I had the privilege of leading the Professional Services Forum at Content Marketing World in which Michelle Ngome, Diversity Marketing Consultant at Line25 Marketing and founder of the African-American Marketing Association, was a participant. This is what she had to say about the experience:

I attended Content Marketing World and I sat in the professional services workshop led by Jonathan Kranz. And I must say I was completely blown away. It was one of those things that’s like, “This sounds like where I need to be,” but you don’t know what to expect, and then you just come out transformed. And that two, three hour workshop, my mind, personally and professionally, I was absolutely transformed. Look, I took so many notes. I left that day, transcribed my notes. I studied my notes.

I bought Writing Copy for Dummies by the man himself. And I began to study. I began to do my homework. And when I was ready, I rewrote my personal website, michellengome.com, and my business website, line25consulting.com. And once I cleaned up my website, this is the stuff that I learned in the workshop and I applied it. And now, both of my websites are ranking for inclusive marketing consultant. And more importantly, within 12 months, I was able to reach more than six figures in revenue, all because of the work I did by sitting in Jonathan’s workshop. So I want to encourage you, whether you want to bring him into your company for the content, the copywriting team, you have to do it.

I think the biggest takeaway with Jonathan is conveying the simplicity of language. And I know for myself, I was at that point where I was doing the work, I was getting the clients mainly because of discovery calls and from speaking, right? But putting that on my website, I wasn’t communicating right. It was too wordy. And with Jonathan’s guidance in the workshop, it allowed me to simplify the language and still make it very human. And now I get probably 60% of my business through organic traffic because I’m ranking, because of the clarity of my message on my website. And if it worked for me, I know it can work for you. So I strongly want to encourage you if you’re on the fence, Jonathan is the man you want to work with, to take your business to the next level.

Thank you so much, Michelle! You can see her video testimonial here.

I had expected to see a gradient of many shades; instead, there was a black-and-white difference between the losers and the winners. Basic ethics (and a desire not to alienate clients or potential clients) prevents me from citing specific examples. (That absence, by my own standards, prevents this post from being a champion.) I’m forced to summarize the distinctions, but even as abstractions, the following themes may shed some insight on what distinguishes great from grating content.

1. You gotta’ serve somebody – but not yourself.

The weakest pieces were clearly self-serving; I could practically hear product managers and PR people whispering in the writers’ ears as they wrote. Product features, “secret sauces” and obvious political agendas took precedence over audience relevance.

The best work glowed with a laser-like focus on audience concerns, needs, and desires. When I read the champion content, I felt convinced that the authors really knew and understood their audiences, so much so that they could pass as colleagues. They addressed their readers’ hopes and fears without condescension, and presented empathetic solutions to real challenges.

2. Take deep dives instead of throwing in kitchen sinks.

I applaud the ambition of much of the work that I saw. Production values ran high, and most of the content creators took on topics of organic interest to their audiences. The mediocre work, however, took on too much, spreading itself wide and thin: these pieces tended to say familiar things about familiar issues.

Champion content favored concentration, digging deeply to uncover fresh and unfamiliar insights or ideas. Here’s a fictitious example of different approaches: A Homeowner’s Guide to Lawn Care vs. 3 Things Massachusetts Gardeners Must Do Before Winter. The former is too broad to stand out; the latter promises something precise enough to attract urgent interest.

3. Inspired, not tired – champions take risks.

At times I could predict, with dismaying accuracy, the substance of a given piece before I even opened it. It was an awful amount of the same-old, same-old: the same-old tips, the same-old recipes, the same-old human interest tearjerkers – even the same-old pop culture references.

The champions all had something daring and unexpected about them: unusual inspirations, unconventional analogies, and surprising stories. Maybe this should be every creator’s rule of thumb: if an idea doesn’t make you at least a little nervous, it’s probably not worth pursuing. The best ideas inspire some fear: “Can we really get away with this?”

4. Execution goes beyond the basics.

Facts, figures, concrete examples – these are fundamental pillars for good content. But champions go above and beyond the call of duty.

In the best work, the production team used original photography, not royalty-free stock stuff. They commissioned professional illustrators to create graphs and other supporting visuals.

