Context in Content Strategy: Personal Behavioral Context

Context in Content Strategy: Personal Behavioral Context Is the second in a series of four blog posts discussing the need to account for context in the practice of content strategy. Did you miss the introduction to the series? If so, you can find that here.

If we’re in agreement that content strategy can’t live without context, one of the very first things we should be looking into when we’re content planning and working with user experience and information architects are the personal behaviors of our prospective users.

How do we begin doing that? First and foremost, we need to start at the beginning of the content strategy process and examine the content we have. Yes, just like every other content strategist, I’m going to insist that you look at it — ALL of it. Catalog it. Put it in a spreadsheet. Know what it is and be able to understand what it means to the usability of the site and the conversion goals that have been established for it.

Speaking of goals; you need them — for every section of your site. A lot of folks will put this onus on the site designer, but as strategists and stewards of smart content, we owe input and critique on EVERY section of a Web site. Navigation, individual pages and the content that fills them all require reason for being. If you don’t have a goal for an individual piece of content or a page on your site, you have your first red flag.

Once you have your audit (I’ve provided a sample Drake Motors Ltd. audit for you here [img]) and your goals (conversion and otherwise), we can establish user personas to develop content against.

Most marketing personas create a fictional person and blend a variety metrics to provide insight into what makes them tick. Typically, they contain the socioeconomic factors the person lives within, what magazines they might read, what type of device they may access our content on and what types of media will be most important to them. These types of personas are absolutely crucial for the development of a Web site like the one that Drake Motors Ltd. would have, but your personas may or may not include all of the information that’s outlined in the example below.

Where do user personas come from? In ad agency land (the setting I practice content strategy in), they come from a blending of social media technographics, market research, consumer insight interviews, subject matter experts, focus groups and a host of other available data points.

And while all of this information is incredibly helpful in defining an editorial strategy and messaging strategy for each persona, it’s really only helping us to create segments. Still, these humble personas are the keys to the kingdom of context, because you my friends know about content strategy! From these initial user personas we can start creating hypotheses to flesh out personal behavioral data.

When we account for personal behavioral context, we must focus on three main areas:

1. Physical Factors – These factors account for the doing behaviors.

Questions we should ask of ourselves include: What are the environmental stimuli? What activities are users doing when they access our content (working out, researching, studying, etc.)? What are their daily habits? Are they disabled or able bodied? What sensory stimuli may be affecting the environment around them? (Some of this can be grabbed from a social technographic study if it’s deep enough)

2. Emotional Factors – These factors relate to behavior made through feeling.

Questions we should ask of ourselves include: Are users stressed when they access our content? Are they feeling confident? Are they tired? Are they desperate? Are they wanting to spend money with our company or does our product or service make them feel afraid, uncomfortable or uneasy? Is it easy or difficult to interact with our business or web site for the average person?

3. Cognitive Factors – These factors relate to learning behaviors.

Questions we should ask ourselves include: What are the users’ cognitive assumptions when accessing our content? What are users’ maximum potentials for learning? Can we make assumptions or do we have metrics that provide us knowledge about their education level?

The first place we will likely want to drift when we start asking ourselves these questions is to a feeling of hopelessness. There’s no way in hell we can account for all of these factors, right? How can we possibly tailor an experience that satisfies all of the needs of all users when such a wide array of attitudes, experiences and environmental factors can influence a user at any given time?

The short answer is that we can’t account for EVERYTHING, but we can start asking the questions in our qualitative interviews with focus groups, discussions with our clients and their subject matter experts (product insight specialists). This allows us to begin to create contextual maps for content based on differing behavior types. From there, we can create specific content templates (examples are coming, I promise!) that can be used within our content management systems to filter content for a variety of conditions (time, geo-location, sex, age, device, situation, access point, etc.). We can also start to utilize personal recommendation engines, user feedback, user generated content and focus our written content to the lowest common reading level.

