Get answers to your digital experience questions

Yes - after go-live is the when real traffic, real integration load, and real content usage surface migration-specific issues that testing doesn't always catch. We stay engaged through that hypercare period rather than handing off at go-live. That's distinct from, and often followed by, an ongoing support and maintenance arrangement for ongoing operations and support.

Yes - this is legacy platform migration, one of our core migration services. The technical move is rarely the hard part; the real work is preserving taxonomy structures, metadata relationships, editorial workflows, and approval chains that accumulated over years, so content stays as usable in Sitefinity as it was in the old system rather than just being copied over as flat pages. We treat content auditing and taxonomy mapping as a distinct phase so we don't lose that organizational logic.

Beyond Sitefinity's software licensing, budget for professional services - typically 3-5x the licensing cost - with total implementation investment (services, integration work, content migration, and platform costs combined) landing around 6-8x the underlying technology cost for organizations with real complexity; the platform license itself is usually only 15-20% of the total. Where your number actually falls in that range depends on your content volume, integrations, and team capacity, so rather than guess at a figure that might not apply to you, we'd rather get on a short call, understand your situation, and send over a real price. If you are planning a Sitefinity migration we would love to have a Sitefinity budget conversation with you.

Yes - migration to Sitefinity is core to our practice; our team has completed 150+ Sitefinity implementations and worked across 200+ enterprise projects overall, including multi-site and multi-language portfolios. Enterprise migration carries more coordination complexity than a single-site migration - multiple stakeholder groups, existing integrations across CRM, marketing, and analytics systems, and governance requirements across sites - so we scope the assessment around that complexity.

Yes - version upgrades are a common entry point for engagements, especially for organizations running an older on-premise release that's fallen behind. As an official Sitefinity partner with direct engineering relationships at Progress and Customer Validation Program participation, we have roadmap visibility that shapes how we sequence an upgrade, including whether it makes more sense to upgrade in place or use the upgrade as the trigger to move to Sitefinity Cloud, where future version upgrades are handled automatically.

The case for Sitefinity Cloud is managed infrastructure and automatic platform updates - you stop owning patching, version upgrades, and infrastructure scaling, and that operational load shifts to Progress. It's not automatically the right call for every organization, though: a decoupled architecture on self-managed or commercial cloud infrastructure can offer more frontend flexibility for teams with strong development resources. We treat this as a genuine decision with tradeoffs on both sides - team capabilities, integration requirements, and cloud sovereignty needs - rather than a default recommendation, since vendor presentations tend to optimize for whichever path they're selling.

Yes, we do. Moving from on-premise to Sitefinity Cloud is one of the migration paths we assess first before recommending a direction. The right choice depends on your team's capacity to manage infrastructure, your integration requirements, and any cloud sovereignty or compliance constraints that self-hosting was originally solving for. We map those factors before proposing a migration approach, rather than defaulting to “cloud is always right.”

It depends on scope - the operational model for a single-site marketing team looks very different from a multi-site enterprise portfolio, and the biggest cost driver is usually how much day-to-day ownership you want us to hold versus how much your own team retains. Rather than publish a number that would only be accurate for one kind of engagement, we scope cost against the same factors we use to scope the work itself: platform footprint, the update/security cadence required, and how much of day-to-day operations you're looking to hand off.

Yes - plenty of engagements start exactly that way. Something's broken or behaving oddly, you call, we diagnose it and fix it, and that can be the entire engagement - no retainer or ongoing commitment required first. We bring the same Sitefinity-specific context to a single fix request as we do to an ongoing engagement, so it's not a lesser or “no support” tier - it's just scoped to the issue in front of you. Some one-off fixes turn into a longer relationship once the fit is clear, but that's not a requirement; solving the immediate problem is a complete outcome on its own.

We do both, and neither is the “wrong” choice - it depends on what you actually need right now. Break-fix is reactive by design: something's not working, you call, we diagnose and fix it, and that's the whole engagement, no ongoing commitment required. A managed retainer adds a proactive layer on top - updates, security patching, and performance monitoring on a standing rhythm, so more issues get caught as drift before they turn into a call in the first place. If you only need something fixed today, break-fix is a completely reasonable way to work with us; a retainer just also covers the maintenance that prevents the next issue.