And the writing! My favorite pieces went far beyond the Dragnet “Just the facts, ma’am” style to employ fresh metaphors and apply a fine ear for rhythm and meter. The best writers were never breezy, but often funny and always good humored.

Forgive me for stating the obvious, but it needs to be said (or remembered): if you want to create champion work, you need to work with champion talent.

5. Big money doesn’t always win.

This was perhaps the most encouraging discovery of all: the quality of the work did not directly correspond to the size of the underlying budget. I saw plenty of big-brand work created by big agencies that had obviously been supported with a phalanx of dollar-and-resource firepower, yet still fizzled. On the other hand, I saw extraordinary work created on a shoestring.

What was the difference? Imagination. The mediocre work stuck to conventional paths. But great work blazed new trails. The creators showed a deep understanding of their audiences, and were willing to take inspiring leaps with their creations. The best content made me laugh out loud, want to try out a new idea, or nod my head in empathetic understanding.

Yes, production values matter. Having a core vision and capacity for dogged execution matters more.

Yet even also-rans have real value

Here’s the beautiful thing about content marketing: it’s not a winner-take-all competition. With perhaps one or two exceptions, all the work I reviewed probably made a positive contribution to their organizations’ ambitions.

As marketers, our goal is not to make the “best” content per se but to create relevant content that reinforces bonds and encourages trust. Sure, champions may be rare. But the only chumps are the marketers who don’t seize the opportunities content creation can open for them, and fail to enter the ring at all.

I must confess two things: 1) I’m one of the featured experts and 2) of the advice offered, I appreciate Tim’s the most; he believes we should “create super in-depth guides to gain online authority,” an approach I’ve been advocating for many these long years. He’s right: timid, me-too content won’t cut it. We need truly distinctive, relevant and deep content if we’re going to win converts. Just keep in mind that to get there, you’ll need:

• Real commitment from the top that supports deep content dives
• An appetite to invest in quality — like everything else in life, you get what you pay for
• A willingness to buck convention and take on contrary positions
• Open arms that welcome talent, intelligence and creativity

Want to learn more? You can reach Tim here, or me here.

Joe Pulizzi and Robert Rose, Killing Marketing, p. 133

“Content marketing” is no longer a new idea. Yet there’s still a great deal of confusion of what “content” is or is not.

Here’s the way I think about it: Just as business involves an exchange of something of value (a product or service) for your money, “content marketing” offers information/entertainment of value in exchange for your attention.

That’s precisely why content marketing is (largely) a contemporary phenomenon. When consumers are no longer confined to three broadcasting networks and one or two local papers, and they can use the Web to find just about anything they want, they control what they see or hear.

You want attention? You have to earn it. Content is what earns it.

That means that a lot of stuff that marketers pass off as content, such as marketing collateral or advertising “assets,” really isn’t.

What’s the difference? Traditional marketing stuff – like brochures, data sheets, and demos – describe value, value that you can obtain when you make a purchase.

Genuine content delivers value in itself. Think of that guide to seasonal planting…the benefits planning calculator…the ebook on assessing security risks. They hold your interest because they provide something you want, right here and now. No purchase necessary. All that’s required is….your attention.

(If you’re wondering why you would give away something of value for free, please read Killing Marketing and the stack of previous books Joe and Robert have written. Plus my blog.)

Apply the acid test to your content inventory. Does your stuff describe or deliver value? If it doesn’t honestly deliver, it’s not real content and it will not attract nor hold the attention you want. It may be time to transform.

This quote is the money-shot of Joe Pulizzi’s and Robert Rose’s Killing Marketing. If you don’t believe that audience is the fundamental asset – not employees, not products, not expertise, not some secret sauce – then the rest of their proposition won’t make sense.

But if, like me, you agree that audience is the one enduring asset, then you absolutely need to know two things:

1. Who is your audience?
2. How do you connect with them?

I acknowledge that as simple as these questions are, the answers can involve a complex of issues, challenges, talents, abilities, etc. But I just want to focus on one insight each.

