When council and government agencies review their website platform, the conversation often starts with IT. But the impact of that decision is felt most by marketing and communications teams.
Your CMS affects how quickly you can publish, how confidently you can manage governance, and how well your website supports service delivery. The choice between a SaaS and non-SaaS CMS isn’t just technical, it shapes how your team works day to day.
Many of the councils and government organisations we work with ask about SaaS CMS platforms during early discussions. Often, SaaS has become a buzzword in digital conversations, and teams are unsure what it actually means or why it might be relevant to their organisation.
Before comparing SaaS and non-SaaS models, it helps to start with a clear understanding of what SaaS actually is.
What’s the difference between SaaS and non-SaaS?
A SaaS CMS (Software as a Service) is hosted and managed by the vendor. You pay a subscription, and the provider handles infrastructure, security updates and ongoing improvements. Updates happen continuously, and there’s no traditional version upgrade.
A non-SaaS CMS is hosted in a managed environment and gives the organisation greater control over configuration, integrations, and upgrade timing. Platforms such as Xperience by Kentico (widely used in government) and WordPress typically sit in this category.
Both models can work well. The key question is which one suits your organisation’s governance needs, complexity and internal capability. So what should marketing and communications teams consider when weighing up these two models?
Key considerations when choosing between SaaS and non-SaaS
Updates and end of life
One of the clearest differences between SaaS and non-SaaS platforms is how updates are handled.
With SaaS, updates are continuous and vendor-managed. There is no traditional end-of-life milestone requiring a major upgrade project. This can reduce disruption and remove the need for periodic rebuild planning.
With non-SaaS platforms, versions have defined lifecycles. For example, Kentico 13 reaches end of life on 1st January 2027. Organisations need to plan and budget for upgrades as part of their digital roadmap.
For marketing teams, this affects:
- Budget forecasting
- Project planning
- Stakeholder engagement
SaaS offers automatic progression. Non-SaaS offers controlled timing and structured upgrade planning.
Integration and digital ecosystem
Government websites rarely operate in isolation. They integrate with CRM systems, forms platforms, payment gateways and authentication services.
SaaS platforms typically provide APIs and integration options, but architecture may be constrained by vendor limitations and authentication services.
Non-SaaS enterprise platforms such as Kentico often allow deeper architectural flexibility and custom integration approaches. This can be important in complex service environments where multiple internal systems need to connect securely.
WordPress also supports integrations, though complexity and long-term maintainability depend on plugin selection and technical oversight.
Resourcing and operational model
SaaS platforms reduce infrastructure management and shift more responsibility to the vendor. This can suit organisations with limited internal IT capacity of those seeking predictable operational expenditure.
Non-SaaS platforms require stronger partnership arrangements and ongoing support. However, with proactive support, they can offer stability, flexibility and long-term architectural control.
Governance, roles and workflows
All modern CMS platforms, SaaS or non-SaaS, provide roles, permissions and workflow tools. The difference is often in flexibility and depth.
SaaS platforms typically offer built-in governance models designed to suit a broad range of organisations. These are often straightforward to configure but may have limits if you require complex approval pathways or highly granular permission structures.
Non-SaaS enterprise platforms such as Kentico are designed for more complex environments. They support configurable workflows, structured content models, detailed role-based permissions and multi-site governance controls. This can be particularly valuable for larger councils managing decentralised publishing across departments.
WordPress can also meet governance requirements, but often relies on plugins and configuration decisions. The outcome depends heavily on how it’s implemented and maintained.
For government marketing teams, the key question isn’t whether governance exists, it’s whether the CMS can scale with your organisational complexity.
Choosing the right CMS
SaaS may suit organisations seeking simplicity, vendor-managed updates and reduced infrastructure oversight.
Non-SaaS platforms such as Kentico are often chosen by government organisations that require stronger governance control, deeper integration flexibility and structured long-term planning.
Ultimately, this decision isn’t about trends. It’s about aligning your CMS model with your organisation’s risk profile, governance maturity and digital complexity. For government, not-for-profit and large corporates, our recommendation is always non-SaaS. Reach out to our team if you’d like help with your next website project.