All of this template structure and contextual mapping can ultimately influence the architecture of a site. This is precisely why it’s so important that (1.) Content Strategy be involved at the earliest possible stage of a build, redesign or site refresh and (2.) that content strategy and IA work as partners throughout the entire process (including testing, implementation and QA).

It seems like a lot to digest, but after we have all this information and have developed what is now a truly useful persona we can start giving our fictional folks situations (Personal-Situational Context or scenarios that require content) that relate to their habits and behaviors to determine the true content need. Once we’ve done that, we compare the need against or qualitative and existing content audits. When we marry personal behaviors, product insights and consumer insights with situations that will apply directly to our products or services, we can get really dangerous with how specifically we can target folks with our content (Situational-Behavioral Content Strategy).

Next Post: We’ll do the above, using the content audit and the general user personas discussed here and marry it with some of our behavioral contextual assumptions. We can then mash this data up against a few personal situations different personas might face during the car buying process to create contextually relevant content scenario templates (which I’ll provide in both image and OmniGraffle form, in case you’re interested in integrating this into your process). When we mash those things up with ambient data and our site goals, we’ll be able to recommend a revised, contextually relevant content strategy. Basically, we’ll outline a few equations for you. Personal behavior A + personal situation B calls for content template X. It’ll be great.

Finally, a few notes that came to me after proofing this post.

First, in the interest of intellectual honesty, a lot of the props about the concept of Personal Behavioral Context in web design must be given to a really fantastic information architect, Mr. Andrew Hinton. He works in usability and codes and writes a stellar site called Inkblurt. The diagrams I’ve utilized to illustrate personal behavioral context were actually built upon some originals he did for a 2009 workshop for the Information Architecture Institute. Whenever I use these diagrams I like to plug him because they have had to be modified so little to make perfect sense for content and context strategy it feels like stealing.

Secondly, I just started reading Clout: The Art and Science of Influential Web Content by the very smart Colleen Jones. While I’m not finished with it yet and I haven’t yet had a personal conversation with Colleen, I can tell that we share a lot of the same thoughts on the importance of really knowing your audience and bringing more context into the content strategy and web design space. Check out the book and Colleen’s stuff if you’re digging what I’m laying down so far.

Context in Content Strategy: Defining Context

So what do we mean exactly when we talk about context in regards to content strategy?

Context has already been the focus of a great deal of research. From philosophy to linguistics and computer science to neuroscience, it seems everyone has a take. That said, I believe it “fair to say that context is most often used as a reference structure that tries to put all worlds and views, including that of the observer and observed, into a consistent framework. (Mike Bergman – 2008)”

And when that framework fits and makes sense to us and, more importantly, our users? Coherence! Understanding! Happy Users!

So if we agree that context will make our content meaningful and coherent for our users, how do we begin to make a contextual framework for content strategy?

We can begin answering that question by first examining the eventual goals of content strategy and the deliverables an experienced content strategist will provide.

The Content Strategy State of The Union

No matter what (or who’s) definition you may subscribe to, it seems widely accepted that content strategy helps provide either traditional “editorial guidance,” pillars for communication or contributes to information management, “findability” and the practice of information architecture.

Taking that into account, it follows that content strategy should provide the buyer with improved SEO, usable, useful content and a plan for maintaining that material over time. What the status quo isn’t promising is that all this will make sense to the user (though any content strategist or agency claiming to practice it worth their salt will start to refine content based on performance).

I agree and wholeheartedly believe the aforementioned are all results that should stem from sound content strategy. That said, so much of what we (and IA/UX pros for that matter) seem to be focused on is making Web sites easier to “get to,” while adhering to an “editorial strategy” that’s tied to user personas that were really developed to construct said site. While all this is fine and good (and incredibly important), they tragically leave out contextual frameworks for the content. It might be great, usable and fantastic for SEO, but if we’re missing the understanding and comprehension element, we’re missing engagement, and that’s not good for the strategist, the client or our user.