To know your audience, understand their buying behaviors

I’m not talking about traditional psycho- and demographics. In fact, this kind of data may not only be unnecessary, but downright misleading. How do you really know that people clumped within a demographic actually buy in the same way, for the same reasons? Conversely, why should you believe that persons in distinct groups – say rural grandparents and urban street gangs – buy in significantly different ways? For all you know, they both might love to shop online for rainbow unicorn plush dolls. (Stranger things have happened.)

No. All you want to know, all you need to know, is how they buy. What motivates them to take action? Which outcomes do they expect as a consequence of making a purchase? What stands in the way of making a purchasing decision? What criteria do they use to compare competing options?

Simply put: If you’re going to build an audience, you better build a better understanding of who that audience is.

Use stories to connect your product to their concerns

Product descriptions won’t do it. Stats help, but won’t carry the day. Boasting certainly doesn’t work.

So what does? Stories.

Stories locate your product or service in the only dimension that matters to buyers: as the relief or means of resolution to some larger tension, be it a desire or fear. Here’s how, in three parts:

1. You have to articulate the audience’s desire, some good they’d like to achieve (like white teeth or increased profitability) or some evil they’d prefer to avoid, such as bad breath or excessive tax burdens.
2. Desire is the engine, but it can’t move a story (or an audience) on its own. To do that, every desire MUST be countered by a danger: some obstacle, problem or impediment that prevents the audience from realizing its desire. In other words, why hasn’t your audience been able to fulfill its desire already? What stands in the way? In fairy tales, it could be a dragon or troll. In the B2C world, it could be outdated fashions, poor nutrition, or limited automobile options. In the B2B context, it could be weak security, inadequate ventilation, widespread workplace ignorance, or overly complex chains of command.
3. When you put desire and danger together, you have drama – a felt tension that must be resolved to give your audience satisfaction. At this point, and only at this point, does it make sense to talk about your products or services – and in a very specific kind of way: as the “magic ring” or “magic sword” that overcomes the dangers and fulfills the desires. When you craft your story successfully, you make the necessary emotional connection to audiences that can move them into action.

Focus on the one asset that lasts: audience. Get to know who they are, and tell stories that connect them to you.

In Chapter 2, “Return on Audience,” in Killing Marketing, Joe Pulizzi and Robert Rose reflect on a seemingly odd case: a company that successfully grew by 650%, yet could not account for its marketing success through any of the traditional ROI metrics we usually apply to campaigns: click-rates, leads, conversions, etc.

The authors suggest that marketing is not, in fact, an “investment,” but a cost of doing business, like overhead and payroll. Measuring each campaign individually is like trying to determine the investment value of each gallon of gas you put in your car. It’s the wrong question. The right question, for your car and for your marketing, is this: in sum over X period of time, does the car/marketing get you where you want to go?

Joe and Robert address the dilemma this way:

“If marketing’s mandate is to maximize ROI, you have every incentive to never do anything new at all. [Italics my own.] Look at it this way. Let’s pretend your mandate is to maximize marketing’s ROI percentage. If I spend $200 in marketing to get $250 in revenue – then technically my ROI is 25 percent. But if I spend $0 and make $100 – my ROI is 100 percent (or really infinite). To maximize my marketing ROI percentage, it’s actually smarter for me to spend no money and hope for one sale than to spend more money and hope for many sales.”

They go on to suggest a better model, “return on audience,” that merits attention. In their words: “This is looking at marketing as a business model – a profitable investment that is meant to provide access, and accumulation of attention and loyalty from a true investment: an audience.”

In practical terms, this means:

• NOT paying excessive or undue attention to individual campaign metrics;
• Paying attention to the accumulated impact of multiple efforts over a more lengthy period of time.

I’m not a math guy. I’m not an expert on metrics. But I do understand this: I invest in a number of marketing tactics (writing, speaking, networking) that are a bitch to measure, but DO produce results over time.

How do I know? Because I ask prospects and customers how they found me. Not surprisingly, their path (or “buyer’s journey” if you will – I don’t like the term myself) is usually rather elliptical, and rarely involves direct shots from a tactic executed to a sale closed. I hear things like:

• “I didn’t attend (such-and-such) conference, but I found your name on the list of speakers…”
• “A colleague of mine shared an ebook you wrote a few years ago that I really liked…”
• “Your website popped-up in a search for ‘writing workshops’…”
• “I used to work for X, where you helped us draft our website…”
• “Someone on LinkedIn recommended your blog post on storytelling…”

Note that in each case, the prospect’s action was set in motion by something I had done, yet would have remained opaque to most or any means of campaign measurement.

