Marketing Interactions

B2B Marketers Need to Understand Technology

I attended a webinar this morning, What Marketers Need To Know To Achieve Content Marketing Success, with Robert Rose and Steve Walker. It was a good session focused on the technology needed to empower content marketing. You should go listen to it.

At the end of the session, this question was asked:

If I'm mostly focused on content writing, why do I need to know about technology?

If I'd been sipping my coffee at that moment, I've no doubt that it would have hit my screen.

Robert answered the question with the notion of awareness. He used a car analogy; Although he doesn't know enough about cars to change the oil in his own vehicle, he does understand the landscape and the difference between a VW and a BMW.

I agree that a general awareness of the technology landscape is definitely something all marketers should have, but I'd push it a bit farther than this.

Functional Knowledge

Marketers need to understand how specific technology works, its purpose and ultimate objective. Why is it in use? How does it fit into the overall marketing plan? What will the marketing team achieve by using it? And, if applicable, what should content used in the technology accomplish? What are the options?

An easy example - email vs. PPC. Arguably both need content, but the content that's effective will be different. The parameters are different. The expectation of the people who experience it will be different. The functionality for each works differently. Best outcomes will be achieved differently.

Presentation

Related to the above points, how content renders in different technology platforms varies based on channel. Easy example is mobile vs. PC based on screen size.

It's always important to realize that the way content looks in a Word doc is not the way it will look on a website or blog - or anywhere else for that matter. It won't look the same based on production format, either. How does the text wrap? Are there orphaned words? Is the main point lost in a paragraph that runs too long given less width on the web page template than in the Word doc? Is the scrolling required to read the piece too much for the attention span you're able to capture from an audience?

Experience

The points above all roll up into the experience for your audience. What I find interesting is that when I ask marketers how many of them have experienced their content marketing just as their audience will, most haven't. They've only seen the word docs or the preview before publish or the after-the-fact metrics. This is crazy.

Given that most marketing today is digitally executed, marketers need to be present from the outside, as well as the inside. I can't figure out how they hope to improve engagement if they don't have the same experience as their target audiences. How would you know what to change or if you should change anything?

Easy example here is your Twitter profile. How many of us use an app to manage our Twitter streams? Probably most of us. When's the last time you looked at your timeline? Is it interesting? Or is it a repetitious list of title + link posts to your own stuff repeated over and over every few hours?

On your blog, do you hyperlink to product pages every chance you get? When you're constructing the post in a Word doc, it may feel appropriate, but when you review the last five blog posts and see the same links trying to push product information on your audience, your perspective may change.

Analytics that Lead to Insights

While analytics applications don't present content, they report on its use. If you don't understand what to look for or how to interpret the success or failure of your content, how will you continue to improve? How will you know that what you're writing is doing its job?

Extracting numbers is one thing. Interpreting them is quite another. Marketers need to know how to do both. And I'm not just talking about clicks and views. What can you learn about your prospects and customers? What interests is their behavior validating? How is this interest helping them make progress toward sales conversations? What copy is Sales using to further the conversation? What combination of the content you created is most successfully contributing to customer acquisition and revenue growth?

Technology is the Backbone

Steve made the point that CRM, the website, or web content management platforms, marketing automation and eCommerce platforms make up the core for marketing technology. This graphic of nearly 1,000 marketing technologies produced by Scott Brinker was used by both Robert and Steve. It's enough to make your eyes roll back.

But the point is that if you don't have a working understanding of the technology, what it's meant to accomplish and how your audience experiences what you put into it, then using the tools to build engagement that results in profitable customer relationships is going to be a tough road to travel.

I'd also argue that you need to understand the integration of point solutions into the core stack. What they enable, why you're using them and what they contribute to the overall customer and prospect experience.

And lets not put all the strain on marketers about understanding the technololgy. Let's also place it on the IT team. It's just as important that they understand what you're trying to accomplish in order to get the technology working well in support of those goals.

As a final point in this post - as channel evolution pushes marketers closer to real-time execution, I'd argue that they're going to need to be able to evolve understanding their technology into using at least some of it competently. Have you thought about what will change when waiting in the queue is no longer good enough?

Better get started now...

 

Is Your B2B Content Just a Pit Stop?

B2B marketers have taken up the challenge to create great content. They're investing time, effort and money into content marketing. People are reading their content. But, effectiveness remains elusive.

Only 9% strongly agree with the statement: "I know our digital marketing is working."

That's only 92 of over 1,000 marketers. Yet, 93% of B2B marketers use content marketing.  Does this scare you? It should.

What's the problem?