Why Content Strategy Can’t Live Without Context

Web sites need both context and content strategy because there is a world of difference between “attention” and “engagement.” Getting people to the site and getting attention is step one of the process. Engagement is what creates meaning for users and is ultimately what leads to metrics that matter: ROI, return visits, brand trust, potential word of mouth, etc.

Why is context crucial to achieving engagement? That’s a simple question to answer.

Humans and search engines don’t consume content in the same way. Search engines consume content via code, Meta data, tags, etc. Conversely, our brains are affected by the temperature in the room to the amount of sleep we got the night before. It also varies based on the device we access the content on (that’s a whole other web series I’ll be getting to here very, very soon). Bottom line, content is something we connect to emotionally, converse about or learn from … but content (and content strategy for that matter) without context is useless. It’s here that I form my belief that content strategy and information architecture are intrinsically linked. content strategy should help put the coherence factor (Context) back into web design.

When I say context, I don’t mean messaging strategy (those too often focus on marketing strategies or what we want users to hear or read). I don’t mean a user persona riddled with demographic data and I certainly don’t mean generalizations. Context for content strategy at minimum should account for:

1. Personal Behaviors
2. Potential User Situations that relate to your business or product
3. Ambient Data (geolocation, time of day, region, content access device, etc.)

All of these factors help to define Personal-Situational Context for our users and through some of what I’ll discuss in the next three posts, I’ll help start to define how we can account for these factors while still being great content strategists. Is it a lot more work? Absolutely. Do we owe it to our clients and users of our Web sites? Definitely. Are there deliverables that prove this point out? I think so, and I’ll discuss it via my fictional company that we’ll be creating a contextually relevant content strategy to.

Framing It All Up

For the sake of this Web series my context strategy examples will all be created for Drake Motors LTD., a fictional automotive manufacturer with a reasonably diverse portfolio of vehicles ranging from cars, to SUVs and crossovers. This particular automaker has recently updated a great deal of its product line and is producing quality, competitive vehicles. Despite this fact, eroded brand loyalty has seen them outsold in showrooms and outdone by its competitors on the web. Drake is looking for a way to get more out of their Web site and wants desperately to better engage its customers through the Web to get butts in dealerships.

With next week’s post, we’ll start talking about some of Drake’s web users and get into the nitty gritty of how we start accounting for those users’ personal behaviors via web content. I’ll also provide you with a high-level content audit and snapshot of what the company is working with. We’ll review what’s already been asked for and provided to help get us started, so that I can dive into the content strategy process.

We’re done with the definitions and the forwards (PROMISE!!). Next week, we’re onto the fun stuff! Have a question or comment or just plain disagree with me? Leave comments.

Evaluating Content: Reading Level

Does your average target user understand the writing found on your Web site? Did you, or your content author, think to evaluate the reading level of your copy prior to publishing? Yeah, I didn’t think so.

If you’re a large organization farming out your Web writing or if you’re a small business with a DIY approach, I’m willing to bet that the author of your content is fairly educated. And while said author(s) can certainly write beyond the average high school student’s reading level it doesn’t mean they should.

One of the biggest problems I discover when I’m tasked with evaluating Web content lies in the reading comprehension level of copy. More often than not, it can be simplified, edited for brevity and structured into smaller paragraphs. Multisyllabic words (how’s that for confusing/technical word choice!) are often presenting reading problems and most of the copy is not optimized for scanning.

Too many sites are just too damn hard to understand for someone trying to find information, make an informed decision or complete a transaction (you know, the things that ultimately lead to that elusive ROI?).

Pharmaceutical manufacturers Web sites are notorious for having readability problems in copy. We’ll use drug maker Glaxo Smith Kline (Advair, Boniva, Paxil, Valtrex, etc.) for our evaluation purposes in discussing the importance of readability.

As you can see by the quick report above, GSK.com has an average reading level of grade 20. So, in theory, to understand the majority of the material on the site, one would have to have significant postgraduate education.