In other words, no one has ever read Writing Copy for Dummies, then picked up the phone to give me new business, ever. But Writing Copy for Dummies opened up a world of speaking, writing and networking opportunities that transformed my practice for the better. If I had measured the ROI on the book, in the usual way these metrics are determined, I’d have to say it was zero, nada, goose-egg city. But in reality, the returns from writing and publishing the book have run into the tens or even hundreds of thousands of dollars over time.

I’m not suggesting that you stop being accountable. But I am suggesting that you lighten up on campaign metrics, and give greater credence to overall marketing performance, in aggregate, over longer periods of time.

On page 32 of Killing Marketing, Joe Pulizzi and Robert Rose share an anecdote that probably resonates with many marketers. In an interview for a digital marketing position, an applicant explains how he would spend the first few weeks on the job:

“He proceeded to outline how he might work with the team to develop a new content strategy to apply to marketing, content marketing and social media. The team cut him off and said, “What if we don’t have time for that?” He asked, “You don’t have time for strategy?” The team said, “No we need to deliver ROI. We don’t have time for analysis. We just need you to come in and start getting results with social posts and email. How would you do that?”

He didn’t get the job.”

Perhaps it was a blessing this gentleman didn’t get that job; his would-be colleagues are idiots. I’ve encountered this stupidity many times before; I’m sure you’ve encountered it, too.

In essence, the objection to strategy is this: “We don’t have time to establish an intelligent path forward that logically connects the resources we have to the objectives we want. Instead, despite clear evidence that exposes the failure of our current marketing model, we’ll keep pursuing it. Because, you know, we don’t ‘have the time’ to do anything else.”

After almost every speaking engagement, marketers will approach me with the same or similar dilemma. They “get” what I’ve just been talking about, but they’re alone in their organizations. How can they get the others to get it?

I’ll offer some concrete advice: tie content strategy to objectives that have already been established; talk up the value of leveraging expertise that currently remains under-used and under-appreciated; show them successful case studies that others…

They cut me off, shaking their heads. No. Their people just don’t get it. “There’s no time for strategy.”

Really? None?

Really. None.

At this point, I lower my voice (just in case their employers have sent spies or magic recording drones). “Maybe it’s time to look for another job,” I say sadly. “Maybe?”

Some are shocked. Some nod their heads. Some will even say, “maybe.”

We don’t get many signs from the Supreme Being or the universe or what-have-you. But I will argue that if your colleagues, especially those you report to, insist there’s no time for strategy, then it is time for you to reconsider your prospects.

Maybe it’s time for you to move on to something or somewhere else. Where there is time for strategy.

Joe Pulizzi and Robert Rose, Killing Marketing, p. 26

Who can argue with that? It’s a simple, straightforward statement that few would (or could) quibble with. But the source makes it interesting: two authors and experts who have probably done more to promote and popularize “content marketing” than anyone else.

Yet they’re speaking the truth, even if it pains the tens of thousands of content creators who have jumped aboard the content marketing bandwagon to create a growing pile of low-quality, look-alike content.

Creating high-quality, original content is difficult because it demands unblinking attention to the needs and demands of a precisely defined audience. It’s difficult because it requires deep dives into issues and ideas relevant to that audience. It’s difficult because, in a media environment already saturated with content, we need fresh ideas, bold stories, and clever execution.

But these same difficulties can play to your advantage. Because creating high-quality, original content is indeed difficult, most of your competitors won’t do it, leaving the playing field wiiiiide open for you.

