What does "marketing departments should act like publishers" really mean?

No comments that I've seen yet, so...

Fully explaining for those this is new to... I think there has been a shift in how marketers can market. If you think of prospects going though a buying cycle (awareness, consideration, decision to simplify), we have been focused on consideration and decision phases when it comes to collateral for some time (talking B2B sales here). Social media in particular has changed when we are able to reach people and has done it in a way that is accessible to much smaller companies.

Being that trusted resource when prospects are trying to grasp what the problems or issues are, and what the "recommended" path is for choosing a solution, is extremely important. The more you can engage here, the better your chance for being in the running in the consideration and decision phases.

Having said this, marketing as publishers involves much more—namely mapping out your buyer personas and then creating content for each phase of the buying cycle. The benefit, in theory, is that you're engaging with people more effectively in that process and driving them to your sales team in a way that creates more sales qualified leads, which results in more business.

So...
1) Create your prospect personas
2) Create content for each buying phase (entire discussion in itself)
3) Deliver in a 1-to-1 way using technology
4) Create automated processes for handing off and taking back leads from sales people
5) Measure results and don't be afraid to test new nurturing paths

Chris Frank
TreeHouse Interactive
www.treehousei.com

I’ll add my two cents.

As someone who moved from reporting for newspapers to reporting for a marketing technology company (Eloqua), I have found the marketers-as-publishers strategy fascinating. As my job title suggests, I am all for it.

That said, there are some elements of publishing, and journalism in particular, I would like to see implemented to greater degree in content marketing efforts. From my viewpoint, the vast majority of the content produced by companies, marketers and bloggers today is made up of lists and individual opinion. Not that I’m opposed to that kind of content, but to make a newspaper analogy, it’s as if marketers are borrowing from the editorial section – often the shortest section – without even scanning the front page, business or sports sections.

The Internet made it possible for anyone to create a voice. And, yes, the publishing world has (mostly) failed to adapt their business models to account for this seismic shift. But I believe there are some key journalistic principles that would greatly benefit marketers moving into the publishing realm.

1. Narrative. Stories are what drive us, be it our personal or professional life. Good journalism attempts to tell the narrative of major events. As marketers explore crafting their own content it’s worth asking who are the characters involved, what are the obstacles they faced and what kind of resolution has come about.

2. Set the scene. When approaching a story I’ve always mined for the details that bring it to life. Where were the people involved meeting? Was it early in the morning or a late-night decision? Were emails traded back and forth, the Blackberry blowing up? These seem like minor details, but they ultimately tie back to physical world we all inhabit and make stories relatable.

3.Sourcing. Sourcing in newspaper articles might be one of the earliest precursors to hyperlinks. In most of the blog posts I read today the author might mention all the conversations he or she has had about a given topic, but rarely are these conversation quoted. I’m not questioning the depth of these writers’ knowledge, but sourcing allows the reader a peek into the author’s development of an idea and the people influencing those opinions. It’s worth adding a dash of sourcing now and then.

Good thoughts, everyone. One point of clarification though. I don't believe this notion should apply to all marketing departments but think this is critical for B2B/when a company is selling something complicated.

Needless to say, The information published can never be too salesy and has to be objective... people will see right through you if you are producing overtly biased materials.

It is important for a skilled salesforce to be in place to help the user translate the ideas in the whitepapers/content into meaningful opportunities. The translation of ideas into opportunities and the quantification of the content's role in the lead is the hard part! I welcome thoughts this area.

Please note... just because you say it doesn't mean people will listen. Companies looking to go down this road should make a significant investment in creating and promoting this content in house, or should work with a credible research firm or media partner(s) to produce these materials. Either way, it is important for all the materials to be clear, consistent and aligned with a platform based on previously established goals and objectives.

After creating the materials comes promoting.. I have many thoughts on this and the use of nontraditional/ nonpaid ways to promote, but will save these ideas for another post.