Well, it would be easy to say that there's a lack of strategy,but let's narrow it down to something you can do right now that will help to improve your efforts. One of the biggest failings I see is a lack of orchestration for momentum.

You can write the best content in the world, but without a plan, it's only a pit stop for busy prospects who may read it but then quickly move on. Content must build interest that translates into intent.

In other words, your content must do more than appeal to buyers. I read a ton of content every day. Some of it is a waste of time, some of it is interesting, but very rarely does any of it make me want more. And, if it does, quite often getting more related content isn't easy to do.

If you want to get past your content being just a pit stop for buyers, here are a few things to think about:

Take a Serial Approach

Serial publishing is nothing new. In fact, Charles Dickens' The Pickwick Papers was serialized in 1836. The reason I bring this up is that short-form content is in demand. For B2B marketers with a complex solution, it's impossible to share all the expertise and guidance needed in short form. But unfolding the story a bit at a time can work very well, especially if you have a very long sales cycle and a number of people who must become engaged to reach consensus before a decision can be made.

Tell Your Audience What to Do Next

One of the things that drives me a bit crazy is when good content is produced without connecting to what comes before or after. It just sits there like an island. And it doesn't count if you have "sign up for a demo" or "contact a sales rep" as the only options for the audience. Marketers need to embrace a guidance approach. Prospects are busy. They aren't going to hunt or search for related content. It's up to you to tell them what to do next. Those who are interested will take action. Reading more than one piece of content on a topic should increment lead score and even trigger more to test the level of that interest.

But we tend to leave our prospects hanging because we don't think about "If they're interested in this subject, what else do they need to know?" We don't create content with follow-ons. Marketers still tend to create content as one-off ideas. This is a missed opportunity.

Provide Cross-Persona Perspectives

In B2B buying there are multiple people with a stake in the decision. Yet, I very rarely see content designed for, say, a Director of IT, that includes an offer of content that speaks to the VP of IT Operations as a "sharing" opportunity. Take a look at all the personas on your buying committee and figure out how to help get your ideas shared among them. This is really helpful in situations where you have problems reaching a persona online, such as those farther up the ranks who may not spend the amount of time on social media as their subordinates do, for example.

Have you thought about how you'll get them involved? Or are you using "hope" as a strategy and just publishing that content online into an audience void?

Go Deeper

Marketers are often told to go create awesome, helpful content. But, what does this mean? If we're going to create content that drives business, we need to speak to what our prospects must have, not to what they merely need.

While "grow your revenues" or "cut costs" are always objectives, the phrases don't mean anything. Take a look at your persona and see what it means in the context of his or her roles and responsibilities.

• A product manager who can get her product to market three months faster than they do now to gain first-mover advantage that could result in larger market share will pay attention to how that can be made to happen.
• A service desk manager who can equip his team with the tools to close out service tickets 20% faster at higher first-response resolution rates while working to reach higher levels of ITSM maturity will want to know how to make that happen.
• An oil field asset manager who can increase proven reserves with a tool that gives his geophysicists greater visibility to the subsurface will have visions of career advancement.
• A start-up CEO who needs to focus all his team's energy on developing enhancements for his SaaS application and onboarding customers who learns that managed services from a cloud provider can relieve the stress and cost of hiring an in-house IT staff while bringing additional expertise he could not afford otherwise.

You get the idea. Specificity wins hands down against ambiguity. The deeper you can get, the more closely your content matches the context for your prospect's situation and objectives, the more interest your content will generate.

You've got to move them beyond the "So what?" to "That was interesting" to "Tell me more!"

Easy Isn't Good Enough

Marketers must stop looking at isolated clicks and views for one content asset as the most important KPI for marketing programs. Our content must do more than appeal to buyers one time, it must spur them to action. While it's great to know that a specific content asset attracted an audience, if that's all it does, then it's not doing enough.

One view doesn't make an MQL. Three or four random views of content on assorted topics will also not produce a prospect intent on buyng.

Business buyers buy to solve a problem that has the potential to cause them to fail at something they're trying to achieve. So what is your content designed to do?

How are you orchestrating progression for your content marketing programs?

Is Your B2B Content Stuck in Purgatory?

One of the challenges I've had a number of conversations about recently has been the ability of B2B content to attract the right audience. Much of the content created by B2B companies gets a limited amount of pageviews, social shares or direct passalong.

There can be many reasons for this, but for the purpose of this post, we'll assume that your content meets the standards for "amazing." We're going to talk about distribution.