I may be going out on a limb here in assuming that a good chunk of the consumers who use GSK drugs and any potential investors may not have achieved masters or doctoral degrees. So, it should follow that when the less educated are reading through potential side effects of drugs, or are scanning for quick information about the company; this copy isn’t going to make them feel more at ease in using a GSK manufactured medicine or convince them the company is worth their investment dollar.

The problem with GSK mostly lies with a high instance of confusing words and complex sentences. More than 27 percent of the words found on the GSK site are “Complex” (Complex words are polysyllabic – having 3 or more syllables). Even worse are the more than 175 instances of long sentences (10-20 words or more).

How do you improve it? Simplify, my friends. Simplify.

Start aiming for writing copy that younger audiences will understand. I don’t believe that there’s necessarily a magic number, but I generally shoot for 6th to 8th grade. Most journalism schools teach new copywriters to scribe for that comprehension level. It should be no different for most Web sites, unless you have a highly specialized audience (think advanced Web programming, Law Libraries, etc.).

Granted, most drug manufactures create microsites to be more consumer facing and in line with the marketing campaign (Valtrex.com), but even these sites are writing to a high school reading level and using high percentages of confusing words. (Valtrex.com is appropriate for 11th graders FYI)

I’m also of the belief that if corporate sites are in your linking strategy on consumer facing sites (as is the case for GSK.com), you need to have both readable by the same audience, which is clearly not the case here.

Is pharmaceutical stuff sometimes difficult to understand? Absolutely. Do drug names often contain multiple syllables? Absolutely. Does that mean the rest of the content (including descriptions of symptoms the drug treats and potential side effects) needs to be difficult to understand? Absolutely not.

Having trouble getting there, or don’t know how to even get started in evaluating copy readability? It’s not really an exact science (that’s what great editors and content strategists are for), but fortunately, there are lots of nifty tools out there to evaluate this stuff. If you’re looking for a quick evaluation of a page on a site, Read-Able.com is a strong, visually appealing site to generate reports on existing reading levels that will help get your pointed in the right direction.

And, if you’re going to get started in evaluating reading level in web copy, here’s the three things you absolutely need to pay attention to, whether you hire a content strategist or not.

1. Flesch Kincaid reading level. This test is sort of the standard. It’s built into many word processing programs and will give you a general idea of how difficult the content is to digest. If the reading level is too high, cut back on confusing words, simplify sentence structures and utilize elements that make the page easier to scan. Too low? Beef it up a little. Too many syllables in you words? Try breaking them apart or separating thoughts.

2. Make your content brief! More often than not, site owners are trying to reach mass capacity with web content to be better optimized for search. It’s a major disservice to your users and to your governance plan. If you’re using 10 words, do it in five. Don’t use a paragraph when bullets or a diagram can say it better. Utilize checklists, how tos and walkthroughs instead of detailed descriptions or confusing language.

3. Use the common sense test. I know, this is asking a lot, but just like you know pornography when you see it, you’ll know confusing copy when you see it. Don’t be smart for smart’s sake. If you know an eighth grader, ask them if they get the gist of your copy. If they don’t, chances are a good chunk of your visitors don’t get it either.

What tools is your organization using to evaluate reading level? Is it something your strategists are building into their Web toolkits? If not, maybe it’s time you ask them to start doing so, because you may be missing out on conversions or customers.

Image courtesy Brian Talbot

Context As A Content Strategy: Let’s Hash It Out!

For the first time in my professional career, I took a pretty big leap. I told a room full of very, very smart user experience professionals at Internet User Experience 2010 that I believe content strategists are not doing enough to adequately prepare for the next big thing. I also mentioned that I believe that Context, not content, is the real king when it comes to the web.

I’m happy to report that my thoughts and early stab at setting up the foundation for Context Strategy were both well received (see slides below).

Still, I’d like to reiterate that this process still needs refining and that we need to start finding better ways to account for personal behaviors (personal behavioral context) and personal situations (personal situational context) in order to take content strategy to the next level. When we combine personal behavioral and personal situational contexts we have the basis for what we’d potentially need to create a contextual based content strategy.