Chris, Joe, Jose, and Jay all share great advice. I would just add a practical aspect of thinking like a publisher. What's key about publishers is that they know they can't let down their audience if they're to be seen as a trusted resource of valuable information. That's why publishers don’t think about content creation as an ad hoc exercise, but rather plan out each edition/issue well in advance. And that's why it's crucial that marketers create a carefully considered editorial calendar (that maps to prospect and customer interests) and stick to it. The beauty of this approach is that it helps avoid fire-drill mode and instead paves the way for efficiently and continually pumping out content of interest to the target audience.

Getting information to your customers at the right time in the buying cycle is nothing new.

In the terms of "traditional" marketing, that might have been in the form of a booth at a trade show, an ad in a trade magazine or direct mail flyer. So "content marketing" is a lively buzz term but don't get thrown off by the fact that this concept is rooted in traditional sales and marketing strategy.

What HAS changed is the new channels available. Instead of a tradeshow, we might be using a podcast or webinar. Instead of a trade ad, we might be reaching people through RSS feeds and eBooks. And these new channels come with the additional burden of being a "publisher" because unlike a direct mail piece or a tradeshow brochure, this online content is permanent and searchable. In fact, you are a publisher, with all the legal and commercial implications that implies.

Hope that provides a helpful view of the term. Thanks for your question.

Hi Jeff,

Thanks for contributing your thoughts on this. I found them very well said and thought-provoking.

First off, I want to be clear -- because I don't think I was before -- that I am not attempting to deprecate lists or opinion pieces. I write both myself. I am advocating for a mix where journalistic elements currently under-employed are incorporated into the overall product.

Do I believe that content marketing should attempt to educate and not merely influence, that it should be tied to the sales funnel? Absolutely. Ultimately, journalism is most engaging when it entertains and informs. One does not need to be sacrificed for the sake of the other.

Behind every lead is a person, if not multiple people. While people might hold different jobs, responsibilities and work in varying industries, they are motivated by universal desires to do well, to contribute, to learn. Why not employ empathy? A good blog will attempt to entertain and educate, because human behavior is not driven by one particular emotion, but several complex (and sometimes conflicting) emotions.

Those are my thoughts anyway. Thanks again for engaging me in this discussion.

Jesse
@noyesjesse

Joe, very well explained.

To me, it is as simple as acting like a newspaper or magazine...in other words give your target market information that is usefull to them, that may not be exactically what you sell as a business but as long as it is related people will want to consume it and will associate it with your brand. Thus when they need what you sell on when you solicit their business, they will be more like to call you or accept your request.

Jose Guerra
@joseguerra24
http://joseguerra24.wordpress.com
Country Manager Chile /Marketing Director LATAM
Integro Marketing
www.integromkt.com

Little background, first. I've been a marketing exec for some 15 years. After a number of years marketing products and services, I now work at a "publisher" - HFM US (brands include ELLE, ELLE Decor, Woman's Day, Car and Driver, Road & Track, Cycle World, Premiere.com) in social media.

The intersection of publishing and marketing is the future for attracting customers. Marketing is about awareness and lead generation. Publishing is about delivering content that educates, entertains, and/or informs a target audience.

When you say "marketing departments should act like publishers" this means that marketing should produce content (text and multimedia) that focuses on education, entertainment, and/or information that ultimately yields awareness and lead generation. Do this rather than "sales initiatives" to build relationships with your target audience. Relationships that cause an emotional bond. A bond that produces advocates. Advocates that become your marketing engine in a much more compelling way than the marketing department can produce. Get the cycle going and witness the momentum.

No, contract publishing is not new. But here's a short case history that cuts-to-the-chase.

http://www.financialinformationcenter.anchorbank.com

AnchorBank is building **process** around distribution (and use of) its content. Read: lead generation.

In essence, this is not only a publishing venture. It's also a “need discovery” and lead management system. It's a system – a chain – of non-monetary transactions with customers.

AnchorBank's marketing function translates customer need. It's invested in a process that leads customers toward purchase of products by nurturing questions that it has answers to. Customers are trading information on what they need in return for advice. The way they express need may be explicit or implicit. Urgent or latent.

For instance, access to AnchorBank's Financial Answer Center is given **in exchange for an email and profile information on customer need **.

