One content source, many channels, with a headless CMS
Headless separates what you write from where it appears. That is a genuine advantage when you have several destinations, and unnecessary overhead when you have one.
What is headless CMS?
A Headless CMS stores content as structured data and delivers it through an API, leaving the front end to a separate application. It suits Australian organisations publishing the same content to a website, an app, in store screens or a partner feed, and teams who want editorial tooling without their content being locked to one presentation layer.
Get a fixed written quote- Typical timeline
- 5 to 10 weeks
- What drives cost
- The number of content models, how many front ends consume the API, and whether the current site has to keep running during the changeover.
- Best for
- Multi channel publishing and content shared between site and product
- You own
- The schemas, the content export, the front end code and the accounts
- Built with
- Sanity, Strapi, Contentful, Next.js or Astro front ends
Your handover
What headless actually changes for your team
In a traditional CMS the content and its presentation are welded together. A page holds a blob of formatted text, and that text carries assumptions about how it will look. Move it anywhere else and the assumptions break. In a headless setup the content is stored as fields with meaning: a product has a name, a description, a set of specifications and images, none of which know anything about layout. The front end decides how to render them.
- 01Content schemas with validation and field guidance
- 02Chosen platform configured and documented
- 03Front end consuming the content API
- 04Working draft preview through the real templates
- 05Image pipeline with modern formats and responsive sizes
- 06Content migration with reconciliation report
- Caching and rebuild strategy per content type
- Editor training recordings
- API documentation for future channels
A well structured WordPress build may serve you better and your team already knows it
The practical effect of a headless CMS for editors is that they stop laying out pages and start filling in structured records, which is faster once the initial adjustment passes but genuinely different from what they are used to. The practical effect for developers is that the front end can be rebuilt without touching the content, and a second channel can be added without duplicating anything. If you only have a website and no plans for a second destination, be sceptical about whether you need this. A well structured WordPress build may serve you better and your team already knows it.
Solving the preview problem before editors notice it
The most common complaint about headless implementations is that editors cannot see what they are making. In a traditional CMS the preview button is obvious. In a decoupled setup preview has to be built, and when it is skipped to save a week, editors lose confidence in the system and start asking developers to check things for them.
More on solving the preview problem before editors notice it
So we treat preview as a required feature, not a nice extra. Draft content renders through the real front end at a protected URL, changes appear without a full site rebuild, and the preview shows responsive breakpoints so someone can check a headline on a phone before publishing. We also build editor guidance directly into the schema, with field descriptions, character guidance for anything that appears in search results, and validation that blocks a publish missing alt text rather than merely warning about it.
How the engagement runs
How a headless build is sequenced
Schema decisions constrain everything downstream, so we settle those before front end work begins in earnest, then run content entry in parallel with development rather than queued behind it.
- 01Channel mappingList every destination the content must reach, now and realistically within two years
- 02Schema designContent types, fields, references and validation, reviewed with the people who will publish
- 03Platform selectionChosen against hosting, data residency and editorial requirements rather than fashion
- 04Front end buildComponents consuming the API, with rendering and caching strategy chosen per page type
- 05Preview and editorial toolingDraft rendering, validation and in context guidance
- 06MigrationExisting content imported into the new schema with a reconciliation report
- 07Performance passCaching, image pipeline and build times tuned before launch
- 08Training and handoverSchema documentation plus recorded walkthroughs for editors
Two decisions on your side that keep the project moving
Getting editors into the system early is the part most implementations skip. As soon as the schema is stable we open the studio to your publishers with a handful of real records to create, and the friction they report in that first week is worth more than any amount of internal review. Field labels that made sense to us frequently make no sense to the person who writes course descriptions for a living.
Choose the right level
Choosing between Sanity, Strapi and Contentful
All three are credible and none of them will be the reason your project succeeds or fails. The choice comes down to hosting preference, how much editorial customisation you need, and how your team prefers to work day-to-day.
Platform
01
Sanity
Strongest when
You want a highly customisable editing interface and real time collaboration
Consider carefully
The studio is code you maintain, which is power and responsibility together
02
Strapi
Strongest when
You need to self-host, keep data in Australia or run it inside your own infrastructure
Consider carefully
You operate the servers, backups and upgrades yourself
03
Contentful
Strongest when
A larger organisation wants a managed platform with established governance features
Consider carefully
Usage based commercial terms mean growth needs modelling before you commit
04
Payload or a similar code first option
Strongest when
The team is comfortable defining everything in code and wants tight control
Consider carefully
A smaller ecosystem, so fewer prebuilt integrations to lean on
How we work this out during scoping
We recommend one after the schema is drafted, not before, because the shape of your content exposes differences that a feature comparison hides. Deeply nested references, large media libraries and reusable content blocks all behave differently across these platforms. Where a client already runs one of them elsewhere in the organisation, that is usually a strong argument for consistency and we will not argue with it without a concrete reason.
