Content Strategy
Overview
From August to December 2020, I worked as a project manager and consultant for the content strategy company, Strategy Hackers (now referred to as “Hackers”). The company—under supervision of Dr. Tharon Howard—was commissioned by the Pickens County Library System (PCLS) to create a content strategy plan. During my time there, I completed multiple projects in project management, branding, and journey mapping, including the creation of a persona and two experience maps. These projects were completed during a four-month study under Howard.
This exhibition documents my role in the PCLS content strategy plan. I will go over the design process, in depth, that occurred during this project.
About the Client
PCLS has four locations in Pickens County, South Carolina: Hampton Memorial Library in Easley (Headquarters), Central-Clemson Library in Central, Village Library in Pickens, and Sarlin Library in Liberty. Their mission, as stated on their website, is “to provide all county residents with access to information through the development of appropriate collections and services.”
Exigency
The Hackers’ supervisor, Dr. Tharon Howard, contacted PCLS about potential content consulting needs for his ENGL8320 "Technical Writing" graduate seminar. PCLS had recently received a content strategy plan about a year prior to this project, but found they needed another plan after hiring a publicist. PCLS contracted the Hackers to create a set of deliverables specific to the in-house content development process workflow.
The Hackers’ goals were to (1) define the PCLS segmented audience, content creators, and various channels for audience reach and (2) define an efficient and sustainable content creation and governance process.
For more details, see the Strategy Hackers’ creative brief below.
Roles
This project required a few staff members to take on alternative roles. Each staff member, excluding the CEO and Captionist, served in a consulting role on two to three deliverables. Since the deliverables were completed in teams, each staff member also served in a leadership position, assuming responsibility for their specific deliverable. Everyone, including the CEO and project manager, deferred to the team leader’s expertise in the project’s topic area. Staff roles are listed below:
CEO - Tharon Howard
Project Manager - Lindsay Scott
Parliamentarian - Kylie Carlson
Captionist - Nora Logue
Consultants - Amanda Anderson, Candace Gallagher, Kayla Rogers, Nicole Stout
My Role(s)
As the project manager, I was directly in charge of supervising the Hackers. I focused on the planning and execution of the PCLS Content Strategy Plan. I, along with the parliamentarian, guided the collective decision-making process for the Hackers. From leading project meetings via Zoom to compiling the final project folder—complete with appendices—I planned, tracked, and collaborated with my team to ensure a successful project execution. My role was preceded by my experience in social media content management and strategy for the Bellamy Mansion House Museum in Wilmington, NC.
As a consultant, my project focus was on mapping and branding. Since this exhibition solely covers the mapping projects, I will not cover the branding materials in depth. For the mapping deliverables, another consultant and I created a persona and two experience maps. See the Deliverables section for more on these projects.
This project provided me with professional experience in content strategy and user experience (UX) design fields. My goal was to simultaneously lead my team while also designing professional, data-informed UX content. With this project, I hoped to enhance my leadership skills and develop a foundational understanding of UX design. By working with PCLS, I gained experience in (1) researching and implementing current trends in UX, (2) building strong client relationships with advanced interpersonal skills, and (3) learning how to lead a team of consultants with varying degrees of expertise and technology comfort levels.
Audience
The PLCS Content Strategy Plan was intended for the Director, Assistant Director, and Publicist to review. As the project progressed, the Hackers realized there were three viewer/audience levels:
Primary - PCLS Administration (Director, Assistant Director, and Publicist)
Secondary - Strategy Hackers’ Employer & CEO, PCLS Staff
Tertiary - Future Employers
Constraints
Throughout the design process, I encountered a few constraints, listed below:
Company-Client Miscommunication
Tharon Howard found the PCLS .fyi email addresses went to spam. The PCLS domain, .fyi, was used by all staff members. Clemson University's email system would file the emails sent through that domain to spam. PCLS would receive our emails and respond, but we weren't aware of their responses sitting in our spam folders. The Hackers thought PCLS was ignoring us. By communicating with PCLS and relaying this issue to them, the Hackers were notified of the potential spam filing. After marking emails from PCLS as "not spam," the Hackers began directly receiving the proper emails and materials from PCLS staff.