One of the things I've often ranted about is the lack of content strategy. An important part of content strategy is distribution. So hopefully, this post will help start a trend for more B2B marketers to turn to strategy before they publish.

While B2B marketers have begun to embrace different content formats and modes of publishing, including articles, blog posts, SlideShare, videos, and more, their publishing practices are often focused on getting it live on the website, blog or wherever the launch point is for the asset.

While they may post a few times on social media, linking back to the content, usually this involves the title and a link. Maybe they send out an email blast to their database. After a few days they move on to the next publishing project.

This lackluster attention to distribution results in a lack of discovery and attention. Sometimes it almost feels as if marketers are checking the box off the list and just moving on to the next item.

What I'm sensing is a lack of enthusiasm.

As everything else related to content marketing requires, distribution takes a concerted effort. It takes creativity and thought and it takes a clear understanding of the audience you're trying to engage, where they hang out, how they prefer to access content and what formats are more engaging to them in which circumstances.

Without this kind of attention, your content will sit in purgatory. It will remain in limbo - neither loved nor hated. Just so-so content doomed to be unappreciated. And that's a shame.

A few things to think about:

• Content marketing is never once and done. Especially in a fast-paced environment, such as Twitter, where the life of a Tweet is said to be something like 20 minutes. Do you think your entire audience is watching the stream at the time you post? Not likely.
• Title and Link are okay once, but self-serving laziness after that. What are the key points the content makes? Use those. Is there a catchy phrase or a proof point that's compelling? Use them. If your title isn't drawing attention, can you change it to something that will?
• When you post on Facebook are you taking the lazy way out and letting the link pull the blurb and picture without adding any commentary? Is what gets pulled compelling?
• Have you thought about what people on different platforms may be looking for and adjusted the way you post to meet those expectations? All social platforms do not deserve the same treatment.
• Have you reviewed your other content to find relevant opportunities to link to this new content? Creating additional pathways is always a good idea as long as they're relevant and make sense.
• So you emailed it once. Why not take a new approach in the subject line and copy and send another email in a week to everyone who didn't respond to the first send?
• Can you submit the content to related industry sites or portals or blogs that cover the subject matter?
• In what other formats could you present the content in addition to it's original form? Does this give you new opportunities for distribution?
• Is there a discussion on LinkedIn where the content is relevant? Can you add to the conversation and then share the link?
• Can you start a conversation in a group on LinkedIn that will engage with the topic? I don't mean clicking on "start a new discussion" and just posting a link to the content. Set up the discussion with a premise and ask a pointed question or make a statement that will encourage people to get in the conversation. It's not as much about views as it is about initiating dialogue.

These ideas can help, but what you really want to base a distribution plan on are the goals for this content. You do have goals, right?

• Do you want to engage new audiences?
• Do you want people to engage with that content and then demonstrate their level of interest by clicking on a "see also" link to a related piece? Or something else.
• Brand awareness? Although this is often a pretty wimpy catch-all on its own.
• Lead generation?
• Customer engagement and retention?

There are many options. Just make sure the goals aren't conflicting. One content asset cannot do everything. If it's trying to, it will fail.

Which persona is the content designed to engage? Where do those people hand out? Have you factored that into your distribution planning?

This post only scratches the surface. However, by determining the goals for your content, you will be able to design a distribution plan that goes much farther than initial publishing. Doing this well takes work. If you want content marketing to work, you need to make sure that your content is given the best chance for being discovered by the people it was designed to engage.

Distribution counters the irrational idea that "if you build it they will come." It takes more than that to get your content out of purgatory.

Is Your B2B Content Tipping the Effort Scale?

I do a lot of work for technology companies. One of the challenges with marketing technology is simplifying complex systems into understandable business enhancers that B2B buyers must have to reach their goals.

I just reviewed a paper written for a technical audience. You know it's tough when you have to keep backing up to re-read paragraphs because your mind wanders or because comprehension is elusive. And I read a ton of tech stuff - given my projects - so I should be a slam-dunk reader.

In the Age of Impatience and short attention spans, we've got to make even technical content fun to read. I don't mean rolling laughter or big entertainment - I mean easy to understand so that your ideas become compelling enough to diminish the urge to click on to somewhere else.

