Content Strategy: Are we all talking about the same thing?
Since the term “content strategy” is all the buzz these days and Twitter supplies an endless number of references to content strategy articles, it’s come to my attention that people mean different things when they talk about content strategy.
The first article, “Rahel Bailie Provides A Content Strategy Primer,” defines content strategy as:
Content strategy has been described by various practitioners as “the practice of planning for content creation, delivery, and governance” and “a repeatable system that defines the entire editorial contentdevelopment process for a website development project.”
Bailie’s article emphasizes that content strategy is a large effort, separate from Information Architecture effort, and can take weeks or months to design and implement.
Creating the plan can take a few weeks to a few months. Carrying out the strategy can take a significant amount of time, due to the simple fact that the amount of content, particularly technical content, can be massive.
Bailie’s article seems to imply that yes, a content strategist is necessary for any large, well-planned and well-executed content project. But if we move on to two other articles, we see that content strategy can be done in-house, especially for those who can’t afford it or don’t value it.
Jonathan Kahn, in his post “Content Strategy for the Web Professional,” and Melissa Rach, in her post “The Value of Content Part 1: Adam Smith Never Expected This,” give different interpretations of the value of content.
Kahn states that content strategy has not been part of overall web design projects and causes projects to fail:
No amount of research, information architecture, interaction design, or usability testing can create a great user experience if the content isn’t useful and usable if it doesn’t help the user to get things done.
But Kahn also states that companies who need content strategy can’t always afford to bring in another expert, don’t have the time for it, or don’t know any content strategists. But, anyone can publish to the web, meaning any user experience professional (or any other kind of person with internet access) can do content strategy themselves.
Rach explains that a friend ask for a good, cheap writer and states:
What she was really saying was, “I know I need smart content, but I don’t want to pay for it.” On a grander scale, many organizations have the same attitude.
This statement is from the company that wrote the book “Content Strategy for the Web.” I take it that they have their fair share of people not wanting to pay for content planning and writing, and still want good, fast, cheap writing.
So what is the scale of content strategy projects that we’re talking about. Is content strategy being pushed as a large-scale design/plan/implement project that runs in parallel with information architecture? Or is it meeting the needs of those who don’t see value in content and yet still want to use content strategically? (I don’t know why you’d want to do something strategic with something value-less.)
Is there space in this field for information architects and content strategists? Are both necessary?
(I’m not judging here, just asking!)
On BoxesAndArrows.com, Rachel Lovinger writes a thoughtful article, “Content Strategy: The Philosophy of Data,” but receives many comments to the effect that people don’t see such a big difference between information architecture and content strategy. This article was posted in September 2007 and since then “content strategy” as a term has really taken off. Perhaps Lovinger was right.
Richard Marsh offers this comment to Lovinger:
…[T]he analogy which you have provided has probably been met with some surprise too many IA’s as we have to consider content very carefully, as this is absolutely key to the sites that we architect, and often covers all of the content considerations that you mention, which doesn’t seem to be your experience of IA’s which seems odd.
Marsh also makes another point:
…[C]ontent always requires great effort and can easily be a cause for site delays even after providing site maps, wireframes, editorial tone guidelines, and web writing guidelines…
It will be interesting to see how content strategy continues to develop, but it seems that some of us are referring to different things. Bailie and Lovinger might be speaking about enterprise content strategy, whereas Rach is talking about content strategy for websites (as the company book title would suggest). The phrase “enterprise content strategy” begs the question: How is enterprise content strategy different than enterprise content management?
I’m still of the mind that content strategy and information architecture aren’t separate and I come from a background of dealing with a large amount of content for larger projects.
Good questions. We name our departments and thereafter they shape us.
Much depends on context: as a Content Strategist for a small web consultancy I do both content strategy and IA, plus whatever else is necessary! There are clear advantages to this more holistic approach, but I wonder whether that’s possible in a larger set up.
‘Why you’d want to do something strategic with something value-less’ is exactly the paradox with many of our clients. They want a strategic web site, without realising how important and necessary the content is to that strategy. It does seem that it is becoming easier to convince people to value content though – and our labels and conversations about CS and IA etc. give credence to that.
Nice work…there are lots of blog posts spouting an opinion. Fewer take the time to synthesize and weigh various viewpoints in order to identify what the key issues are in the discussioin.
Interesting article. Thanks for the link to my blog post. I just wanted to clarify a few points you made about it.
1. In my article, I was not talking about content strategy for the web only. However, the web has changed how people value content and the way people perceive the need for content strategy, which was the point of the post.
I have a long background in enterprise content strategy — and believe even if you are focusing on one specific channel, all aspects of the client’s content ecosystem have to be considered.
2. This statement is an incorrect assumption: “I take it that they have their fair share of people not wanting to pay for content planning and writing, and still want good, fast, cheap writing.” Actually, most of Brain Traffic’s clients today start with content strategy.
Thanks, Melissa
Yep – lots of people talking about content strategy and I’m not quite sure they’re all talking about the same thing. It seems that people are rushing to define the space, so I suppose different definitions are vying for the limelight…
And I think planning content and writing it well becomes more valuable as you have more content or that content needs to support customers or internal employees. So far, people with small sites (less than 50 pages) don’t see the value of “content strategy,” and perhaps there isn’t value there for them.
Thank you for your comment, Melissa. I think your clarifications are the questions I have: is content strategy only for the web? Or by “web” do we mean web-based products such as software, documentation, intranets, emails, CMS driven sites? Do we also extend it to marketing collateral that may be in print? If we extend it to marketing collateral, are we encroaching on marketing communications? How do information architects and marketing communicators view content strategy? How do content management experts view content strategy?
I’m looking forward to part 2 of your article!
Thanks so much for taking the time to research and synthesize this information. You ask a lot of great questions.
The term “content strategy” has really only taken off in the past few months, believe it or not. (I can say this definitively, as I’ve been watching its usage daily on Twitter and Google for 18 months now.) I think it’s hilarious that people have started referring to it as the new “buzz term” or something that’s suddenly “sexy”… content has long been considered the most BORING thing in the world!
Here’s what’s important, ultimately. No matter how different people are defining “content strategy,” everyone seems to agree on one thing: Content needs to be treated as a critical business asset, not an afterthought.
Rahel’s article was actually the first that’s been published that spoke dismissively of others’ attempts to understand or define this space, and to actively replace those definitions with her own. In my opinion, there’s little to no chance that anyone will really OWN this term… and for the love of all things holy, let’s not spend time fighting over it.
Whether you’re talking about content strategy for marketing, UX design, CMS consulting, technical communications, social media, enterprise content management… you’re talking about making a smart plan for content and its associated processes. It’s natural that we’re all going to view this challenge and its solutions through different lenses. Rather than arguing over semantics and ownership, let’s work together to continue to raise awareness of content as something that’s worthy of our organizations’ time, money, and attention.
I also find people getting into content strategy ironic because, as a former technical writer, no one thought strategically about content and most still don’t! Even the simple idea of using support documentation to promote one’s company as a customer service oriented company seemed strange. Having content in the first place is a major hurdle!