work by Indi Young

Appreciating these diverse perspectives, we could start to learn more about why different staff did and didn’t publish profile content. We were also prompted to view profile content as dynamic and changeable which encouraged us to think less about a single technical solution and more about a lifecycle for profile content management. Collaborating with other staff, we started to co-design opportunities to combine technology, process and practice to showcase the work of University people that aligned with recognition of their career milestones and achievements, as well as their preferred processes for publishing content in their specific realms of the University. Taken together, all of this led to a set of recommendations that promised to be more person-centric and longer-lasting than a technical fix or system upgrade.

Harnessing the power of structured content relies contextual knowledge and commitment

A recurring theme emerging from the survey and the interviews was the need and the desire to make connections between and within profiles, both to bring profile sources together and also to make sense of the rich body of profile content.

This need was expressed at the level of whole profiles, for example, those coordinating profile content en masse wanted to be able to group multiple profiles together, to be able to see profiles for all the staff in a given research area, all the staff in a particular team, all the staff working in a certain School.

Staff owning profiles had a similar need on a different level, to link to content in other sources as a way to join the dots between their various interests and use their profile to present the most comprehensive impression of themselves possible.

Another need emerged from staff seeking to forge connections using the data within individual profiles – for example to find other staff with shared interests, who had attended the same conferences, or belonged to the same professional bodies or did equivalent roles in other parts of the institution to share knowledge and experience.

Being an active contributor and UX leader in the open-source Drupal community, my ears pricked up at the potential for structured content mechanisms such as tags and taxonomies to address these different types of need. Drupal is the content management system powering EdWeb 2 (and its predecessor, EdWeb) and is renowned for its potential to handle structured data and leverage its potential.

In the ideation workshops, staff in individual Schools and business units had devised tags and taxonomies and shared their experiences of the processes. A common denominator was an excellent knowledge of the specific contexts, and the need for commitment from colleagues, both to agree on the correct taxonomy mechanism and to enforce consistent use of tags within it, to achieve the desired result.

Information spaces have contextual concepts, relationships and rules. Structure brings context, and context is how we build understanding” – Designing Connected Content: Plan and Model Digital Products for today and tomorrow by Mike Atherton and Carrie Hane

I recognised that for the University to make optimal use of tagging and taxonomies and capitalise on Drupal’s strength, there was a need to build on the work of colleagues who had experience of implementing these types of mechanism, to help define workable processes and practices to adopt to develop taxonomic approaches.

In the interim, revisiting our research data to tease out priority use cases for connecting profile content and using data and content modelling techniques to obtain a visual sense of the needs and the underlying mechanisms and decision points required would be a worthy endeavour for both the University and the wider audience seeking to harness Drupal’s power for structured data.

Collaborating around a shared problem is the best way to accelerate solution ideas

In my position leading a project of this scale and importance, I regularly questioned my judgement on our research methods and project direction. Was 40 interviews too many? Did we need to hear about non-EdWeb approaches? Wouldn’t a content audit of the current state have been enough to design a future profiles provision? On reflection, I feel my decision to place an emphasis on hearing as many perspectives from as many people as possible was the right one. Throughout the project, the ‘A ha!’ moments came from listening to staff who had already recognised ways to improve profiles and had experimented with different approaches to do so. Drawing again on my experience contributing to the open-source Drupal community, I was reassured of the value of approaching challenges with a community-focused mindset:

Couldn’t just about any social or economic challenge be solved with a critical mass of self-organized contributors seeking an answer to the problem? – Wikinomics, how mass collaboration changes everything, by Don TapScott and Anthony D. Williams

As we moved from research to ideation at the end of the project, I was grateful for those colleagues who gave up valuable time to contribute their wisdom, experience and knowledge for the benefit of the project, and I am looking forward to continuing to work with them and many more as we move towards a future profile provision.