x

Are Feelings Good For Content Strategy?

Content strategists have been talking a lot about feelings lately. But is that actually hurting the industry gain buy in from the mainstream marketing community? Learn how to frame empathy in terms of data to make the case for content strategy.

Last week at Confab Minneapolis, the content strategy community’s annual get-together, there was a lot of talk about feelings. Seriously. A lot of feelings. Katie Del Angel summed it up pretty well in her Confab recap for The CMS Myth when she said “content strategy is emotional business, and delightful content requires empathy.” I hadn’t really thought about the concept of empathy, though I can say in retrospect that it’s always been a major part of my work as a content strategist. I’ve got to admit, the whole idea of empathy as a marketing strategy makes me more than just a little squeamish.

I suppose words like ‘empathy’ have never seemed congruent with my approach to content strategy, which plants its feet firmly in the data-driven practices of SEO and market research while resting its head in the clouded realm of old-school marketing and advertising — of which “because I can” is the dominant expression, and data comes second to risk-taking and gut instinct. Between those two extremes there has never been much room for me to discuss or ponder feelings. But I’ve got the energy now. Let’s do it.

#Confabfeelings

Confab feelings
My work in content strategy has never seemed to be a more emotional sort of work than that of my colleagues in market research, SEO, or creative development — or even nonprofit administration and community organization, when I did content strategy in that world. Really, I’ve always found most people are pretty emotional about the work they do. In nonprofit we talked a lot about money, because there never was any of it — but discussions about emotion were rare. I’d be curious to know if other nonprofit folk have had the same experience.

I think it’s safe to say that when work is challenging and good, people get emotional. That’s just the nature of doing business that people are invested in — they get emotional. But they don’t generally talk about it at industry conferences. That seems pretty unique to Confab and the content strategy community in general. Is it weird? Am I weird for thinking it’s weird?

I’ve worked as a content strategist and copywriter for a few years, and have not actually held a job outside of that realm since I graduated college. In the course of my (admittedly short) career, one of the major criticisms I’ve encountered from colleagues regarding my “type of person” (read unquantifiable, touchy-feely type) was that we are…well, unquantifiable, and sometimes too touchy-feely. That we are hard to work with because we don’t separate our personal emotion from business. That we can’t make the tough marketing decisions because we’re in love with our own content, which ultimately amounts to our being in love with our own ideas. Which, if we’re going to be honest with ourselves, boils down to the quality of narcissism. The criticism from the outside community — let me know if I’m way off base here — is that we content strategists (and more specifically those of us on the creation side) are in love with ourselves.

This doesn’t seem fair. The case for content strategy is obvious to anyone who works in it. Yet a good part of the content strategy process remains unquantifiable. Some of our work does rely on a certain sort of artistry that falls into that nebulous realm dealing exclusively with the emotions of the user — and that, dear friends, is a largely unmeasurable entity. But shouldn’t we be trying to change that? Can we find a way to measure empathy in a way that allows our colleagues in the larger, more established, data-focused marketing world to buy into content strategy as a profitable and necessary discipline? Can we get more money into content strategy?

Data-Oriented Empathy

feelings chart
I was lucky enough to informally learn the concept of persona-driven writing in my first gig out of college for 826 Valencia, an education nonprofit based in San Francisco. All of the content we created for the site was aimed at one of three groups: teachers, students, and volunteers. Because I was working alongside community organizers, tutoring students in my off-hours, and often going into classrooms to support public school teachers, I absolutely knew my personas first hand. But this is rare. Our website had a very well-defined, local community.

Content strategists face more challenges as their audience grows from tens of thousands (a pretty reasonable figure) to hundreds of thousands, and then to millions of diverse and unique users. It gets harder. Sarah Cancilla had the lucky job of developing a cohesive content strategy for what was then roughly 350 million users — and what is now over a billion users — when she took her job at Facebook. It really just gets harder.

The most important thing I’ve learned as I’ve organized, audited, developed, and measured content for progressively larger websites is that determining user sentiment is seriously (by which I mean fatally) flawed without the careful consideration of hard user data. It is the only thing I’ve found that works besides meeting with and speaking to your actual users on a daily basis. Not generally an easy task once you start working on Fortune 500 brands. (Though, to that point, it never hurts to ask your friends and family questions about well-known brands you’re working on — chances are they use the products and haven’t yet thought themselves into a corner about its branding like you have.)

