Time & Our Focus on Content
Content is grounded in time. Therefore, I have a theory that our view of time affects our view of content. I think our view of time depends largely on our role or function. Often, that view doesn’t match other people’s views. To illustrate, I sketched a graph.
If we understand these differing views, then we can better articulate the benefits that content strategy offers to each function. For instance, we can say to marketing that a content strategist focuses on content beyond the campaign to improve the overall brand experience.
Caveats
- This graph is not based on data beyond my anecdotal experience with these different functions. It’s simply a way to illustrate the concept.
- As always, sometimes exceptions exist. For instance, UX that is closely aligned with product might have more of a product lifecycle view than a project view of content.
- For product, I have in mind situations when the product is content. HowStuffWorks.com and AutoTrader.com are examples.
- Besides product, another common treatment of content is “stuff that fills a communication channel,” which almost lacks a temporal benchmark. I’ll tackle that in another blog post.
Related Ideas
- Jeffrey MacIntyre notes the importance of time to content in The Elements of Editorial Strategy.
- Dan Greenberg is making efforts to align PR and interactive marketing through his PR Campfire series.
- Erin Scime recently shared the content lifecycle, especially for an agency context.
- Kristina Halvorson points out the impact that different functions have on content in Content Strategy for the Web.
Yummy, eye candy! One of the best I have seen, the fact that it is tied to product life cycle, role and function is the icing on the cake.
In my theory, one can use the free/open process classification framework from APQC.org that documents process across an inter/intra web. As we know each function and process has content assets, what’s new is this framework allows us to roll those assets into a SG&A taxonomy.
Why SG&A? Because SG&A is measurable, for public companies in the U.S.A., through GaaP and soon to be IFRS. SG&A allows us to evaluate cost variances and justify process and product content optimization initiatives.
As your illustration slyly suggests, content specialists need to grasp that all attention to content (planning, production, delivery, reuse) is cyclical.
I think there is some subtle satire at work in here, too, because we’ve all had experiences with “on/off” marketing campaigns and other single-burst theatrics from the PR hack down the hall. What’s missing so often is the long view: what’s the effect of our content over time in terms of advancing an experience, a product or service? Which is why it’s heartening to see content marketers start to think longer term with keyword analysis, for example, in lieu of dashed-off overnight splashes. It’s about really grasping the longevity of content, its value over time.
Just as importantly, Colleen, I wonder whether there’s a somewhat different vector we could add above, which is when content *is* the product of a digital property–a web magazine, for instance. My approach with editorial strategy is to wed it to the product development lifecycle in such a way that a client is over time increasing content focus, able to increase their capacity/production/reach, and genuinely expanding their content business. Economic cycles and user engagement trends aside, up and to the right is the way that vector should always go.
That, of course, is one consultant’s projection rather than a reality! But all the same, I would love to see someone take your prototype and start to layer in representative data.
Jeff, as usual, you raise an insightful point. Most of the visuals I’ve seen about product lifecycle show a “saturation and decline” stage along the lines of what I represented. So, I think product folks have that lifecycle ingrained in their view. I like your suggestion that when the content is the product, attention to content should not decline. I wonder, then, if the product lifecycle for a content-focused product is different (or should be different) than the typical product lifecycle. I see potential differences in length of the “mature” stage because the content lifecycle constantly takes care of “saturation and decline” and revitalizes the product. And, recent publications from Harvard Business Review, such as Exploit the Product Lifecycle, suggest opportunities to extend or vary the product lifecycle. Content strategy is a smart way to take advantage of those opportunities.
I also see a need to address the situation when content is tied to channel(s) that critically support a product or service. For that situation, I’m exploring the customer relationship lifecycle. (I started to layer it in, but the visual was becoming…not visual!) I plan to explore time and focus on content for product and for channel in a separate visual.
Social comments and analytics for this post…
This post was mentioned on Twitter by willsansbury: Different functional roles view content differently at different times in product’s lifecycle, says @leenjones http://tinyurl.com/yc4fdrs...
[...] As Colleen Jones put it only last week, a web content strategy allows for the different departments, roles and responsibilities that exist during a project to naturally alter their focus on content at different stages but, crucially, still maintaining consistency and accuracy in their delivery. [...]
[...] Time & Our Focus on Content by Colleen Jones. [...]
[...] Testing Content Concepts Time & Our Focus on Content [...]