Here are a few of the biggest effort triggers that cause your buyers to flee from your content due to the perception of effort:

• Run-on sentences. Fifty word sentences are not normal. They're hard to focus on all the way through. That's what was causing me to back up when I was reading the paper I mentioned above.
• Alien grade-level competency. I tend to run the content I develop through the Flesh-Kincaid readability tool in Word. In case you're wondering - this blog post clocks in at 8.1 grade level to this point. The white paper I mentioned above came in at 24.1 grade level when I checked it. Can you imagine the difference in effort?
• Big-word syndrome. A big word here and there can add interest when used well. Stringing them together in those run-on sentences and tossing in a bit of jargon to top it off can create twitchy fingers on the back button. We may think it sounds cool to use them, but it's like an assault on comprehension. And, as soon as you lose the thread of what the content is about, your mind wanders...and so will your buyers.
• Abrupt transitions - no context. One paragraph we're cruising along and then we come to a new header and we're off in a new direction, unrelated to the path we were following. A header is not an excuse for a 180 shift. A header is a marker along the path. If you remove the text and string headers together, they should provide a synopsis of your content.
• Abrupt transitions - from compelling idea to forced sales pitch. One of the things that bother me the most is when I'm reading about a compelling take on something and then I'm confronted by the equivalent of a solution brief for the last few pages of the paper. Or a bunch of hyperlinks to product pages embedded within the part masquerading as thought leadership. There's a time and place for everything - forcing the issue is not working in your favor.

There are others I can list, but these are the worst of the bunch. Of course if I don't say it, someone will comment - spelling and grammar should be a no brainer.

I didn't bring all this up to leave you hanging. Here are some simple ways to test your content before you set it loose on the rest of us:

• Read it backwards. Seriously, this works. Why? Because when you read forward your mind has expectations and will try to compensate for words that don't work well with what it expects to see. If you've ever published something you know you proofread to death and discovered a typo after the fact, this is likely what happened. Start at the end and read it backwards. This will help you catch words that have different versions based on context (their, there, they're, for example)
• Read it out loud. This is great for the run-on sentences. Have you ever noticed that you read about the same way you speak? You'll often adjust your breathing when you're reading as if pausing to take a breath when speaking. If you have to gulp for air when reading your content aloud, I'll bet you your sentence is over 50 words.
• Have someone else read it. And then take it away from them and ask them to tell you what it's about. Can they identify the key points you wanted your audience to take away? What did they like about it and what did they not like so much? You'd be amazed how people interpret content. Their reaction may be totally different than what you expected to hear.

About that last one - don't take it personally. If people are afraid to tell you what they really think, they won't. And then you'll end up publishing stuff no one wants to read.

It's the beginning of 2014. I invite you all to take the pledge to make sure your content is not tipping the effort scale in the wrong direction. Writing to be easily understood is difficult. It takes thought and practice.

It's a good place to start in the New Year.

In case you're wondering - the overall Flesh-Kincaid grade level for this post is 6.2 with a reading ease of 73%. Only 3% of the sentences are passive. That's another tip for your content. Passive sentences allow the mind to wander. They're boring.

 

Viral is Not the Game Point in Complex B2B Sales

I received an email from Christopher Engman, CEO of Vendemore, asking me what I thought of the Van Damme Volvo video that went viral to the tune of 57M views and counting for Volvo Trucks.

It's a great stunt, dubbed The Epic Split

Volvo created the video to showcase its new precision steering feature on the big rigs.

It's a really good piece. But all anyone can talk about is the number of views and the parodies being made in imitation.

What do I think about it? Well, that depends on a couple of things I don't have the answers to:

• Did it put any leads in the pipeline?
• Did it even get to the right audience?

Depending on the goals that Volvo had for the video, if it was about any kind of awareness and traffic, then yes, it did beyond great. But B2B marketing can't afford to be focused on random volume. B2B marketing needs to be targeted and based on driving some type of intentional behavior from prospects. Everything else is a bonus.

I think it's a great way to catch attention. But there needs to be more. Once they've gotten their target market's attention, what will Volvo do with it?

I might have thought about how I could feature it on a web page that also showcased more information about the precision steering and how businesses are finding true value from having that feature in their fleets. At the very least, a call to action at the end of the video leading to more information would be vital for assessing how well they reached their target audience or if it was just a great stunt.

I mean, it's not often that fleet drivers will be helping some insane person do the splits, right? Wouldn't that just make a great impression on the Health and Safety folks?

So Volvo's truck division got its name out there, but what else did this very costly campaign deliver?

Viral is great, but marketers need to think about how it will connect the dots between getting random attention and getting attention of their target audiences - and most importantly - being able to redirect them to more vital information that will improve the relationships they're trying to build.

As marketers, we love the attention that going viral can bring. Most of us are more creative than scientific and we appreciate others recognizing what we do. But in B2B complex sales, the end goal can't be going viral. It does, however, make a great starting point if you're able to make sure your target audience is among the millions viewing it - and taking the next steps you incorporate to keep the story rolling.