In my past work I’ve made the mistake of assuming knowledge about the type of user that visits a given site, and I’ve almost always been wrong in those beliefs — which, to be honest, were usually assumptions made by working backwards from a concept I’d already imagined and fallen in love with. Real example: “Yeah, we can totally pull this off because I’m sure there are tons of users on this site that love House Party 2.” Persona research shouldn’t be used for the justification of previously held notions, but rather the development of new ones. We have to actually be open to tabling our assumptions, which is really, really hard to do.

But market research, in the hands of an analyst who really understands how to pull and interpret segmentation data, can paint a detailed picture not of individual people but rather communities of individuals concentrated into unique personas to whom the copywriter can speak directly. Personas backed by data are in my experience more effective tools than ones imagined by creative teams — or even in some (or most) cases, those based on actual people. Those personas rely too much on the assumptions of the copywriter and the content strategist. Most people — especially ones who toil away in offices — are out of touch with the outside world.

Take me, for instance. Nearly all of my friends that I have ever had live in major coastal cities. Norris Rowley, our lead market researcher, constantly has to remind me, obvious as it may seem, that 80% of Americans live in the 48 states (and Puerto Rico) that aren’t New York or California. I’m reminded that roughly 45 percent of cell phone owners don’t have smartphones (Pew Research Center) — and that a large number of smart phone owners use that as their primary or only source of internet. I’m reminded that cable TV isn’t irrelevant to 95% of the country (Nielsen) — even to those people who are already using services like Netflix and Hulu.

In examining user data I’m forced to step outside the comfort of my own metropolitan assumptions, and confront the world as it exists for the various users of whatever site I’m working on. This process allows me to create content that is not limited to my own worldview, which makes me not only a better writer and strategist — but also makes me (I hope) a better person.

And there I think we’ve arrived at it: empathy. Empathy derived from data — the same destination with only a few extra steps.

Making the Case for Content Strategy

I predict that the next five years will see content-oriented people from all around the marketing community flooding into the industry with a host of data-driven approaches that will help to legitimize our discipline as a core digital marketing practice. It isn’t there yet. But we’re getting closer. This year’s Confab saw some awesome presentations espousing the ease of incorporating relevant data into content strategy. Johnathon Colman brought it home with his powerhouse deck Data Sets You Free. And I’m proud to have seen my boss Mike King presenting a concept we worked on together, The Poetry of SEO, making a case for content strategy in the SEO world, and vice-versa.

While we are all getting at the same thing, the people who control marketing budgets don’t respond as well to the strategy of empathy as we would like them to. They respond to data. But we’re lucky enough to be living in a digital world that is coming closer and closer to quantifying those sentiments. While they may not be perfect representations of a user’s actual feelings, they’re a starting point toward which the arts of interpretation content strategists are so renowned for can be applied. Data is a way to sell your services, get your foot in the door, and practice your discipline in a big way. Content strategists may be an emotional bunch, but sometimes we need to act a bit tougher to get our work taken seriously.

As brands become more advanced in their management of content, questions like “Do you know how much content you have?” and “How are you measuring the success of your content?” simply won’t cut it. Content strategy is becoming increasingly technical and technological. The next steps for our industry will come from the outside.

Quick Market Research Hacks

Having a full-time market research analyst with 7 years at Nielsen sitting right next to you is a convenient but rare luxury. There are tons of quick hacks that you can use to get formal and informal consumer information which you can apply to your content strategy campaigns. But since I do have a market research analyst with 7 years at Nielsen sitting right next to me, let’s get funky.

Test Your Ideas on Reddit and Quora

Reddit Market Research
A great way to discover whether your idea is likely to spark conversation is to plant a question into a forum like Reddit, and see what people say. The course of the conversation can help you figure out what aspects of your topic are the most engaging. This is also a fantastic way to discover the humor in your topic by watching actual users engage with it in the wild. Just keep in mind Redditors are a somewhat niche subset, so take everything you learn with a grain of salt. Quora also works well. The responses are often much more thoughtful, but the rate of engagement is way slower.

Grab Ready-Made Data on Marketing Charts

Marketing Charts
I love MarketingCharts. It has a great search function that allows you to find useful data quickly. Plus, the information is laid out clearly so it’s easy to interpret and implement. And all of the sources are clearly listed, which makes conducting further research even easier. I use this service all of the time to back up claims that I make in my writing. It can also be a great source of ideas, if you comb through the charts looking for topics that interest you.

