How to Design a Content Model That Scales

A CMS can feel “done” the moment you can publish a page. Then reality arrives: you add a second channel, a new product line, a redesign, or a search feature. Suddenly your neatly arranged fields turn into ad-hoc blobs, content becomes hard to reuse, and “just one more field” turns into a fragile maze.

The fix is not a bigger CMS. It’s a better content model: a clear, shared structure for what your content is, what it’s called, how it relates, and how it moves from draft to publish.

This post walks through a practical approach you can apply to most CMS setups (traditional, headless, hybrid). The goal is simple: model content so it stays usable for editors and predictable for the systems consuming it.

What a content model really is

A content model is the set of content types (like Article, Product, Landing Page), their fields (headline, summary, body, price), and their relationships (an Article has an Author; a Product has many FAQs). It’s not the visual design and it’s not the page tree. It’s the underlying vocabulary your organization uses to store and retrieve content reliably.

Well-modeled content has two key traits:

• Intentional structure: fields exist for a reason, with clear meaning, constraints, and examples.
• Reusability: content can appear in multiple places (web, email, app) without copy/paste drift.

Bad content models are usually “page-shaped”: one giant type called Page with dozens of optional fields, or a rich text field stuffed with everything from headings to call-to-action buttons. That may work short-term, but it limits automation, personalization, and consistency later.

Start with outcomes, not pages

Before creating types and fields, get crisp on what the model must enable. A scalable model is built around jobs your content must do, not how your current site happens to be arranged.

Use this lightweight discovery checklist (a 60–90 minute workshop is often enough):

1. List core content objects: What are the “things” you publish repeatedly? (Articles, case studies, locations, services, docs, events.)
2. List channels: Where will content appear? (Website, app, email, social snippets, internal portal.)
3. List operations: What must users do with the content? (Search, filter, recommend, localize, archive, A/B test.)
4. List constraints: Compliance rules, approvals, localization, SEO needs, brand rules.

This produces requirements you can actually model. For example, “filter products by compatibility” requires structured fields and relationships; “editors want to paste formatted text” may require a controlled rich text field with allowed blocks.

Define content types and fields

Start small: identify 5–10 core types and keep each one focused. A useful rule is “one type per concept.” If you find yourself saying “sometimes it’s like a product, but sometimes it’s a brochure,” you likely need two types or a shared component.

The minimum fields every type needs

Most types benefit from a consistent baseline. This reduces one-off decisions and makes UIs and APIs easier to reason about:

• Title: a human-friendly label used in lists and internal search.
• Slug or ID: stable identifier for URLs and integrations.
• Summary: a short description used in cards, previews, and metadata.
• Main content: either structured blocks or rich text (more on this below).
• Status: draft/review/published (or managed by the CMS workflow feature).
• Metadata: tags, categories, language/locale, canonical reference if needed.

Then add fields that support the outcomes you identified: filtering fields, CTAs, feature flags, or references.

When you document a type, include three things: field name, field purpose, and a “good example.” Your future self (and your editors) will thank you.

{
  ContentType: "CaseStudy",
  Fields: [
    { name: "title", type: "short_text", required: true },
    { name: "summary", type: "short_text", required: true, maxLength: 200 },
    { name: "industry", type: "taxonomy_term", required: true },
    { name: "services", type: "reference_many", targets: ["Service"] },
    { name: "results", type: "structured_blocks", allowed: ["Metric","Quote","Paragraph"] }
  ]
}

Note what’s not here: layout decisions like “left column vs right column.” Layout should be driven by components/templates, not baked into your content types.

Relationships and reuse

Relationships are where a content model becomes scalable. They let you connect objects and reuse them consistently across the site.

Common relationship patterns

• Reference (one-to-one): Article → Author. Keep Author as its own type so you can update a bio once.
• Reference (one-to-many): Service → FAQs. FAQs can be reusable items or embedded blocks depending on reuse needs.
• Many-to-many: Product ↔ Feature. This supports filtering and avoids duplicating feature copy across products.
• Taxonomy tags: Topics/Industries/Use cases. Use taxonomies for navigation and filtering; don’t overload them as a substitute for relationships.

