This document discusses balancing centralized content hubs with channel-specific content. It notes that content hubs allow content to be reused across channels but risk creating generic content. Channel-specific content ensures relevance but is difficult to update across channels. The document proposes a hybrid approach of core content in a hub with contextual content tailored for each channel. Workshops are suggested to identify core and contextual content in organizations and how to reuse core content across projects.

1. CONTENT WANTS
TO BE FREE
(FROM PROJECTS)
@RASMUSSKJOLDAN | J.BOYE 2015

2. Rasmus Skjoldan
Lead content strategist of Magnolia
Founded the content strategy agency, Cope
Former brand manager of TYPO3 and UX lead
of the open source Neos CMS
@rasmusskjoldan

3. UCD » CMS » CS

5. THE PLOT
1. THE PROBLEM SPACE
2. COFFEE
3. TWO PRAGMATIC APPROACHES

6. THE PROBLEM SPACE

7. PROJECTS
ARE GREAT

8. PROJECTS GIVE US…

9. BOXED DELIVERIES

10. DEADLINES

11. MEASSURABILITY

12. SENSE OF URGENCY

13. THE PROBLEM WITH
PROJECTS

14. CONTENT HAS A
LOVE-HATE
RELATIONSHIP
WITH PROJECTS

15. CONTENT GETS
TRAPPED IN…

16. SILOS

17. DEPARTMENTS

18. DESIGNS

19. PUBLICATION
SYSTEMS

20. PROJECTS

21. THE
CHANNEL-TAILORED
CONTENT METHOD

22. OUTDATED CONTENT
IS KILLING US

24. MORE CHANNELS
MEANS
MORE STORIES
ABOUT CATASTROPHIC,
OUT-OF-DATE CONTENT

25. THE CONTENT HUB
METHOD

29. THE FRIDGE
NEEDS YOUR
CONTENT

33. CONTENT HUBS ARE
GREAT. BUT…

34. TOO GENERIC
CONTENT & UX
BORES
USERS TO DEATH

35. ZZZZZ
+
CONTEXTUAL-WTF?

36. “SHOULD WE MOVE ALL OUR
CONTENT TO A CONTENT HUB—
OR SHOULD WE LET CONTENT
STAY IN EACH CHANNEL?”

37. CONTENT HUB
ADVANTAGES
—ONLY UPDATE ONCE (ISH)
—CENTRALIZED CONTROL
—POTENTIAL SYNERGY: OMNICHANNEL
DISADVANTAGES
—GENERIC CONTENT
—POTENTIALLY BAD UX

38. CHANNEL-TAILORED CONTENT
ADVANTAGES
—HYPER RELEVANT UX
—WYSIWYG FOR CONTENT PRODUCERS
DISADVANTAGES
—VIRTUALLY IMPOSSIBLE TO UPDATE X CHANNELS
—NO SYNERGY ACROSS PROJECTS/CHANNELS

39. THE
(SLIGHLY UTOPIAN
DREAM OF A)
CONTENT HUB

40. CLIENT:

41. “We should move all of our content to a content hub because it
will let us repurpose content across different projects,
channels and platforms and because it will let us produce
content across internal departments and external content
providers. Let’s use CMS’s such as Contentful or Woodwing’s
Content Station to create, manage and store structured
content and publish it all directly to each and every publication
point via content delivery API’s.”

42. ME:

43. “Mmyeah, but you risk creating a new monster of a publication
system that way, leading to integration nightmares. Or you risk
that content will fail to communicate in a relevant manner
because it was created in a system too far away from where it
touches the user. “

44. THE
(OVERWHELMINGLY
HARD CASE FOR)
CHANNEL-TAILORED
CONTENT

45. CLIENT:

46. “We should keep allocating ressources for each touchpoint
because that is how you produce real quality content. Only by
doing so, we make sure content speaks the language of the
platform, relates more directly to target groups, is framed
correctly to obtain project goals—and also prevents content
from becoming too generalized. Let’s try to agree on some
overarching themes and goals—and then let the channel,
platform or project content folks communicate them in
appropriate ways, one channel at a time.”

47. ME:

48. “But hey, you won’t be able to keep up at the pace things are
moving—when you’re trying to produce content for one
channel at a time! What about the time it takes to translate it
all, too? And don’t even get me started on personalization.”

49. THE CONCLUSION:

50. If anyone says let's do a Create Once Publish Everywhere
setup and really tailor the user experiences on each
touchpoint,
then start waving flags.

51. WHICH ONE DID YOU
CHOOSE?

52. DOES IT HAVE TO BE
EITHER—OR?

53. LET’S MESS
WITH THE CONTENT
ECO-SYSTEM

54. “LET ME HAVE
ONE COPE
WITH EXTRA
TAILORING”

56. WEAVE TOGETHER
ORGANIZATION-WIDE
CONTENT WITH
CONTEXTUALLY
RELEVANT CONTENT

57. FINDING PRAGMATIC
WAYS

58. 1. CORE VS CONTEXTUAL
— WORKING INSIDE A PROJECT
2. CORE VS PROJECT
— WORKING ACROSS PROJECTS

59. CORE VS CONTEXTUAL

60. THE CONTENT-MIX OF A PROJECT:
Contextual
Content
Core
Content
Content as a business asset.
Reusable, long-term content.
Approved, proof-read, translated.
Can never live in a single channel!
Short-lived content. Tailored to a
particular touchpoint, to the project’s goal
and fit to the tone of voice of the channel
and the platform. Lives nicely in the
publication system of a channel or a
platform. Content is produced by platform
experts

61. Hero
Core content
Contextual content
Headline
Image
Payoff
Product description
Product name
Product name
Intro
CTA
Body text
A touchpoint on the web

62. Core content
Contextual content
Product name
Background
*S*I*G*N*H*E*R*E
Standard product description
Sales contract
Standard disclaimer
Special disclaimer
Special price for you

63. GETTING DEPARTMENTS TO
WORK TOGETHER ON SHARED
CONTENT (DESILOING)
+ BRIEFS ABOUT STRATEGY
+ KEEPS UP WITH CHANNELS
+ TAILORS THE EXPERIENCE

64. CORE VS PROJECT

65. REUSE CONTENT
ACROSS PROJECTS

66. OH NO.
WORKSHOP
EXERCISES.

67. CORE VS CONTEXTUAL
—WORKING INSIDE A
PROJECT

68. Look at your own organization:
1. Identify one type of content that would be better off by being handled
centrally
2. Identify content that would be better off by being edited and managed in
the channel
3. Combine the two in at least 2 different end results (An end result can be
an intranet webpage, a product webpage, an app screen, an email, a flyer,
an info screen, a fridge etc.)
4. Go through 1-3 alone, then explain to your neighbor, then iterate together
5. Present your neighbor’s end results to all

69. CORE VS PROJECT
— WORKING ACROSS
PROJECTS

70. Look at your own organization:
1. Identify one project that has produced content that could be used across
several projects.
2. Now imagine a new project of yours—about something else—and
describe how to reuse content from 1.
3. Go through 1-2 alone, then explain to your neighbor, then iterate together
4. Present your neightbor’s project to all

71. @RASMUSSKJOLDAN