All-Remote Completion
The entire project, including the experience mapping, was completed remotely (via email, Slack, and Zoom) because of the COVID-19 pandemic. This presented miscommunications, time management concerns, lack of physical interaction between company and client, inability to access patrons, etc., but through proper organization, the Hackers solved most issues. We spent an entire meeting—about three hours—discussing which messaging platforms to use and where we should put certain documents and information to reduce duplication of materials. Ultimately, we decided on the online messaging application Slack for company communication. Slack also allowed us to integrate Google Drive into a channel, which updated the Hackers as any and all documents were uploaded to, commented on, or edited in Google Drive.
Short Timeline
The timeline for the project was two months. To compile an entire content strategy plan in such a short span of time proved difficult with the amount of client deliverables. Due to sudden illness among one of my team members, the persona and experience maps were completed in less than a month (closer to a two-week time period). The team member was unable to look at screens or use our Slack, so the mapping team's internal communication suffered. The team tried to wait for a response from the missing member, but after waiting a week and still not hearing anything, the mapping team had to start the project down a member. We met with Howard to troubleshoot possible methods to reach out to our team member, but he hadn't heard from them either. Like the mapping team originally intended, he recommended we start working on the project without our team member.
No Funding
This project was not funded. With a proper budget, certain tools could have been implemented (i.e., Hootsuite, LibraryAware, Adobe Creative Suite, ScreamingFrog, other analytics software, etc.). It may also have been beneficial to use a professional experience mapping software, as opposed to the free design software Canva.
Scope Creep
This project developed a scope creep. “Scope creep,” according to Welshman, occurs with project bloating, micromanaging, and overburdening of production resources (Managing Chaos, 47). To prevent scope creep, projects are often assigned “bridges.” Part of the “bridges’” role is to keep the project owner—in the Hackers’ case, each project team leader—on task, working quickly and efficiently. As the Hackers worked on the deliverables, each consultant began to think of questions and ideas outside of the project’s scope. This was especially prevalent in the persona and experience maps. My team was uncertain whether our deliverables should be more narrow or broad to accurately depict the collected data. As the project manager, it was part of my role to alleviate this scope creep. Howard and I referred back to the project brief multiple times during company meetings.
My consulting deliverables had a few constraints as well. These constraints are broken down below:
Mapping Deliverables
There were three deliverables here: persona, current experience map, and future experience map. For these deliverables, I was on a team with two other consultants—Consultant A and Consultant B. Their names have been hidden for confidentiality purposes. Consultant A was in charge of the persona, and she and I were in charge of the current experience map. Consultant B and I were responsible for the future experience map. Consultant A suffered an intense illness and was unable to communicate or work on her projects for almost three weeks. Because of the lack of communication, Consultant B and I took on her roles. I designed the persona and experience maps while Consultant B input the necessary information for each deliverable.
Deliverables
This section details the deliverables I was responsible for during the experience mapping process. For each deliverable, I will detail deliverables’ design phases, research methods, and collaborative work efforts. The deliverable PDFs are included with this exhibition.
Persona
A persona is a fictional character, based on research, that provides a holistic overview of a specific position within a larger organization (Usability.gov, Personas). It provides a visualization of the challenges and successes faced as they navigate the workflow. The Hackers decided to create a persona for PCLS as a visual representation of the interview data we collected. The persona represents a PCLS branch manager/liaison.
Design Phases
The logo went through the following design phases: (1) Research, (2) Sketch, (3) Iterate, (4) Refine, and (5) Deliver. These phases are adapted from Willenskomer’s Design Funnel.
Research
This phase was broken down into two parts: general and specific. The general research was conducted by the Hackers as a team and informed the entire client project, including the deliverables; the specific research was completed by the project sub-teams and was deliverable-dependent. For instance, the Hackers developed two questionnaires to send out to PCLS staff members and administration: (1) demographic and occupation-related interview questions to be filled out pre-Zoom meetings and (2) content development-specific questions to be asked during the Zoom meetings. After informing the project as a whole, each team then conducted research based on their deliverable. For instance, the Literature Review team worked on research regarding the literature review deliverable, while the Persona and Mapping team worked on research for those deliverables.
As Consultant A volunteered to work on the persona, she completed most of the research. The team did meet to discuss what type of persona to create, and we decided on the “Table” version, which is best to “compare designs to user needs” (Usability.gov, Personas). Though we had a lot of demographic information and a research-oriented narrative, we did not want to overwhelm the administration with a “Narrative” version. In the same way, we had enough research to not use a “Quick-and-Dirty” persona.
Sketch
Like much of the Research phase, Consultant A completed this process. After the team decided on the type of persona, she drafted the persona’s narrative and included the necessary information.