Run Surveys on SurveyMonkey Audience

Survey Monkey Market Research
SurveyMonkey Audience is amazing. It’s panel base is huge, which means that you have access to a hugely diverse selection of survey participants. You can target the specific demographics you’re interested in, and still have a large representative sample size. Plus, the analytics tools are incredibly useful and dynamic, allowing you to cross-index the information you’ve already collected to make your data that much more useful. You don’t have to be anywhere close to a market research expert to leverage SurveyMonkey. We generally use it to confirm suspicions we have about our audiences, but are more often than not surprised at the responses we get. SurveyMonkey data has effected huge changes in many of our campaigns and creative projects.

Experian Simmons & Nielsen Prizm

Nielsen
While the full-scale versions of Experian Simmons and Nielsen Prizm are our bread and butter for market research (especially Experian), the free versions of these data sources can be used to access historical panel data to inform your content decisions. While the data may be a bit outdated, it can point you in the right direction when testing your assumptions against reality. The mosaic types can help you build out basic (but again, let me stress outdated) personas to make a case for the ideas that you want to implement.

Learn About Your Audience Using Followerwonk

Followerwonk
It’s not a secret that we love Followerwonk over here. We talk about it all the time. But it really is a fantastic tool. It allows you to search Twitter bios for particular keywords, and get a snapshot of the users that are interested in your particular topic. In the above example I was searching for people who were interested in snowboarding. You can then sort the users by key metrics like Social Authority to determine the top influencers surrounding that topic, and dig into their individual profiles to see what they’re talking about. You don’t have to be a social media specialist to do this. It’s easy, and incredibly useful. Everyone who creates content with their audience in mind should be using Followerwonk.

The Value of Content Strategy

As content strategists, we are in a unique position to define our role in the larger marketing community, which is beginning to learn exactly what it is that we do. But we haven’t yet as an industry begun to fully define our values. What do we care about? What do we want to achieve? How are we different than writers? How are we different than editors? The marketing community at large does not understand these distinctions yet. They want to know what we do, and how we plan to make them money. The conversations in our community are slowly shifting from themes of creativity to those of strategy — which will ultimately be more beneficial for the adoption of our techniques. Creativity is great, but it often feels like a word that precludes consideration of the substantial work that goes into the planning of content.

I’ll end with a quote from David Ogilvy — my third greatest personal hero — on the nature of creativity:

“I am supposed to be the No. 1 creative genius in the whole world, and I don’t even know what the hell the word ‘creativity’ means. But I’m not afraid to tell creative phonies that their commercials are utter nonsense. When I write an ad, I don’t want you to tell me that you find it ‘creative.’ I want you to find it so persuasive that you buy the product — or buy it more often.”

The content strategy community has yet to decide what it’s principle values are. Do we care more about creativity or success? Are we interested in elevating the online conversation to more artistic heights, or are we primarily concerned with the success of the business we represent? We will not ever come to a decision on these matters because we are a complex community of individuals, but these are the conversations we need to continue to have if we are to be recognized as a truly indispensible discipline within the larger canon of marketing.

What do you think? Can content strategy afford to be talking about feelings when the rest of the marketing community is waiting for us to grow up and make money? Am I totally cynical, ignorant, or crazy? Let me know in the comments section below, or reach out on Twitter.

  • halvorson

    This is an incredible post, Devin. Thank you so much for the time and effort you put into writing it. I plan to reread it a few times in the coming week, because there’s so much good stuff here.

    Here is my two cents: when I talk about feelings in CS, I’m nearly always talking about the tough conversations that need to take place within my clients’ organizations in order to effect change. I have yet to encounter a project that doesn’t involve a certain amount of “content therapy” with the core team and stakeholders. (For example, issues of ownership are always highly political.)

    I couldn’t agree with you more about the fact that content strategists have a long way to go in terms of defining our value in terms of cold, hard data. I often share an anecdote about a content strategist who came to me very frustrated that her leadership didn’t value her work—that no one seemed to care
    that doing content strategy was THE RIGHT THING TO DO. My response: no one cares if it’s the “right thing to do.” Leadership cares about the bottom line, as well they should. So, to your points above, figuring out how to define and defend how our work contributes to that bottom line should be a primary focus within the CS community, now and in the future.

    Here’s the deal: this is exactly the same battle the user experience community fought as they began to “find themselves” fifteen years ago. The empathy for the user that you address used to be the lead in ever UX conversation—that it was “the right thing to do.” That conversation began to shift in the mid-2000s as UX folks finally started to connect the dots between ROI and their work (see Adaptive Path’s great 2004 article, “ROI Is Not a Sliver Bullet,” for a good example of how the conversation began to shift: http://www.adaptivepath.com/ideas/e000338).