A Sitefinity managed services engagement typically combines three threads we treat as connected rather than as separate line items: platform currency (updates and security patching handled on a proactive rhythm instead of deferred until forced), performance operations (monitoring, capacity planning, and incident response as load changes), and day-to-day platform administration for teams that want operational ownership handled for them. Exactly which of these are in scope, and at what level, is something we scope per engagement rather than sell as a fixed package, since a single-site marketing team and a multi-site enterprise portfolio need very different contracts.

Yes - taking over operations can mean anything from light oversight to full day-to-day ownership: routine content and platform administration, monitoring, and holding the operational knowledge that would otherwise live only with whoever's currently running the site. We start with a short assessment of your current operational patterns and, if we didn't build the site ourselves, the implementation too - undocumented customizations, taxonomy decisions, widget configurations nobody wrote down - before proposing a specific model rather than assuming full handoff is what's needed.

Yes - and that's not limited to sites we built ourselves. We provide ongoing Sitefinity support and maintenance both as a natural extension of our own implementation projects and as a standalone engagement for sites originally built by other vendors or agencies. Most consultancies disappear after go-live regardless of who built the site — we've built our operational-excellence practice specifically around being the team that stays, or the team that steps in later once the original team already has. Our team has managed day-to-day operations for 100+ Sitefinity implementations directly, and getting up to speed on someone else's build - undocumented customizations, taxonomy decisions, widget configurations nobody wrote down - is a normal part of that work, not an obstacle.

Yes - custom content types and editorial workflows are a standard part of our Sitefinity development work, and usually one of the highest-value additions for a content team, since Sitefinity's out-of-the-box content types don't always match how a specific organization structures its content or approval process. We map your real editorial process first - who drafts, who reviews, what needs compliance sign-off - before building the workflow.

Yes - we set up audience segments in Sitefinity Insight based on behavioral, firmographic, or engagement signals, then connect those segments to targeting rules across your Sitefinity content. This typically starts with defining a small number of meaningful segments tied to real business decisions rather than over-segmenting from day one, which tends to produce more content variants than a marketing team can realistically maintain.

Yes - we implement Sitefinity Insight (Progress's built-in customer data platform) specifically to support personalization, connecting the behavioral and profile data Insight collects to content rules that change what a visitor sees based on their segment, history, or stage in the funnel. Most of the work is in defining the personalization logic and content variants themselves, not just the technical activation.

Yes. Most of our custom development work is exactly this - adding a specific new capability to a an existing and live Sitefinity site. We'll typically ask a few questions about the existing implementation (Sitefinity version, hosting model, any existing customizations, content structure) before scoping the feature, since that context usually determines whether it's a quick addition or something that needs more careful integration with what's already there.

Yes - custom Sitefinity development is a core part of what we do at Enso DX. As an official Progress Sitefinity partner with 20+ years of enterprise CMS and DXP delivery across 200+ implementations, we build custom widgets, modules, content types, API integrations, and platform extensions directly into existing Sitefinity sites or new websites migrated into Sitefinity. Most engagements start with an existing site that needs a specific capability added - we scope, build, and hand off the feature rather than requiring a larger commitment.

Yes - our development team builds custom Sitefinity widgets and modules as a standard part of our work, from simple presentation widgets to complex interactive modules that pull from external systems or custom content types. We typically start with a short scoping call to understand what the widget needs to do and where it fits into your existing content architecture, then deliver it as a reusable component.

We build custom search experiences on Sitefinity using Progress Agentic RAG, which combines retrieval-augmented generation with your content repository so search results (or an AI assistant interface) can answer questions directly rather than just returning a list of matching pages. This goes beyond Sitefinity's built-in search — it's suited to large content libraries where visitors are looking for an answer, not just a document, and where the site is willing to invest in structuring content so the retrieval layer can use it well.