This information was based on the eight key elements of a persona, as provided by Usability.gov:
Persona Group (i.e. web manager)
Fictional name
Job titles and major responsibilities
Demographics such as age, education, ethnicity, and family status
The goals and tasks they are trying to complete using the site
Their physical, social, and technological environment
A quote that sums up what matters most to the persona as it relates to your site
Casual pictures representing that user group
After documenting all of the persona elements, the team moved onto the Iterate phase.
Iterate
Though Consultant A served as the team lead and was supposed to create the persona, Consultant B and I completed this step. At this point, Consultant A had not communicated with our team and had not designed a persona deliverable. This was due to an unforeseen illness, but the mapping team and CEO were not aware of that. We had less than a week until we were supposed to present our deliverables to the rest of the Hackers team.
Due to the time constraint, I created the persona via Canva, using a resume template. Consultant B then input the drafted document from Consultant A into the design. This served to be the narrative for the persona. The Usability.gov Persona “Table” style clearly and concisely represented the information.
Refine
Because Consultant B and I were already down one team member and under a time constraint, the team did not have time to refine the deliverable from the iteration phase. Consultant B did send the deliverable to Howard and me for review before presenting to the other consultants. Howard approved, as did I.
The Hackers said the persona looked good, but wondered if we should include a second persona for the administration. After a detailed discussion, the Hackers solved the scope creep and reiterated the persona’s audience was the administration, so there was no current need for a second persona. Administration is aware of their typical work day, situation, etc.; they are not aware of their staff’s typical work day, situation, etc.
Deliver
The deliverable was the same design from the Iterate and Refine phases.
Informed Theories
This project was informed by many theories, primarily from Usability.gov (as can be seen in the design phases above).
During the research phase, the Hackers used research methods like interviews and questionnaires. We implemented these methods from Usability.gov, which recommends starting the content strategy process with content stakeholder interviews (Content Strategy Basics). We employed individual interviews, as opposed to usability testing or focus groups. Individual interviews, as mentioned by Usability.gov, allowed the Hackers to:
Talk to one person at a time
Discuss topics in detail with more time
Give the interviewee full attention and adjust interviewing style based on interviewee’s needs
Based on the Individual Interviews’ best practices section of Usability.gov, the Hackers, as a team, discussed:
What we wanted to learn from PCLS
Which representative participants we should talk to
What interview protocol to use (i.e., follow-up questions, tape the interviews, note-taking)
We developed a Google form questionnaire to be emailed to PCLS staff, followed by a set of interview questions to be asked during individual Zoom interviews.
Following the overall research phase, the mapping team informed the persona deliverable with the information gathered. The deliverable was also referenced by sample personas from Jessica Wells and Ryan McCready. This was not so much in terms of theory, but in terms of the practical applications completed by Wells and McCready. Both offered sample personas that Consultant A used in her researching process.
In “4 Persona Samples You Can Use in Any Industry” by Wells, Consultant A utilized the Tobi Day example. The use of scales and other visual graphics clearly explains Tobi’s comfort levels with technology and her daily motivations. These visuals directly influenced the Hackers’ persona, as we represented staff comfort levels with certain technology during the content development process.
Similarly, in “20+ User Persona Examples, Templates and Tips For Targeted Decision-Making,” the team used the second sample as a template for our own persona. We also utilized the third tip to “use a customer journey map template to help create each persona” (McCready). The persona was not fully complete until we drafted the current experience map. These two deliverables mirrored one another. The persona acted as the game piece and the map acted as the game board. The persona represented the staff members as they experienced each part of their day, evidenced by the current experience map.
Collaborative Efforts
The persona was supposed to be developed by Consultant A, but due to an unexpected illness, the project was completed by Consultant B and myself. I created the persona itself and the design, while B input the information necessary for the persona. Consultant B and I did receive feedback from the other Hackers and our CEO/supervisor.
Experience Maps
An experience map is a visual representation and analytical breakdown of the different experiences a person walks through to accomplish a certain goal. In Mapping Experiences, Kalbach writes that experience maps “fundamentally recognize that people interact with many products and services from a multitude of providers in many situations. These experiences shape their behaviors and relationship with any one organization” (275). The PCLS current experience map is a visual representation of the pain points presented in the persona and current workflow chart. The PCLS future experience map is a visual representation of the recommended workflow chart.
This section includes the design phases for both experience maps, as well as the combined theories and collaborative efforts for the maps.