Data residency, privacy and where content is hosted
Some Australian organisations, particularly in the public sector, health and finance, have obligations or policies about where data is stored and processed. A managed headless platform hosted offshore may be perfectly acceptable for marketing content and unacceptable for anything touching personal information under the Australian Privacy Principles.
More on data residency, privacy and where content is hosted
We raise this during platform selection rather than after procurement blocks the project. If residency is a hard requirement, a self-hosted option in an Australian region solves it cleanly at the cost of you operating the infrastructure. If the content is genuinely public marketing material, the managed platforms are usually fine and the constraint is more perceived than real. Where personal data does enter the picture, we keep it out of the CMS entirely and hold it in systems designed for it, an approach we set out further in our security practice.
When headless is the wrong tool
We turn down headless CMS projects reasonably often. If you publish to one website, your team is small and non technical, and nobody has ever asked for content in a second place, you are taking on architectural complexity for a benefit you will not collect. Two systems must be maintained instead of one, preview must be engineered, and simple changes need a developer more often than they would otherwise.
The rest of the answer
Headless earns its keep when at least one of these holds: content genuinely feeds multiple destinations, the front end will be rebuilt on a different cycle from the content, you have a large volume of structured records rather than pages, or the site is part of a product with its own release process. If your problem is really that your current CMS has an awkward content model, the fix might be a purpose built CMS or a better configured existing one. If it is that the site is slow, that is a front end engineering problem and swapping the CMS will not solve it.
How we scope it
Four ways to scope your Headless CMS project
We do not publish package prices, because the same brief can be a short build or a long one. These are the shapes the work usually takes. Tell us which one sounds like you and you will get a fixed written quote that spells out exactly what it covers.
Headless CMS Launch
A credible site, built properly, live sooner
Fixed written quote, agreed before work starts
- Content schemas with validation and field guidance
- Chosen platform configured and documented
- Front end consuming the content API
Headless CMS Growth
A site that has to sell or integrate with something
Fixed written quote, agreed before work starts
- Everything in Headless CMS Launch
- Working draft preview through the real templates
- Image pipeline with modern formats and responsive sizes
- Content migration with reconciliation report
Headless CMS Platform
A large site, or one built around your operation
Fixed written quote, agreed before work starts
- Everything in Headless CMS Growth
- Caching and rebuild strategy per content type
- Editor training recordings
- API documentation for future channels
Headless CMS Care
Keeping it fast, patched and improving
Rolling monthly, quoted in writing
- Hosting, patching, backups and uptime monitoring
- Content and design changes as you need them
- Core Web Vitals watched, not assumed
- Rolling, cancel with 30 days notice
These are shapes, not menus. Most quotes end up somewhere between two of them, and we will say so when the honest answer is the smallest one. Describe the problem and we will tell you which it is.
Questions buyers usually ask
Frequently asked questions
How long does a headless CMS implementation take?
Generally 5 to 10 weeks. Schema design takes the first stretch and deserves the time, because changing the model after content entry begins is disruptive. Front end development runs the longest, with preview tooling and migration toward the end. Projects extend when the content model is still being argued internally, which is why we run the modelling workshops early and with the actual publishers.
Is a headless CMS more expensive than WordPress?
Usually at build time, because you are constructing the front end rather than adapting a theme, and preview must be built rather than inherited. Running costs vary: self-hosted options mainly cost infrastructure, while managed platforms charge by usage and can grow with traffic and API calls. We model the likely running cost during selection and quote the build as a fixed written figure.
Do we own our content if it lives in a hosted platform?
Your content is exportable in a structured format at any time, and we make sure an export runs on a schedule so you always hold a current copy independent of the vendor. Schemas, front end code and any custom studio configuration are in your repository. Vendor accounts are in your business name. Portability is a design goal, not an afterthought.
Can our marketing team use it without a developer?
For everyday publishing, yes, provided preview and validation are built properly. Creating and editing records, adding images and scheduling publication are all self-service. What needs a developer is changing the schema or adding a new page layout, which is a real difference from a page builder. We are clear about that line during scoping so nobody is surprised in month two.
Can it feed our mobile app as well as the website?
That is a primary reason to choose headless. The same API serves web, mobile applications, digital signage or a partner feed, so a change made once appears everywhere. We design the API responses with the second channel in mind even when it is planned rather than funded, which costs little at the start and saves a restructure later.
What happens if we want to change platforms in future?
Considerably easier than with a coupled CMS, since content is structured data rather than presentation markup. Migrating between headless platforms is mainly a mapping exercise between schemas, and the front end changes only in how it fetches. We keep platform specific code isolated behind a small data layer for exactly this reason, so a change of vendor does not become a rebuild.
Related services
Not sure headless is right for you?
Tell us where your content needs to appear and who edits it. We will give you a straight recommendation within one business day, including when the simpler option wins.