    (In fact—as I re-read the AP article—it says a LOT of what you’re saying here, once again demonstrating the fact that the CS community has a lot to learn from the groundwork already laid by our friends and peers in UX.)

    One final note: there is a lot of very, very important ground that content strategy covers that has little to do with marketing. When we talk about proving our value, we can also look to improved internal performance—namely, more effective use of our resources, better cross-team collaboration, and so
    on. To me, this is the most powerful part of CS: being able to bridge the gap between the substance and measurement of our content products and the people who create and care for them.

    Okay, one final FINAL note: On #confabfeelings … Confab has, in fact, been a pretty emotional conference for many attendees since its debut in 2011 simply because they never really knew there were other people like them who shared their challenges. Discovering their “people” for the first time in
    their career is understandably a powerful experience for folks. This is part of why it’s such a special onference (IMHO). Also cake.

    Thanks again for this post. More! Write more!!!

    • Devin Asaro

      Wow, thanks Kristina. I was feeling a bit nervous about this post (was honestly worried it might make people in the community angry) — so I’m glad to see it elicited a response on the more positive end of the emotional spectrum.

      I got into content strategy the same way I imagine most people get into it: accidentally. I was working for an organization that had built a website, and I was given ownership of “putting all the stuff on it.” But to your point, I suppose I haven’t thought much about content strategy outside of the realm of marketing. As I’ve moved forward in my career and have had to justify content strategy to clients, the conversation on their end has always been about marketing value. I’m curious about how to shift that conversation to show the depth of content strategy beyond its impact on marketing strategy.

      And yes, Confab was super emotional. It was my first time, and I was really expecting to meet a lot of very intimidating people who knew so much more about content strategy than I did. While I did meet a lot of people who were smarter and more experienced than me, I didn’t encounter the same resistance that I have in the inbound marketing community. I didn’t feel like anyone was testing me, which was strange.

      I’m going to read the AP article in just a minute, and am looking forward to discussing this more.

  • Patrick Brown

    Wow. Great article, great article, great article. Timely, complete and inviting. Thanks for your great work, this is one I’ll send to my entire team.

    • Devin Asaro

      Patrick, thank you. I’m really glad you found this post actionable.

  • shelbow

    Hey Devin, thanks for this reflection and point of view — especially
    because this was the first Confab I *didn’t* attend, and it’s nice to
    get a flavor of what was going on this year.

    Funny thing though, I read
    your article and went down a completely different spiraling tunnel of
    thought than Kristina … in that I was thinking of feelings generated by the
    content strategy itself, rather than the process of it.

    I keep thinking
    of content strategy as a journey — the journey of a brand’s story. And
    as stories go, they grab the viewer in an emotional way. Or, at least,
    they should. Data helps inform the creator on what might illicit that
    emotional tug, whether it’s B-B or B-C; we’re all human after all.

    Thanks again, and for the resources!

    • Devin Asaro

      Thanks! I was hoping that it would be thought provoking, and I’m quite glad to see that everyone has had a somewhat different reaction to it. I think it can be difficult sometime to separate personal emotion from that of the brand story, particularly when (agency talk) you’re slogging away on a never-ending client account. The frustration or joy of the work can become so much of an influencing factor that data is the only thing keeping me on track.

  • Andrea Goulet Ford

    This is really thought-provoking, Devin. Where I sit in the content strategy ecosystem requires a massive amount of empathy. I agree that empathy is both: a) an absolutely CRITICAL element to creating content that connects with the audience (and is thereby good for the business), and b): completely misunderstood by most people, which, anecdotally, I’ve observed to be people who are more analytical, left-brain people.

    While I agree that demographic and psychographics profiling of your audience is a good practice, I don’t believe it’s enough. Being a good writer, whether you’re writing fiction or not, is forming a whole, real, relatable character that connects with the real customer who has real needs and real feelings. Data doesn’t do that. Humans do. Which is why content strategy requires both the analytic skills to understand the data, and the emotional capacity to step out of our own perspective and feel in a very real way what our customers need.

    Empathy is not frou frou, and it’s easy for people who don’t understand empathy to toss it aside. Empathy is a real and important tool for content strategists.

