{"id":14080,"date":"2019-09-04T08:14:58","date_gmt":"2019-09-04T06:14:58","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.testingtime.com\/?p=14080"},"modified":"2019-11-15T12:12:57","modified_gmt":"2019-11-15T10:12:57","slug":"why-content-strategy-should-be-part-of-your-discovery-phase","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.testingtime.com\/en\/blog\/why-content-strategy-should-be-part-of-your-discovery-phase\/","title":{"rendered":"Why content strategy should be part of your discovery phase"},"content":{"rendered":"

Content strategy is great when you\u2019re in the driver’s seat and all stakeholders are on the same page. You have in front of you exactly what you need to understand every element of the client\u2019s problem and carry out the phases required to make the project a success.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

Unfortunately, I\u2019ve seldom seen this become reality. Especially in large companies where employees are being \u2018politely\u2019 told by their managers to listen to and help the nice user experience people.<\/span><\/p>\n\t\t\t

\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t

A guide to identifying appropriate UX methods<\/h2>\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t

This kit offers concise guidelines to quickly assess the general suitability of UX methods for your research project. It contains a printable diagram<\/strong>\u00a0with established research methods for each product development phase and a UX methods sheet<\/strong>\u00a0with descriptions, strengths and weaknesses, and areas of application.<\/p>\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t

\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\tDownload kit\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/a>\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/p>\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t\t

\n\t\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\n

Instead, what I have seen time and again is a UX project almost brought to its knees due to unforeseen elements; or stakeholder disharmony that is staring you in the face, right from the start. Both of these unwanted circumstances usually raise their ugly heads through content and its (sometimes reluctant) owners.<\/span><\/p>\n

5 caveats of content:<\/h2>\n

#1 \u2013 Lack of content<\/span><\/h3>\n

The project is a startup or brand-new element to an existing system. Being given the \u2018green light\u2019 by the big cheeses, <\/span>the shiny solution that needs validating is in someone\u2019s head or on the back of a Costa\u2019s receipt. How it\u2019s going to be expressed to the customer \u2018isn\u2019t quite there yet\u2026\u2019<\/p>\n

#2 \u2013 Too much content<\/span><\/h3>\n

The new project is a lot more complex than first anticipated or the existing system has become a <\/span>lumbering behemoth full of content skin tags hidden under the folds of its time-worn hide.<\/p>\n

#3 \u2013 Duplicated content thanks to multiple owners<\/span><\/h3>\n

The existing system is presumed to be in tip-top condition with owners keeping a close eye on each other\u2019s work and communicating any new ownership when people leave the department or the company.<\/span><\/p>\n

I haven\u2019t seen this \u2018dream world\u2019 scenario. <\/span>This is where the \u2018silos\u2019<\/a> of a company emerge from the woodwork. Either through internal politics or plain old bad communication, content is now duplicated or triplicated and all sitting on the same server, saying the same thing, but in very different ways!<\/span><\/p>\n

#4 \u2013 Inconsistent terminology and overuse of buzzwords and acronyms<\/span><\/h3>\n

A business\u2019s marketing strategy needs to display consistency, therefore, becoming omnichannel. <\/span>All<\/span><\/i> content strategy within a company could learn a lot from this. Employees\u2019 understanding of processes would be uniform and unambiguous, making them confident ambassadors. Customers would easily understand why they are investing in that company\u2019s product or service. Recommendation will soon follow!<\/span><\/p>\n

Unfortunately, thanks to points covered in #2 and #3 above, a haphazard use of what content owners \u2018think\u2019 is terminology and <\/span>a trend towards acronym overuse alongside this week\u2019s buzzword, presents nothing more than a mess.<\/p>\n

#5 \u2013 Out-of-date content<\/span><\/h3>\n

Out-of-date-content needn\u2019t mean information that hasn\u2019t been touched for decades \u2013 although this is usually the case when it appears in a project. One particular project I was involved in had got to the MVP (Minimum Viable Product) stage of a rather complex customer portal, only to be told by the legal team that as of the following week, all terms and conditions, policies, etc. would be required to be reworded. Even for testing purposes!<\/span><\/p>\n

Had the legal team got the new content to hand and was it ready for circulation? Of course not! <\/span>So, in hindsight, by including a legal team stakeholder and holding off on the project start by maybe a week or two, everything could have remained tickety-boo.<\/p>\n

This is definitely not an exhaustive list and you may have already thought of more content caveats while reading these.<\/strong><\/p>\n

All of the above caveats can be unearthed at some point in a project\u2019s proceedings. User testing, in particular, will find the rotten content apple at the bottom of the barrel. When the outcomes are presented to the stakeholders this can bring the whole project to a grinding halt depending on the severity and how it affected the users tested.<\/span><\/p>\n

Maybe you will be lucky time and again. There\u2019ll be no stakeholder friction towards your team and its \u2018dark arts.\u2019<\/span><\/p>\n

But just in case, and to stop Holst\u2019s Mars: the bringer of war<\/i> being the soundtrack to stakeholder meetings further down the project\u2019s road map, …<\/span><\/p>\n

\n