*As a disclaimer, I don't know the inside scoop on Volvo's intentions, I'm speculating. But I hear a lot of B2B marketers talking about "going viral" and they need to think about what comes after that...

What do you think?

 

 

B2B Content Marketing is About More Than Publishing

Think like a publisher! That's been the rallying cry for content marketing for the last few years. But, I'd like to submit that content marketing takes a whole lot more than publishing — especially for B2B companies with complex sales.

I've been getting a lot of calls lately from B2B marketers who are saying:

"We bought into the idea of content marketing. We've created great content. It's getting read. But it's not moving the needle."

Quite often, what I find is that they do have pretty good content, but it's based on random acts of publishing. This means, there's no apparent strategy behind it. Nothing to orchestrate buyer progression and next steps.

People may be reading it, but then they just move on. It hasn't impacted their perception of the topic enough to motivate action or sway opinion.

Why not? There are a number of reasons, but most often what I see is:

• Too much focus on the company's perspective rather than the buyer's
  Does your content show that you really understand what your buyers care about? Or have you made assumptions that leave your content short? Do your products sneak into your content? How about feeds and speeds? Do you use "we" and "our" more than "you" and "your"?


• No call to action
  What comes next after the content the buyer has just viewed? Do you tell them? They are not going to go looking for it, they'll just move on once they're done reading what's in front of them. People are often multi-tasking. You have to give them a reason to spend more of their attention with your content.


• Too much effort perceived to take the suggested action
  Does your form ask for the kitchen sink? Do you only offer a video link without a transcript for those who prefer to read? Or vice versa? Are you trying to send them to a different channel that they don't use or a place where they have to set up an account to gain access? Too much effort can manifest in many different ways.


• Gaps in the story - aka leaps of faith
  When I ask marketers when was the last time they experienced their content as if they were their buyers, most of them can't say they have. They often think they've covered all the bases, but they are stuck with the curse of knowledge.
  
  Marketers know the whole story. They think it's reflected in their content. But, often it is not. And, because they don't have a strategy, they haven't orchestrated the story, so they may be asking their buyers to leap from one concept to the next without any foundation. This is a problem that costs the company in credibility and in progressive engagement with buyers. Goes to the effort thing, as well.


• Not taking ownership of expertise
  A lot of content doesn't take a stand because it's trying to make everyone happy. But that's not the point. Sharing expertise must be done with authority and confident ideas that help people visualize what your knowledge will bring to the table that they can't get elsewhere. Show them you mean what you say and feel strongly about it. Tell them why. Make your case.


• Staying too high level
  Phrases like "grow revenues" or "cut costs" can mean anything. Content that motivates action must do a deep dive into the specifics applicable to the audience it's intended to sway. But quite often it just does a white wash across the benefits that does nothing to differentiate your company or your expertise.


• Not targeted to a specific audience
  This is why a lot of content stays high level. Marketers don't know their audience well enough to get into the nitty gritty. But, if you don't get to know them, they won't go on the journey with you. They'll go find someone who delivers more value that helps them visualize their problem being solved.

It's great to publish content. We need to do this to attract and engage our buyers. But an editorial calendar with a list of random topics you think are interesting won't cut the mustard. Quarterly themes won't do it either. All the switching will just alienate people who were finally getting invested in the story you were telling last quarter.

Random acts of publishing won't get the level of engagement and intention needed to move the needle because you won't be able to sustain engagement long enough to help buyers learn what they need to know to move to a conversation.

What you need is a content strategy. A method for the madness that is solving complex problems. A plan for strategic storytelling across channels. And, as you can see, there's much more to content marketing than publishing.

What else should be on this list?

 

Are B2B Marketing Priorities Out of Whack?

A few months prior to Content Marketing World, I ran an online survey to help direct the session I created on Customer Retention. I'm compiling an eBook with insights, but in the meantime, I wanted to discuss B2B marketing priorities.

Below is a summary of how marketers ranked 11 different priorities:

As you can see, I've highlighted three of them. These three, taken together, will actually help marketers achieve all the other priorities on the list - but not like this.

Let's take a look at why.

Content Strategy

Thankfully, content strategy ranked fourth. At least I hope this is evidence that marketers see that content marketing and achieving performance outcomes requires more than just publishing. It requires publishing with intent.

Content strategy is about creating consistent, engaging experiences that help prospects and customers learn what they need to know to take steps to doing (more) business with your company. Publishing without a plan for how that progression will occur will not make this happen.