    Recently, I’ve been turning to the work of Brene Brown, a professor at the University of Houston. She uses data to uncover the real workings of hard and misunderstood topics: shame, vulnerability, and our good friend here, empathy. Here’s how Dr. Brown defines empathy in her recent book “Daring Greatly”.

    “Empathy is a strange and powerful thing. There is no script. There is no right way or wrong way to do it. It’s simply listening, holding space, withholding judgment, emotionally connecting, and communicating that incredibly healing message of “You’re not alone.”[1]

    If you want to sway opinions, start using her data to demonstrate why these “emotional” attributes are the secret to making not just content, not just marketing, not just customer service, but EVERYTHING (legal, ops, sales, etc) in a business worthy of the trust, loyalty, (and reduced acquisition cost) that a customer who feels understood brings.

    I’m really looking forward to the dialogue you’ve presented here. Thanks again!

    -Andrea

    [1] Brown, Brene (2012-09-11). Daring Greatly: How the Courage to Be Vulnerable Transforms the Way We Live, Love, Parent, and Lead (p. 81). Penguin Group US. Kindle Edition.

    • Devin Asaro

      I love that you’re citing sources (with footnotes!) in the comments. I wish the inbound marketing community would pick up that habit :)

      Interestingly enough, I’m not a terribly analytical person. Amongst my colleagues I’m actually quite the opposite — but having worked with some really creative data analysts, I can never emphasise its importance enough, especially as I see it largely ignored by creative teams (of which I am part) because they just want to pursue their own ideas of who they think the audience is (which usually amount to who they wish the audience was). And yes, I agree that demo/psychographics are just a starting point, but they’re important in establishing the ground rules for engagement.

      Data is also starting to look less and less like numbers, which a lot of people are really scared of. We can gather actual data about language which we can apply to our writing. I’d like to be able to use data from generative grammar research to discover which phrase structures garner the most positive reactions, and apply that to large scale content auditing projects. I really enjoy learning to be a better writer and strategist through data. I frequently use Russ Jones’s tool nTopic — which leverages instances of co-occurence from a massive wikipedia crawl — to enrich the vocabulary of my writing. We’re getting better at working with data, and I think as long as we remain creative and focus on actual people we will be fine.

      I’m excited to dig into Brene Brown’s work. It sounds fascinating, and I’m looking forward to having another tool in my belt :)

      • Andrea Goulet Ford

        I’m an inbound ex-pat myself. I totally get it! And my partner is a hard core science geek, so I picked up the footnote habit from him. I hadn’t heard of nTopic — I’ll have to check it out.

        Oh, and here’s the video that made me an absolute Brene Brown fangirl: http://www.ted.com/talks/brene_brown_on_vulnerability.html

        • Devin Asaro

          Ha! Yeah, I really like walking that line between inbound marketing and content strategy. I’m seeing more and more disciplines developing fuzzy borders with CS, which is awesome! Thanks again for the comment.

  • Jared A. May

    This is a very thoughtful and well written article, thanks for writing this.

    I wanted to comment on this article because believe that qualitative data and empathy are invaluable factors to designing great solutions for people. And it’s interesting to see that there is talk about this in the Content Strategy community. I’m curious to know if you are familiar with the Design Thinking process and how they incorporate empathy and qualitative data into their research process.

    From my experience and understanding, this role of data gathering and research has been the role of a designer or researcher and reading this makes me curious to see how these terms and roles will be defined within the industry; will it be design thinking, will it be content strategy, or will it be anthropology and research.

    • Devin Asaro

      Hi Jared,thanks for your feedback. I certainly appreciate the comment. I’m curious about design thinking, and have heard it discussed but have never actually investigated it. A brief wikipedia scan brought a few things to my attention: namely, the idea of beginning the design/development process with a solution, and working backwards to discover the tactics. I like that, and the team I work with functions that way. Looking forward to digging into that philosophy further.

  • Pingback: Are Feelings Good for Content Strategy? | iAcqu...

  • vinishgarg

    This is one of the most insightful articles I have read on content strategy. I gives me a few excellent pointers for preparing a business case for content strategy. Tech comm is changing fast, from merely planning deliverables as help files to the holistic content strategy, publishing and governance. The reference to survey and research as part of strategy is again excellent; however, I feel that tech comm professionals are moving out of their ‘writing comfort zone’ and converging with IA and UX, to plan for holistic content strategy for businesses.

    Thank you for sharing it.

