Saturday, March 19, 2005

"What's Your Process?"

In a world of "suits," how do you stand apart? One way companies find differentiation -- especially in professional services -- is in their methodology or process. How a company works with you is certainly part of the overall brand experience. Process also has the advantage of being very difficult for competitors to replicate. In the world of instant information transfer, everyone reads the same books and uses the same software. It's very possible that most of what makes you "you" is the experience of working with you.

"We're very pleased with your work. We've received a lot of very good feedback on the paper and I'm confident it will help distinguish us in the marketplace."

Customers ask "What's your process?" because the answer (if there is an answer) indicates you've thought through how you do what you say you do. They can evaluate both your thinking, and your process. And it sounds better than, "Do you know your stuff?"

But how do you answer the question if most of "the process" is what goes on inside your own head? That's how it is in high tech marketing writing. People ask me all the time what my process is and the answer is embarrassingly brief: I read source material; I interview content experts with a recorder going; I write a first draft; It gets reviewed; I make edits; and it's done. Not exactly the stuff of a PowerPoint presentation, is it? And unfortunately (for me) I think one of the ways people assign value is by how complex something is.

Well, trust me, there is a lot of complexity in this very "simple" writing process. But rather than try to explain it -- I think it's to the customer's advantage to keep the process somewhat opaque. It's kind of like object oriented programming. In a complex system, different software processes don't have knowledge of how the other processes work with which they cooperate. If everything needed to know the details of how everything else worked, in order to cooperate, big systems would quickly become overwhelmingly complicated. Instead, one process only needs to know how to hand data and instructions off to another process and get results back -- a two-way interchange called an application programming interface, or API. The key is having clearly defined APIs.

In professional services, the API equivalent would be: "How do I know if I have an effective interchange with you?" And, as with an API, it's a question to which you can apply a set of standards. In high-tech marketing writing, those standards would include: The process is a true collaboration; the result is something people want to read; and that there is an even bigger outcome that flows from both the writing and the collaboration -- which is that there is now a much clearer understanding of how the client is truly exceptional in its marketplace.

Or, as one of my clients said in an email to me yesterday: "We're very pleased with your work. We've received a lot of very good feedback on the paper and I'm confident it will help distinguish us in the marketplace." In other words, the paper works; the positioning works -- and the collaboration was good, which I think you can tell from the tone.

The client was Centage. They make financial management software for small and mid-size companies. They used to make only budgeting software but that changed as a result of the writing process. The functionality didn't get bigger, but the marketing claims did. This wasn't something that was just tacked on because it sounded good. It really is what they do. They needed to try on new words, but they (and I) also needed to collaborate to make the words fit. That's the sign of a good process: a good API. The result is predictable and easily reproducible, even if the underlying process is hard to replicate elsewhere.
Centage Paper Click here to download.

Thursday, March 17, 2005

Creating We

Hi . . . Just back from my monthly 28 hour New York trip in my role as secretary to The New York Wedding Group. What is a high-tech marketing writer doing as secretary to a wedding group? As explained in earlier posts, my wife founded the NY and Boston Wedding Groups and brings me along to NY as sort of marketing consultant and all-around support person. (The NY Wedding Group was actually my idea, but don't let that get out.)

Creating We Book Jacket

Anyway, the speaker this month was Judith Glaser, author of the soon-to-be-published book, Creating We. The publication date is April 12th, but all of you reading this blog can pre-order on Amazon by clicking here. Her premise is that there are basically two kinds of people in the world: I-Thinkers and We-Thinkers, and that the latter makes for a much stronger organization (probably not a huge surprise since We, after all, is another word for group). The interesting part is that We-Thinking also makes us stronger individually. What do you think? Here are five examples of I- versus We-Thinking:

"Fear it wont' work" VS. "Believe it will"
"Been there done that" VS. "How can we make it happen"
"I can't get any support" VS. "Rally support"
"Fear of mistakes" VS. "Learn from mistakes"
"Don't get your hopes up" VS. "Share your hopes"

I can't wait to dig into my autographed copy. But after listening to her speak, I think I know kind of where Judith is coming from. There is a practical edge to what she is saying that can get lost if readers simply dismiss this as just a lot of idealistic cheer leading.

A really good practical example is an affinity pool, where companies each contribute leads to a common pool with some sort of overriding activity or interest that ties the members of the pool together. If each company contributes 5 of their hard-won business leads to the pool, and there are a hundred companies, that's potentially 99 x 5 = 495 new leads each company can "withdraw" from the pool. Yet, where affinity pools break down usually is getting everyone to really believe they can benefit individually by making what looks like a sacrifice. Instead of stepping forward with ways to make the pool better for the members, they cynically sit back, take whatever new business they can get, and feel gratified if enough cynics bring down the pool.

There are actually all kinds of ways We-Thinking can help marketing strategy, not just organizational development. And that's not idealistic at all.