Why Strategists Need Content Managers

Written by Daniel Eizans on 12/04/2009 – 3:05 pm -

Every Wednesday morning, I wander upstairs to cheat on my colleagues in the content strategy and user experience departments to broaden my knowledge base and talk about things just as geeky as our collective practices.

You see, Wednesdays are my weekly trysts with my agency’s Content Management and Content Integration groups. I very much enjoy these sessions, not only because it provides me the opportunity to fully nerd it out on everything from asset grids to meta data, but it also affords me the opportunity to vent shared frustrations, create new efficiences and discover insights as to how we make this whole content strategy/content management thing play nice. I do this because ultimately, I’d like to better serve our clients and assist our content developers in producing more relevant and compelling creative.

Let me start by disclaiming that I’m of the opinion that content strategy is most certainly NOT content management. As strategists, we have input on how the content is produced, managed and governed, but our goal is ultimately to aid in the creation of a strategic set of best practicies and personas to be sure that content developers are creating the most appropriate content for machines and humans.

So, if content management is concerned with the cataloging, re-purposing and proper tagging of assets so they’re readily available and relevant, and content integration is concerned with making these assets usable for a variety of media channels, how do these guys get along with and provide insights into the content strategy role?

The answer that I’ve slowly been coming to after a few months of getting inside the heads of various content integration and management team members is that there is an absolutely crucial need to design a common set of systems, routines and nomenclature for an integrated content development process – something myself and two colleagues are working very hard to shape.

It seems that our separate languages can certainly be understood by one another, but somehow can become twisted in interpretations when they’re translated to those outside our happy content development cycle. So, it seems far better to step forward with a universal dialogue to properly marry content strategy and user experience to content management and integration so that POV can be articulated to the content development process laymen.

This calls for unprecedented collaboration, which can be difficult in a large agency setting. It means content managers and strategists need to work very hard to understand the other’s practice.

Good content strategists should have a strong understanding of how asset management and integration works (EVEN IN NON-DIGITAL!!), and asset managers and integration specialists have to understand the insights and data sets that influence how a content strategist develops personas, works with experience planning, determines gap analysis and creates a point of view for a given project.

If content management doens’t understand the results of strategic persona process, assets can’t be tagged properly in databases and potential efficiencies for content integration across communication and campaign platforms will most likely be missed. Missed opportunity creates a creep on scope when new projects and the potential for new content creation comes around. Likewise, if content strategy doesn’t better understand the management and integration process influence on management and evenutal governance of an asset will never be achieved.

So I’m putitng out an APB for the creation of a content development dictionary of sorts. Content producers need a common set of terms and ways to explain the roles of their colleagues and everyone needs to understand these terms, roles, processes and routines through a common nomenclature.

Big agencies traditionally suck at this, so I’m especially interested in what you strategists working within this environment are doing to combat it.

I know it seems silly to have to tell people to integrate into a process for content development, but as agencies and organizations attempt to become less siloed by re-aligning as content production houses, they’re effectively creating new silos by coming up with their own language, process and routine for handling individual steps to creating the work.

So strategists … have you hugged your content manager or your integration team today? If you haven’t head upstairs and do so. They’re smart and insightful people who will make you think more deeply and cause you to write better strategies.

Drop thoughts below in the comments and check back for periodic updates to my attempts to write the Content Development dictionary.

Disclaimer: The opinions reflected in this post ARE NOT necessarily those of my employer. These opinoins are strictly my take on the content development process.

Share and Enjoy:
  • Print
  • Digg
  • Sphinn
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • Google Bookmarks
  • email
  • LinkedIn
  • StumbleUpon
  • Tumblr
  • Twitter

Tags: , , ,
Posted in Content Strategy | 5 Comments »

5 Comments to “Why Strategists Need Content Managers”

  1. Dan Grantham Said:

    Hey Dan:

    First off, I object to being called a layman. :-)

    Secondly, I think much of the confusion revolves around the word “content” itself. A strategist uses it to mean everything on the site, the manager might use it for the assets on the site and a creative developer might use the term to mean a story concept that could take any form: text, video or graphic. They could sit in a room and talk about “content” and all mean something different.

    Agree we need a lexicon, but I think finding the right terms for the various parts of what we now call “content” is the place to start.

    And, no, I don’t have that definition worked out just yet.

    Dan

  2. seamus walsh Said:

    This debate over one word reminds me of testimony from 1995 debating the definition of the the word “is” but slightly less contentious and scandalous. You attest that content strategy is most certainly NOT content management, I assume your platform does not slow its implementation?

    In your quest for a definition, I offer you the APQC process classification framework and our addendum that aligns to Dublin Core and DITA metadata schema. I promise our taxonomy and metadata mapping is full on geek and we are very close on having it’s definition worked out.

  3. Daniel Eizans Said:

    Dan:

    Agree that there at least needs to be a lose guideline of what content is. Maybe because I have experience in all these different arenas, I don’t often start to question what “content” is.

    When I have my Wednesdays wtih the “asset” management team and put on my “enterprise content strategy” hat those discussions can include everything from motion assets, to 3D wireframes for vehicle builds on the Chevrolet Web site.

    To me, all that stuff is content. Assets = content, words = content. In other words, tangible deliverables are content. A concept is a concept, a plan is a plan, anything that can be databased, cataloged, etc. is content.

    I think where I really hope to find defnitions moving forward are for the things that aid us (whether we’re strategists, managers, developers, planners, etc.) with the description of why and how we’re using and optimizing content, how that content pays off the consumer experience and ultimately how we expect thos things to influence their bottom line.

    Let me know when you’ve got your definition and we’ll compare notes.

    Seamus:

    I’ll look forward to the e-mail outlining all that stuff :)

  4. Stacy Lukasavitz Said:

    How strange. I’m in the middle of writing a similarly-themed post on my all-but-forgotten blog that will be emphasizing the need to expand the vernacular of another realm.

    I totally agree with you that there should be an agreed-upon lexicon in the world of “content” and other arenas, but the problem is that language is so rapidly shifting and so are some technologies, that by the time some people catch up to understanding/referring to one term as one thing, the meaning has already evolved to those ahead of the curve and thus, things get lost in translation.

    Other than making efforts to define the term(s), which may or may not be in vain depending on time, I think our only hope is patience with each other! :)

  5. Daniel Eizans Said:

    Stacy

    Totally agree with you on the rapid change of lexicon in these areas. I guess my struggle is that I’m of the belief that at least all of these different teams that have a stake in “content” need to more lockstep when approaching a client.

    I have to sift through your blog and see what you’re up to. I saw the first video post, was shocked to see you vlogging. Keep it up!

Please Share Your Insights. I Need Geek Fuel!