Content strategy must address marketing goals across all the channels in play, must focus on increasing attention and interest and, most importantly, must motivate progressive action by your intended audience. This means it also must include the elements of customer engagement and personalization to be most effective.

Customer Engagement

I found it disconcerting that customer engagement was #6. In fact, I'm not quite sure that marketers can achieve lead gen, brand awareness, customer retention or lead nurturing without it. Not to mention any of the other priorities on this list.

Engagement is a word that has been bandied around to the point of meaningless drivel. But the concept of gaining attention and increasing interactions with prospects and customers is still critical. For without it, you have the tree falling in the vacant forest syndrome. And that doesn't help marketers to accomplish anything.

Although arguably a component of content strategy, marketers need to spend more time determining what they want each interaction to achieve with their prospects and customers. What is the goal of each content asset and what will it guide them to do next? What outcome will help to move the needle? Of course, all things considered, it's pretty hard - nigh impossible - to engage anyone effectively without personalization, let alone your target markets.

Personalization

Personalization coming in at #8 makes me sad. Before I start any project with a client, the first thing we must do is get to know our audiences (buyers, influencers, champions, end users, detractors). What objectives do they have? What do they care about? What gets in the way of them achieving their goals and responsibilities?

For marketers who still believe that personalization is about Dear <firstname> in an email - get over it! Personalization is about relevance. It's about providing value and I'm unclear how any marketer can do this without knowing their audience (buyers) and marketplace intimately.

Content strategy based on personalization is what results in customer engagement that drives business relationships. The three go together hand-in-glove.

Now, I know that marketers are reacting to what they get graded on - lead gen, brand awareness and customer retention, for example. But without putting the fundamentals ahead of the outcomes, how will we reach our true potential of achieving them?

What do you think? Are marketing priorities out of whack?

4 Content Marketing Conundrums

I see a lot of stuff said about content that makes me wonder. There's so much noise about content marketing that it's hard to know what to believe. Some of it looks good on the surface, but when you start to dig in it doesn't. Some of it holds up. Do marketers take the time to find out which is which, or do we just go with what sounds best to us?

So, because it's Saturday and I'm stumped on a website copy project and need to clear my head, I thought I'd tackle a few things I've seen lately and see what you think.

Is Longer-Form Content Losing Ground?

For the last few years, I've been hearing a lot about how longer-form marketing content is dead. That everyone wants to read short blog posts, Tweets, scannable lists, look at pretty inforgraphics, etc. To a degree, I can see the logic. We're all busy. It's a snack-and-go world.

Or is it?

I stumbled across 36 Useful Internet Marketing Statistics, written by Mauro D'Andrea, and found these:

(Source: QuickSprout)

AND

(Source: QuickSprout)

So why is this?

• Is it because it takes more depth to write something truly helpful and instructive about solving a problem someone is trying to deal with?
• Is it because - instead of a snack - people are sometimes looking for a meal?
• Is it because people assume that since it's long that it has good stuff that may be useful - and make them look smart for sharing it? (But they don't really read it?)
• Is it because there are more opportunities to hit on the keyword phrase without the appearance of "stuffing" so the search bots like it better?

I use a lot of 1,000 word articles in the marketing programs I do with clients. They're selling meaty solutions that solve complex problems so it takes some weight in information and expertise to help prospects with serious consideration. But at 1,000 words, the content is still pretty easily digested. The programs have solid traction.

One of my client's salespeople finally secured a meeting with a prospect that he'd been after for a long time. When he got to the meeting, the prospect pulled out a copy of an article from our nurturing campaign and said - I agree with the way you're company is approaching this issue - what would it look for my company if we did this? The deal is in the works. And it's in the 7-figure range.

So, is longer-form content losing steam? I say no.

Only 20% Counts

I read somewhere recently that, on average, only 20% of the text on a web page gets read. Wish I could remember where. If you know, tell me in the comments. But, if it's true, how do you measure which 20%?

Some assumptions were made about the first 20% of the text from top down as that which would be read. If true, then I'd say the writing needs some work.

I'd guess that the first few sentences and then the headers and any bullets are skimmed. Maybe whatever has emphasis, such as bold or italics can also be thrown in. Then I think people decide if they want to read the whole thing.

If you had to consider how to optimize 20% of an article, how would you do it?

Producing More, More, and More Content

This is another hot button I'm hearing a lot about. Content marketers are trying to keep up with the hamster wheel of content production based on posting schedules and channel coverage. In fact, producing more content has overtaken the challenge of producing engaging content in the latest report (slide 17) from Content Marketing Institute.