I don’t honestly know of any way to make high-quality content creation easy, but I do have a few suggestions that can make it easier:

1. Understand what motivates and moves your audience. Screw demographics—you want a profound understanding of customer and/or buyer behavior. Why do they look for a product like yours? What do they look for when they shop? What do they find desirable, and what fears inhibit their purchase? How do they go about making a buying decision? Who influences that decision and how? Etc.
2. Build your content at the intersection of their needs and your expertise. High-quality content focuses on one theme with the tenacity of a dog on a bone. So what’s the right theme? One that has two qualities: 1) It’s of urgent and unmistakable importance to your audience; and 2) it’s one to which you can contribute demonstrable experience and expertise.
3. Keep a tight grip on the overall vision, a light hand on the individual executions. Invest the time necessary, at the start, to build consensus on the two previous points: your audience and your theme (editorial focus). Once established, this vision must be guarded zealously. Ideas that conform get green-lighted; ideas that don’t should be “terminated with extreme prejudice.” But at the tactical level, lighten up. Don’t stand over your creators’ shoulders; don’t line edit every sentence; don’t insist on arbitrary color choices because violet is your sister-in-law’s favorite color. Let your talent fulfill their talents on your behalf with minimal interference, and you will get more truly original work.

Commit to the long haul. Of course you’ll test various tactical executions. But if you’re going to do content right, you gotta’ commit to the long haul – go all in or stay out. The occasional one-off just won’t do it. Before you begin, get the commitments you need to make your efforts last.

In a side conversation, Ruth completely upended what I thought I knew about content, contracts and intellectual property rights. I found her knowledge so insightful, I invited her to participate in an interview for this blog, which I’m honored to share with you now.

What’s the biggest misperception content producers have about intellectual property law?

It’s the assumption that whoever paid for the work owns the copyright.

Wait….they don’t?

No. In the United States, copyright ownership can only be transferred in writing and that written document must be signed by the transferor – the content creator. It’s true that “work made for hire” is a legal term, but one of the rules is that a work-made-for-hire contract, to be valid, must be signed by both parties before work begins.

I had no idea. I thought copyright automatically transferred to the purchasing party.

Many people make the same wrong assumption. The biggest mistake they make is not having contracts when work is outsourced. A lot of times, all they have are email exchanges back and forth, or texts. But there is no formal document in which all the terms are described and listed.

I think of a contract as a “relationship management document.” You know, like in the Big Bang Theory when Sheldon and Leonard sign a roommate agreement – a super-nerdy contract that covers things like Godzilla, body snatchers and thermostat temperatures. From a business perspective, a contract should outline things like:

• What are you being hired to create?
• Who owns the copyright in what you create?
• How will you deal with delays?
• How does payment work?
• How do you deal with changes in project scope?
• How will you resolve problems if and when they occur?

The contract puts everybody on the same page so that when there are questions, they have a master document to refer to. It’s when things go sideways that you need the contract to tell you the rules of the relationship and how to address the question at hand.

Any thoughts on kill fees?

Why wouldn’t you include one? Usually, if you don’t, it’s because you didn’t know you could or because you’re afraid it might offend the client. But if someone balks, maybe you don’t want them as a client. Remember, the kill fee can cover, not only the work you’ve completed, but the opportunity loss that comes from concentrating on the client’s work at the exclusion of other projects.

I often work for multiple clients competing in the same sector. Any special contracting considerations regarding confidentiality?

You usually want to include a statement to the effect that information labeled confidential will be kept confidential until it becomes public in the ordinary course of business. Clients may also want you to define the actual measures you put in place, like passwords, to protect confidentiality.

Where can we go for more information on content and law?

The Internet is a good starting point, but be careful about which sources you use: there’s a lot of inaccurate and blatantly false information out there. For example, I’m surprised by how many people believe you can use any image on the Internet as long as you provide attribution and a link back to the original. Not true. You may be committing copyright infringement, admitting it, and then telling the copyright owner about it.

Better call Saul!

Right! You really need to work with attorneys who understand both business and intellectual property law. I advise professional content creators to ask their lawyers for contract templates they can use repeatedly, perhaps with a core base and additional provisions that can be swapped in or out as demanded by specific circumstances.

Keep in mind that whoever presents the contract will have it written to their advantage; the template I write for creators looks very different from the template I write for people who outsource content creation.

Terrific, thank you very much! Are there other resources you can recommend?

Your readers can will find lots of information on my blog. And I do a video show called “Question of the Day” that I release every week on YouTube. See you there!