Decide early where you need shared truth. If a “Pricing Plan” appears on multiple pages, it should probably be a referenced entity. If a “callout paragraph” is unique to a single page, keep it local.

A practical test: if a piece of information must remain consistent in three or more places, prefer a reference. If it’s likely to vary by context, keep it embedded.

Governance: naming, ownership, and change

Most content models fail because of drift, not because the initial design was wrong. Governance is how you prevent “field sprawl” and keep the model coherent over time.

Put these rules in writing (a one-page doc is enough):

• Naming conventions: consistent field names (e.g., summary vs shortDescription) and taxonomy terms.
• Field ownership: who approves changes to core types (usually a product owner or content architect, not ad-hoc requests).
• Definition of done for new fields: required/optional, validation, example values, and where the field is used.
• Deprecation policy: how you retire fields without breaking consumers (mark as deprecated, migrate, remove later).

If your CMS feeds other systems (site generator, app, email tools), treat the model like an API. Breaking changes should be intentional, communicated, and ideally versioned or rolled out with a migration plan.

Workflow and lifecycle states

A scalable model supports how content is created and maintained, not just how it’s displayed. Workflows are often where complexity hides: legal review, localization, scheduled publishing, or periodic updates.

Two practical moves keep workflows manageable:

1. Model what changes: If “Last reviewed date” matters operationally, store it as a field. If “needs compliance review” affects publishing, represent it as a status or required approval.
2. Separate evergreen from time-bound content: Events, announcements, and promos typically need start/end dates and archival rules. Don’t force those rules onto evergreen content types.

Also consider “lifecycle defaults” for each type: Should it expire? Does it require an owner? Is it translated? These decisions reduce manual oversight later.

Migration and future-proofing

Even a great content model will evolve. Planning for change makes that evolution cheaper.

Design with these future-proofing habits:

• Prefer additive changes: adding a new field is safer than repurposing an old one with a different meaning.
• Avoid “misc” fields: a generic “extra info” rich text field becomes a dumping ground and blocks structured reuse.
• Keep URLs stable: a slug should be unique and predictable; don’t use titles as the only identifier.
• Plan for localization: decide which fields are translatable and which are global (SKUs, internal IDs).
• Track content dependencies: know which pages, listings, or integrations consume a field before you change it.

For migrations, the safest approach is often “parallel run”: introduce the new type/field, migrate content in batches, support both for a short time, then remove the old path once consumers have switched.

Conclusion

A scalable content model is less about predicting every future need and more about creating stable building blocks that can adapt. If you define a small set of clear content types, invest in relationships, and add basic governance, you’ll make publishing easier for humans and consuming content easier for machines.

If you want a quick next step, pick one high-value section of your site (like products, services, or case studies) and remodel it end-to-end. That pilot will reveal your real constraints and give you a repeatable pattern for the rest.

FAQ

Should I use structured blocks or rich text for the main body?

Use rich text when editors need flexible writing with basic formatting and you don’t need to reliably extract specific parts. Use structured blocks when you need consistent components (quotes, metrics, CTAs), multi-channel reuse, or downstream automation. Many teams use a hybrid: rich text for narrative, blocks for repeatable elements.

How many content types is “too many”?

Too many is when editors can’t tell which type to use, or when types differ only in minor layout details. A healthy model typically has a small set of core types and a library of reusable components/blocks. If you’re creating a new type weekly, you likely need better reuse patterns or clearer governance.

When should I use taxonomy tags vs relationships?

Use taxonomies for classification and navigation (topics, industries, audiences) and when the term itself is the point. Use relationships when you need a richer object with its own fields and lifecycle (Author, Location, Feature, Pricing Plan) or when you want strong reuse without duplicate copy.

How do I model content for multiple sites or brands?

Start by separating shared entities (like Products, Features, Policies) from brand-specific presentation. Add a “brand” or “site” field only when content is truly distinct per brand; otherwise keep one shared entity and vary how it’s rendered. This reduces duplication and makes updates safer.