But I'm also getting calls from marketers who say "We believe in content marketing. We produce great content. Buyers like it. But it's not impacting the pipeline"

Yep. That's because content for content's sake isn't going to do that. Content marketing isn't about just pushing out more content, it's about connecting the dots and telling the story that moves buyers from status quo to change.

I spoke to a marketer the other day who showed me a website redesign plan and asked my opinion. After looking at the site plan, my first question was to ask how he planned to produce all the content required on a schedule that would keep it fresh and motivate buying? We'll be working on a new strategy that gets the job done and doesn't kill his team and drain his resources. 

As a selfish plug - I'm presenting a webinar about Putting Your Content to Work next week. I'd love to "see" you there. If you'd like to produce less content and get better demand generation results, you'll find some helpful ideas.

Infographic Madness

This may be due to my age and eyesight, but most infographics make me a bit frustrated. Who decided that it was a smart idea to cram a bunch of really tiny text onto a scrolling horizontal series of graphics with big numbers?

This aside, even when I can blow them up big enough to read, many of them don't tell a story or carry through on a reader value proposition. #7 on the 36 Internet Statistics post is:

Publishers who use infographics grow in traffic an average of 12% more than those that don’t (Source: NeoMam Studios)

But I wonder if the traffic is bounce traffic or serves to build real engagement? If people only come for the infographic eye candy, is it worth the effort and resources to produce them? And, how many infographics are part of an integrated content program? I don't see many that are. Do you?

I'd love some examples if you've got some to share. And it needs to be more than "we embedded it on our blog and pinned it on Pinterest and Tweeted about it."

The above are only a few conundrums about content marketing. What else are you seeing that confounds you about content marketing?

Change and the Content Marketing Continuum

Now that we're a few months into the new year, it seems appropriate to take a stand about the payoffs of sticking with solid content marketing strategies. The beginning of the year is when a lot of B2B companies look at what they want to accomplish this year as a clean slate. Like they're starting from scratch. Kind of an "out with the old, in with the new" type of mindset.

A few drivers for this reset come to mind, and are not uncommon:

• Executives come up with new "themes" they want to see tackled.
• Company objectives may take a turn given market fluctuations or board consensus, or the CEO's new hyper interest.
• A new channel looks like a big opportunity for extending reach. Everyone's starting to jump on board and you don't want to be left behind. But that means something will have to go to make room/budget for it.
• Regulations shift, opening up a new market.
• Quotas go up.
• A new product is being introduced.
• And everyone's favorite: Budgets get slashed!

I could go on, but you know what I'm talking about. Change is normal for businesses — and not just at the beginning of the year. But, unless your B2B content marketing strategy and programs were crap last year, taking a clean slate approach is not the best response.

While you weren't looking, your buyers began expecting their experience with your brand's story to be a continuum. Not a jerky, stop and start, switch horses in mid-stride, confusing one.

This means your content marketing strategy needs to follow suit. If it's been built around the distinct value your company provides to the specific markets you serve, then it's primed to scale, shift and morph without need to start over. Room for adjustments is built in.

Before you start tossing stuff out and bringing in new stuff, determine why you're making those choices. Just because your company is changing a few things doesn't mean your buyers needs, preferences and problems have changed. If you start making shifts to your content marketing strategy without considering the difference, you could actually be tossing away more than one marketing approach vs. another.

Ask the following questions based on the internal change you're reacting to:

• Has something about your persona (buyers, customers) changed?
• Has the problem your persona is trying to solve changed?
• Has the way the industry is approaching that problem changed?

If the answer to any of those is "yes" - now you have some work to do to realign the foundation of your strategy with buyers. If the answer is "no" (which will be true in relation to most internal corporate changes) then the next step is to consider the change relative to your buyers and customers (markets).

• What parts of the change will be visible to your markets and how is it relevant to them?
• Does this change invalidate anything we've said/done in the past that would create a fragmented experience for our markets? How can we adjust for this?
• In order to achieve this new objective, what really needs to change? Why? This could include things such as process, editorial calendars, talent, timing, etc.
• Given our current marketing strategy, how can the change be holistically incorporated? Where does it fit the most seamlessly with what we're already doing?
• How will we measure, validate and report on the impact from the change?

Content marketing strategies must be designed as a continuous process that live and breathe the brand story. As such, they can be shifted, tweaked and refined based on shifts to corporate objectives. B2B marketers must stop thinking about "campaigns" in response to change. Instead, we need to think about how the change shifts the story in relation to what's most relevant to our markets.

Outside - in. Not inside - out.

Continuous and consistent. Not one-off campaigns.

