Give your cross-media approach wings @nozurbina #congrescm

Second keynote at the Content Marketing and Webediting conference is by Noz Urbina about going omnichannel. Here are my notes of his talk.

Do you know the difference between multi- and omni-channel? Noz will answer this question during his talk.
Overt selling has given way to problem solving. Sweeping statements have given way to conversation-like message. (Rose)
Good example of omni-content: cards Google is showing based on searches. E.g. showing the opening times of a supermarket when you Google for it, instead of showing you a link to the site of the supermarket.
There are more and more channels and there's more and more need for personalization of content.
We’re realizing content is the strategic business asset, not the deliverable that wrap it. Content is vital across channels.

We must:
  1. fix the content (make it media-agnostic; make is reusable, well-modelled; apply semantic metadata; apply audience, applicability and context metadata to decide where and when to route it)
  2. assemble and serve more intelligently (manage systems that understand the content; etc)
Ad 1. Distinguish between Content, Models, Users, Scenario's and Outputs This links the world of UX to the world of content. The content model is the backbone of adaptive, cross-media, omnichannel content strategies.
Ad 2. It's not about the cms anymore. We need to think in layers: Create (authoring tool(s)), Manage (CCMS), Serve and transform (processors/api's), Publish and measure (WCMS). Then you can serve to everyone, channels, specific people. Also can relate to CRM's and translation management systems.

Omnichannel is when you take your content/assets and maps them to the phases of your relationships. This is not the same as multi-channel. Google understand this and tracks it with Google Universal Analytics.

In summary:
  • Who are you really talking to?
  • What content, format, model?
  • When should you personalize?
  • Where: device, channel, layout?
  • Why, updated valued-prop?
  • How will you create, govern, publish and measure?

Popular posts

Keep the Intranet Small

Image
This tweet by Jonathan Phillips ( @digitaljonathan ) triggered to finalize this post, that's been burning in my draft box. I've always been intrigued by how unsuccessful many intranets are. And there are all kinds of good reasons for intranet failure. One of the things that is hardly ever mentioned is: Shouldn't the intranet be smaller? Usually intranets are huge. Lots and lots of pages with lots and lots of content. With complex navigation. The intranet  evaluation surveys almost always show employees only use the news page and people finder. But still we build and maintain nice big intranets. Not only stats point to smaller intranets. There are others reasons as well. I came up with a few. If you have more, just leave a comment. Here's my list: -            user requirements: users don't require large intranet -            search/navigation: searching and navigating a small ...
Read more

Enterprise 2.0 Research

Image
There's not too much fundamental research on Enterprise 2.0. Deloitte recently published interesting research done on enterprise 2.0 implementations and their return-on-investment. In the EU research has also done as well. Study is being done for the European Commission and it was carried out by Tech4i2, IDC and Headshift. What was the goal of the study? Goals of the study To provide a clear definition of Enterprise 2.0 is, describe the market and the positioning of EU industry, also in comparison with US and Asia; To analyze the take-up of Enterprise 2.0, the organizational requirements, and the role on the transition to a knowledge based low-carbon economy; To collect evidence on its macro-economic impact, as a market opportunity for the European Software industry and as a productivity tool for European business; To identify and analyse both the direct and contextual challenges, including the need for Next Generation Access and the legal barriers; To analyse an...
Read more

Innovation in Turbulent Times

Image
I love reading articles about innovation. And every now and then you read one that is very interesting. "Innovation in Turbulent Times" by Rigby, Gruver, Allen (in HBR, June 2009) is one of them. This article takes fashion companies as an example for continuous, year-by-year innovation. And how successful fashion companies are usually led by two people: a left-brainer and a right-brainer. "If you don't have highly creative people in positions of real authority, you won't get innovation. Most companies in other industries ignore this lesson." They extend this to show that successful non-fashion companies have the same kind of leadership. And this kind of leadership is usually also characterized by a long-term relationship. I think this concept can also be extended to teams and projects as well. More often than not, people are good at one or the other: thinking up great concepts or ideas, or, making them. In teams and projects we can learn from this as...
Read more