My next steps are to start exploring fields for content audits and persona development to begin accounting for context, while researching tools (including Eye Tracking, Functional MRI and biometric data) that can be synthesized on a project by project basis. Like I say in my presentation, I really need help formulating this discussion to get to a place where we can all start creating more meaningful content for users on the Web.

Comments on my presentation or the idea of Contextual Content Strategy in general are more than welcome. Let’s hash this thing out people!

On The Importance Of A/B Copy Testing In Content Strategy

I have a love/hate relationship with A/B Split Testing, especially when it comes to Web copy. Love that A/B testing can deliver significantly improved response, but hate that many brands may base all future copy decisions on a single test that delivered or over delivered on expectations.

Relying on a singular result, creates missed opportunity to refocus or edit content for other circumstances, site users, time periods or changing business factors. This is why it is crucial to have a sound content strategy to help determine variables, governance and success metrics for copy based on the user personas that were developed for your Web site.

If we can agree that content is your Web site’s greatest asset, the user persona should be the guidepost you’re using to increase its value any time we change messaging, and we can validate this premise through A/B copy testing.

And only through repeated and frequent testing will we be able to make changes that help us:

What factors should be considered in A/B Split Copy Testing?

1. Start with a metric in mind.
What are you trying to accomplish with the test? Are you after more subscribers, conversion rate increase, or a greater return on investment? Just like wanting to know what we want our users to do helps us define content strategy, goals for testing will determine parameters, which in turn will determine the potential success of our efforts.

2. Establish a control copy page/persona
Think back to your elementary school science class friends. Establishing a control persona will help us to establish the copy that we will test all varitions against, always keeping step one in mind as we develop considerations for variables.

If you are just getting started with A/B testing, your control page will be your current copy that is underperforming before any variation is served. When new copy outperforms the existing control copy, consider it your new benchmark (control persona) in any subsequent testing.

3. Determine a reasonable interval for the test
Determine how you’ll gather the data and for how long you need to gather it. This time period will vary from site to site, but should allow for the gathering sufficient data to gauge real insight about your A/B tests. If your site has a lower number of daily unique visitors, the test may run significantly longer to determine a clear copy winner.

4. Significantly vary your copy
Go big or go home. Slight word changes won’t necessarily give us enough of a true variable. Be radical with copy changes. If we’re spending the time and money to test differences, be sure they’re clear enough to users to determine if the change should really be made. If two to three radical variations can be tested against the control, make it happen!

5. Test, refine and test again
Test the alternate copy against the control (there are lots of different software suites and services that you can use to do A/B testing or you can do it yourself through something as simple as CGI Scripting). Ideally, each copy/persona will be tested against every other variation, but if you don’t have the funds or it becomes impractical to run multiple tests, test two pages at a time and keep the best as your control for subsequent tests as mentioned above.

In a perfect world, our brands, bloggers and friends have the time and the resources to follow a process like this and perform true split testing, but even if we have neither we can still create sequential A/B testing through throwing up one version of our site with one version of copy for a given period and then test alternative versions for the same time period after gathering data. Results may not be as reliable as true A/B split testing, but we can still gather incredibly valuable information from the exercise.

In Conclusion
Copy testing will help us maximize conversion rates, solve site problems, and challenge our assumptions. If you’ve got a fussy client, who continually wants to beat his chest about a product claim, good A/B testing might just show that all the user really cares about is what color it may be or the fact that it fits into their back pocket. And if we can start showing wins on this level, we can open the door for HUGE opportunities when we get beyond testing small changes.

Once initial factors and bugs in content are worked out, we can do bigger things, like designing and writing radically different versions of our pages, for brand new personas, where almost everything is different. And when we can test dramatic changes for new audiences, we’re most likely to achieve breakthrough improvements in conversion rates and potentially that all-important ROI.