 

 

Content Marketing Should Never Be Advertising

The rise of the term Native Advertising seems to be causing quite a stir. This may very well be in creating a label that's inherently in conflict with itself. The main problem is with the word "Advertising." However, the concept of "Native" is headed in the right direction in regards to addressing context for audiences, rather than the unwanted interruption of ads.

Before anyone gets cranked up, let me explain a few things. I've been thinking about this for awhile. There are all kinds of reactions to the term Native Advertising, but I find most of them to be surface. We need to look deeper to how the model could work - without deception or trickery. Or any illusory benefits will fade fast. And marketers who don't consider this will find themselves on the short end of the stick. 

I haven't known exactly what I wanted to say about this, but I started thinking about it again when Scott Albro sent a Tweet to me, Joe Chernov and Jon Miller a few days ago.

What do content marketers think of this? Ad War: the Perils of Sponsored Content theatlantic.com/business/archi… @jonmiller @jchernov @ardath421

Joe responded with:

@scottalbro I feel very strongly that any attempt to deceive a reader is what Fred Reichheld would call "bad revenue" @jonmiller @ardath421

That really got me thinking. The content in the BuzzFeed example is clearly marked as provided by a company, it's shading is different and it's also noted that the item is from a "featured partner." Seems pretty straightforward to me that it's brand produced.

Is this really deceptive?

We've had Advertorials for years. Although, admittedly, the value of the content was usually more promotional than helpful. We now have promoted Tweets, Facebook and LinkedIn ads and other forms of paid placement or sponsored content that's being inserted into real-time streams. [As a confession, I tend to ignore them as most aren't engaging, but appear to be more of a ploy for attention based on a false assumption.]

What about white paper syndication where the paper is promoted in a newsletter but the company sponsoring/providing the white paper isn't identified until after you've submitted information and downloaded it? I'd label this last practice as more deceptive. I see this method all the time.

Yet, no one is screaming about it.

Is it because it's email and not online? However it's done, syndication companies have made a nice living by taking fees in exchange for promoting vendor content to their audiences. Some more deceptively than others, of course.

Where's the line?

Mark Schaefer recently wrote a post, What comes after content marketing?, where he shared 4 ideas about how to become the signal rather than the noise in the content dumping ground that marketing is relentlessly contributing to.

What prompted his post was a post written by Mitch Joel where Mitch stated, "It is my belief, that content is the new advertising. It is my belief that content is media for many brands." Mark's response of "ouch" was felt by me, too.

But I see his point. Marketing crap is polluting the very channels that give us the opportunity to connect with our prospects and customers. If we screw it up, then what? I don't think returning to smoke signals is an option.

In his post, Mitch also states that channels, "...have become a pumping ground for a marketing message. Very few of them are thinking about utilitarianism marketing and even fewer are thinking about the overall experience of the products and services (or, as the news item calls it, the "design"). Marketers create messaging around campaigns. Few marketers elevate their thinking to a macro brand play and how it engenders the overall economic value to the business strategy."

This, I agree with. And that brings me back to my assertion that an Advertising mindset is the problem. At least in B2B and in regards to the need for content to be a value add for the audience's experience - provide "utility" as Mitch (and Jay Baer) both identify as the key to effective marketing.

Paid placement is not going away. Not while there's a business model for it. Brands need exposure and publisher's sites can provide an audience that matches a vendor's target market.

But, what's important is the kind of content marketers provide within the context the site sets for the audience. This is why it's so important to know your audience, develop an in-depth strategy with a long-term vision (not a one-off campaign) and create truly helpful and memorable content.

One of the top goals for paid placement should be to convert it into earned media. But to do that, the content you create and syndicate had better be damn good! In the audience's eyes, not your company's.

Maybe we should call it Contextual Content Placement, instead of Native Advertising. Maybe it's also up to the publishers to hold their paid placement customers to a higher standard before granting access to their audience. After all, their audiences are their key asset to monetize. Respect for them should be top of the list.

It's time to raise the bar!

Most definitely vendors need to proactively hold themselves to a higher standard. But this can be difficult when marketers haven't yet developed the skills and strategies to do so effectively. Here's your checklist:

• One mention of your products or services and you're out
• One mention of anything remotely resembling a sales pitch and you're disqualified
• If you're content isn't deemed relevant for the audience, say goodbye.
• If the content doesn't drive the bigger business strategy driven by customer experience, go back to the drawing board

Finally, if you can't articulate how the content will provide recognizable value for the targeted audience you seek, start over. Your reputation and credibililty is at stake.