The bank tailors publications to be hyper-focused on particular topics. Hence, customer need (general intent) can be easily derived from the customer's request itself. Other qualitative aspects of customer need are also gathered and recorded.

If a customer requests tips on how to buy a home for the first time he/she is categorized by AnchorBank as a first-time mortgage candidate. Follow-up from a qualified banker is then scheduled to nurture and close the lead. If a request comes in via the bricks-and-mortar branch it's associated with the customer's account.

Likewise when the exchange happens via the Web.

Think about your last visit to your bank – physically. Maybe you popped in to make a routine deposit. When entering the branch or teller window you typically see and hear about one thing: rates. Recall the promotional signage and maybe you'll even remember hearing a banking professional mention a rate.

Unfortunately for banks, this is how customers interact with them. Customers walk in to make a transaction. And then get out. Most often we're not looking to solve a problem – although we often have a good handful!

But AnchorBank's customers frequently hear, see and chat with branch employees about major life events. Not just banking products. They're in tune with customers' problems. And not only in the branch but at the Web site and through social media tools too.

The online strategy is also focused on earning customers' trust through a “human touch.” But it's also designed to net AnchorBank business leads. Opportunities to cross-sell products in a way that leverages trust.

Whether the customer is online at AnchorBank.com or in a branch the bank is nurturing referrals and leads using mini-publications. Physical documents or PDFs.

Within these helpful documents is information that solves customers problems in meaningful, relevant ways. Ways that often recognize an emotional element. But AnchorBank is also applying a rigorous translation process. One that opens the door for customers to “signal” what they need. And one that prompts customers to ask more questions that AnchorBank has answers to.

Jesse...
So long as "more is better" dominates Web marketing we'll have lists. Because lists garner the tweets, re-tweets and pageviews. Hence, they're deemed "most effective". But at what? Earning customer's fleeting attention. Most marketers don't value lead generation. They value advertising outputs like attention. I think this is the cause of your symptom and a means to improve a company's content marketing ROI.

While I agree with your 3 points above (especially #1) I disagree with what seems to be a core belief at your company. That is (from your blog's front page currently):

"People are beginning to distinguish self-serving techniques designed to induce a behavior (link, tweet, comment) favorable to the publisher from meaningful content created to entertain, inform or inspire."

IMHO, marketers are here to induce behavior -- beyond attention. As Ogilvy said, "We sell or else." Our job is evolving away from being artsy messengers who deliver customer's fleeting attention -- and toward being translators of customer need who (ultimately) capture demand. Don't you think?

Is content marketing a means to garner attention and influence? Yes. But isn't influence best defined as behavior? And why can't content marketing's outputs connect to the sales funnel? Why are we aiming at outputs like empathy and entertainment? Why not things like education, sales and leads? Witness HubSpot.

As Chris Frank says... "you're engaging with people more effectively in that process and driving them to your sales team in a way that creates more sales qualified leads, which results in more business."

Thanks for considering.

Hi, Jesse. And I should say that your argument is well stated too. Compelling. You're convincing me that there is room for empathy. I suppose it's a matter of when and where. Example: People do not plan, they react. It's human nature. And when we're reacting it can be effective to employ empathy. Example: If one is getting divorced. A bank or financial planner might leverage a bit of it while doling out advice on how to manage one's finances in various stages of divorce... using content marketing.

I simply reject all this guru-speak bologna that says, "customers expect brands to 'feel their pain.'" I don't think that's the big opportunity here. And it's often presented as THE opportunity. Right along side having a lot of Friends or being Liked.

Empathy is a tool not the end goal. I suppose that's my point. And "branding" folks always like to tell us it's the end goal.

Thank you for taking the time as well.

The Content Marketing Institute today published a case study titled, "How To Create Killer Content" on SlideShare (http://www.slideshare.net/cmi42/how-to-launch-a-killer-content-marketing-camp...). Although the case explores much of the work Eloqua has done in this area, the author - Michele Linn - writes it in a way that there are "horizontal" lessons for any marketer considering a publishing model. Hope it helps answer the original question and aids the marketing efforts of those on this thread.

All my best,
Joe Chernov / Eloqua / @jchernov