Content Mistake #3: Lack of Quality Control, aka No Rules
In the last two posts we covered consistency of publishing and keeping your content streams focused on relevant content. Today we’re going to talk about varying levels of quality in content pieces, another basic mistake that is disappointingly common.
Bear with me for a moment; I am not here to simply tell you that your content must be good (duh), but rather that it should always meet or exceed certain standards that you and your team agree on. If you are going all-in on content marketing, then you are going to end up with different authors and maybe even different content streams or formats. This means that you will have different voices, which is great, but different voices cannot be an excuse for differing levels of quality in the finished product.
The one step that you can take that will keep your content at a consistent level of quality is to come up with a content Rule Book or guide. This document will define acceptable content for your organization. It will be somewhat similar to the classic Style Guides, such as the Chicago Manual or the MLA. Newspapers, magazines and other publications all have their own custom, in-house style guides, which is one of the reasons why so many articles in the New York Times sound like they could have been written by the same person. While these guides traditionally focus on grammar, syntax, word usage, punctuation and the other basic elements of written composition, your content guide will be much broader in scope, for a couple of reasons. The first reason is that it will apply to all types of content, including non-written forms such as videos. The second is that, as we discussed in the last post, content, by definition, must meet certain criteria that are completely independent of style and form.
This does not mean that your content guide cannot contain rules or guidelines about style and form. It just means that it must also settle larger questions of what makes the final cut as content and what does not. I would recommend starting with these questions, and then addressing questions of grammar and style, many of which can be settled by adopting one of the more widely-used guides, such as the Chicago manual.
What would these content rules look like? Well, the topics of the series you are reading right now are a good place to start. Establish a basic rule about frequency of publishing or set a definite publishing schedule and then decide what types of stories or subject matter will be considered acceptable. From there you can get more specific and tailor things to your audience and brand. Here are some real-world examples of content rules that clients of mine have used:
- No specific mentions of company products or services in content pieces
- No sales copy, sales pitches or attempts to sell anything in any content pieces (I am going to cover this one in an upcoming post)
- No citations of any research other than that conducted by independent organizations
- No citations of any research other than peer-reviewed studies
Your rules do not have to look like these or even address the same specific topics, but they should follow this basic structure in that they start out general and get more specific as the list progresses. Beyond that, every company and audience is unique and your content rules won’t necessarily look like anybody else’s. You may be in an industry that relies heavily on peer-reviewed, scientific studies or you may be in one that relies on pure entertainment-style content. Look around at other companies' content efforts and try to improve on what they’re doing right or avoid what they’re doing wrong. Since you make these rules, there isn’t any pressure to come up with a definitive list right away. As you publish more content you’ll get a better idea of what works and what doesn’t and you’ll be able to refine and revise your content guide. Start with the basics and work your way up from there.