“We wrote our first blog post before we wrote our first line of code.”
- Jon Miller, founder, Marketo

Blogging is important for every business. So we don’t just offer ghostwriting services for others. We blog for ourselves. Why? To discuss big issues such as content strategy, commissioning and ROI, as well as tactics for effective copy creation or editing, not to mention news about Collective Content.

Remember, over a third of marketers say blogs are the most valuable content type. Let us know what you’d like to read about here.

Content agencies

Why do we have staff around the world?

Photo by Juliana Kozoski on Unsplash

Why do we have people in different locations around the world? We could simply answer: “Because we can.”

But there’s a wider point that’s worth making.

When I recently mentioned to someone that our latest hire is in Toronto, I was asked whether Toronto/Ontario/Canada is an important market for us. We have a handful of clients there but that’s not the reason for that new hire.

We are global in the search for talent, not markets.

There’s something to be said about the precise difference between being global and being international – or multinational, even.

Most of our clients sell anywhere and sometimes everywhere around the world. Their people are also spread all over, with only sales and on-site personnel needing to be physically close to clients on a regular basis.

They rarely require us to meet face-to-face or even be in the same town or city.

It helps that we specialise in clients within the B2B technology sector. Their products and services have enabled all organisations around the world to work in distributed ways. And of course they practice what they preach – they can’t enable and advocate such a way of working without doing so themselves, and being OK with suppliers like us who also see the benefits.

So being able to be global is on the one hand about working for anyone, anywhere. But arguably the greater benefit is about being to hire anyone, anywhere. This has been the true revolution that makes a business like ours possible.

This has been about the why of a distributed working set-up. Next time I’ll tell you more about how we do it – and the big difference between remote working and distributed working.

Follow us on Twitter – @ColContent

 

**

 

Read Further

Quality work – why I constantly assess our agency model

On my mind: How to describe team members at our content marketing agency. That’s partly because we’re preparing a new website – nothing radical, just something every company does. But it’s also because of an article from a partner at a VC firm.

The founding general partner at Eniac Ventures talks about team slides in decks that companies use when they’re seeking seed-stage investment. Several things caught my eye, as they relate to Collective Content (although we’re not looking for investors). Number five on his list is “If you have shared history, make that very clear” – so we’ll be doing that, for example.

Our core team averages about 20 years working with B2B content, as writers and editors. That’s across a mixture of agencies, such as PR and content marketing, and working for B2B companies. But mostly we’ve all worked in journalism (another way we’re different from other agencies). Even our wider roster of part-time specialist writers and designers tends towards the higher end of experience.

This is in contrast to agencies where a team of junior writers often means lower prices, along with a we-can-turn-our-hands-to-any-content approach.

 

Process affects

How does all this affect the way we work with clients? There’s one obvious way and it goes like this: Collective Content works to a four-step process for much content – a white paper or e-book, say. Other agencies, often where content is produced by a faceless ‘pool’ of writers (have you heard about our ‘farm fresh’ content theory?) will feed content back into a cycle of edits and other amends numerous times.

This happens because each stage isn’t as well planned, and because their model is based on cheaper, less experienced writers who iterate again and again. I don’t want to mention Shakespeare’s monkeys. But I just did.

 

The difference

The results – to be honest – can be the same. In one model (ours), a group of experienced writers and editors takes fewer stages to get the right outcome. In the latter model, where a larger group takes several more rounds of work but at a lower per-employee cost, the overall price tag to a client is similar.

Clients don’t necessarily have a preference. They just want a good result.

But I prefer doing things thoroughly at each stage, with the highest-quality people and fewer stages, to keep everyone’s blood pressure at a healthier level.

There is always a trade-off across speed, quality and price. Focusing on quality doesn’t necessarily make you slower – but it can maintain project sanity.

 

Follow us on Twitter – @ColContent

 

Read Further

Brand journalism and PRs: playing a little better in 2017

Brand journalists are becoming more accepted by PRs although there remains a distinct split in levels of acceptance.

Today marks the publication of our third annual study of the UK PR community, run in partnership with ResponseSource.

Over 25 per cent of PRs believe mainstream acceptance of brand journalism has already taken place or will do so within 12 months.

Another 30 per cent believe it will take a little longer – between one to three years – before brand journalists are treated on a par with peers in traditional media organisations. Meanwhile, a third insist it will never happen.But when we group the first three answers and compare against the latter three – what we called progressives versus refuseniks in last year’s report – we find results that are between the 50/50 split of 2015 and the 60/40 in favour of progressives in 2016. However, this year’s result again errs on the side of the progressives.

Moving away from the statistics we found some of the most interesting insights in the conversations we had with PRs during the qualitative parts of the research. We found that PRs are quite savvy but accepting – they understand the equation.

They understand the writers and journalists are writing for other brands rather than traditional media organisations and accept this as long as the brand publication is a good place to have their client’s story heard.

As one respondent said: “It’s not the journalists that are treated differently, it’s the publications.”

We’d love to hear your feedback on this subject and this year’s report, so please email us using our contact form or write on our Facebook page.

Download the full PDF report. Look out for more analysis of our findings over the coming weeks.

Follow us on Twitter – @ColContent

 

 

Read Further

Contact us

Contact us to find out how we can help you:

Email:  tony.hallett@collectivecontent.co.uk

Twitter:  @ColContent

Facebook: facebook.com/CollectiveContent

LinkedIn: www.linkedin.com/company/collective-content

Phone:  0800 292 2826