    • Devin Asaro

      Thanks for the feedback! I definitely believe the discipline of content strategy is forcing (or allowing — depending on how you look at it) more traditional writers and editors to step outside of their comfort zones, and begin taking a more holistic role the content they are creating. We’re seeing more interdisciplinary writers — SEO Copywriters, UX Copywriters — and that is encouraging. Glad you enjoyed!

  • Hilary Marsh

    Hi Devin, I’d like to echo what Kristina said — in my experience, it’s really the ownership issues that provoke feelings inside organizations. As @ftrain said at Confab’s closing keynote, “every pixel has an owner.” Oy, is that ever true!!

    Empathy and respect are the best ways I’ve seen to transform a spirit and culture of ownership into one of collaboration and trust — there, you have more feelings! When you empower people to see the benefit of working in a new way, as well as get buy-in from their leaders, it’s easier to make change happen inside an organization. Data is a key way to do that — success metrics that show the positive results from better-quality, on-brand content, and from smarter promotions and cross-linking, for example.

    “Data empowers empathy” is my takeaway from your piece. Thank you!

    • Devin Asaro

      I wrote a response to this yesterday and apparently never hit enter…yikes. But I totally agree with your distillation of this piece. This was one of those lucky writing processes where I learned so much by writing down my thoughts, and wound up with a completely different argument than I intended to make. But yeah, empathy arrived at through data is at least empathy that is pointing in an informed direction.

      But data is a great tool for communication, as well. Hurt feelings are commonplace in any discipline. But content strategy is difficult because its entire foundation can seem to be based on value judgments — particularly in the auditing stage. I’ve found that numerical data (even if that is a subjective 1-5 rating in the “readability” column) can help the owners of the content distance themselves from feelings of judgment. Numerical data tends to feel objective even when it isn’t, which makes it a great buffer for communicating sensitive ideas.

      Thanks for the comment, Hilary. Looking forward to continued discussion on this and other CS topics in the future :)

  • Pingback: The resurgence of empathy | Awfully Curious

  • http://delight.us/ Katie Del Angel

    Devin — great piece!! (Also thanks for the pingback :) ) Very thoughtful, and I appreciate the quick hacks!

    Balancing qualitative insight with data is something ISITE is always talking about & teaching clients, but it’s often something I take for granted with our own content and audience. I couldn’t agree more about Jonathon’s session — and Mike’s! — both were true “Aha!” moments for me. Mike said something that stood out, along the lines of “The more we think about content from just one angle, the worse off we are”, and I think that’s basically what you elaborated really well here.

    Also as a sidebar, the beginning of your post made me think of that *ridiculous* HBJ article about working with “The Creatives”…particularly about being too close to our work. I think you hit the nail on the head though — so long as what we are doing is important (and it all, presumably, is) there will be ego involved. It all involves some special touch, some bit of “art” and “science”, whether we’re talking about “creatives”, devs, or content strategists. We may not speak the same language all the time or have the same perspective, but our analytics are the key to translating across those borders.

    • Devin Asaro

      Katie, thanks for the comment! I just saw this now. I’m not sure what article, or even what publication, you’re referring to. “HBJ Creatives” proved to be a fruitless Google search. Would you happen to have a link?

      I certainly agree with everything you mentioned above, except for the idea of analytics being the key to translating across borders. Analytics are only half the story, because they tell us about the present state of things. My argument (and maybe I didn’t make it very clear) was for the further adoption of market research — which communicates to us not only what is but what could potentially be.

      I worry that in the minds of most marketers, the need for traditional market research has been obviated by advancements in analytics. Much of the work that Mike, Norris and I are doing is centered around bridging that gap between analytics and market research to create a system of measuring digital strategies wherein (to borrow a phrase) the “science” can justify the “art.” We believe that content strategy is the discipline where this goal is most likely to be accomplished.

      • http://delight.us/ Katie Del Angel

        Devin — good distinction. And a great point. Thanks for elaborating!

        “HBJ”…meant to write “HBR”! :) There was a pretty hotly debated piece a few months back on working with “Creatives” that pretty much everyone had something to say about. It was originally called “Seven Rules for Managing Creative People”, then they updated the title to this not-much-improved version — enjoy :) : http://blogs.hbr.org/cs/2013/04/seven_rules_for_managing_creat.html

  • Pingback: What is Content Strategy & How to Make it Work for your Business

  • Pingback: Forward Thinking, Vol. 130 | Web EnK

  • Pingback: Shakespearean Content Strategy | iAcquire Blog

  • Pingback: (Not Provided) Sets You Free » iAcquire