Current
Current experience maps outline the current UX. In PCLS's case, we wanted to outline the current content development experience, emphasizing the pain points in the content development process and lack of a feedback loop from administration to staff.
Below please find the design phases for the current PCLS experience map:
Design Phases
The current experience map went through the following design phases: (1) Research, (2) Sketch, (3) Iterate, (4) Refine, and (5) Deliver.
Research
The mapping team knew from past research throughout the project that Kalbach defines eight elements to experience maps:
Phases of behavior
Actions and steps taken
Jobs to be done, goals, or needs
Thoughts and questions
Emotions and state of mind
Paint points
Physical artifacts and devices
Opportunities (Mapping, 285)
It’s not essential to include all eight elements in a map, but the mapping team wanted to include as many as possible. We felt somewhat overwhelmed with our information from interviews and questionnaires, so we met with Howard to discuss the preliminary mapping steps.
My Adobe InDesign file was roughly-sketched out. It included how PCLS’s content development process affected the staff members’ daily experiences. This aligned with Kalbach’s explanation that experience maps “are concerned with how the provider’s offering fits into a person’s experience, not the other way around” (Mapping Experiences, 280). We did not aim to show how staff experiences would change the content development process. Instead, we wanted to express how the content development process affected the staff experience.
Iterate
I then took the sketches and notes and created a draft in Canva. I used an infographic template that included colors, graphics, etc.
At this point, Consultant A was unable to participate in the design process. I presented the unfinished concept to the Hackers and received feedback on the concept. Overall, the Hackers approved of the graphic. It was linear in nature, symbolizing the abrupt stop with the PCLS content development process. I used PCLS brand colors to imply the “stop” and “go” points throughout the process. The Hackers felt that this design was not clear enough and suggested adding visual icons like pause buttons, a “Go” at the beginning of the process, and "X" marks when the persona exited the map.
Refine
Consultant B input the narrative and interactions/opportunities sidebar after the designs were created. Along with the narrative, I also added icons like the Hackers suggested.
Deliver
The mapping team delivered the refined map to PCLS.
Future
Future experience maps outline the ideal UX. In PCLS's case, we wanted to outline the ideal content development experience, inputting a feedback loop from administration to potential content creators.
Below please find the design phases for the future PCLS experience map:
Design Phases
The future experience map went through the following design phases: (1) Sketch, (2) Iterate, (3) Refine, and (4) Deliver.
Sketch
The research completed for the current experience map also informed the future experience map, so there was not a separate research phase for this map. I met with Consultant B to discuss the main difference between the current and future experience maps: the feedback loop. PCLS was not giving staff the feedback or review phase they needed. The future experience map aimed to solve that problem. The notes for that meeting are below
Consultant B and I looked at different versions of experience maps to inform our sketches. We wanted to create a visual loop or circle to illustrate the continual process of content development, perpendicular to the current experience map’s linear format, which stopped abruptly. We used the sample map from p. 278 in Kalbach’s Mapping Experiences as a reference.
Deliver
The mapping team delivered the refined map to PCLS.
Informed Theories
Like the persona, the mapping deliverables used interviews and questionnaires for their research methods. These research methods were informed by the same Usability.gov theories as the persona. The data retrieved from these research methods was visually represented in this deliverable.
Along with the research methods and Usability.gov references, the experience maps were informed by the book Mapping Experiences, which can be found in the References section. When designing the maps, my team and I combined two main theories: (1) User Story Mapping and (2) Maps of Experience.
With User Story Mapping, the team used Figure 8-12 as a template for the persona’s narrative and interactions on the maps (Kalbach, Mapping, 214-217). This map included specific step-by-step tasks and intended UX, which informed our current and future maps’ sidebars. Post-production, there could have been more time spent on analyzing the step-by-step format and UX outlines.
In formatting theory, we used Maps of Experience (Kalbach, Mapping, 274-280). We looked at a sample experience map (see Sample, p. 278 above) as a base for the PCLS experience maps (278). This sample showed a cyclical experience, which the future map relied heavily on in terms of closing the feedback loop. Post-production, there could have been more research done on the specific steps PCLS could have used the loop-format. The sample map was a bit more flushed out than ours, so if we had more time or a better software than Canva, it may have been more professional and aligned with PCLS expectations for the maps.
Collaborative Efforts
The current experience map was supposed to be developed by Consultant A, but due to an unexpected illness, the project was completed by Consultant B and myself. I created the map itself and the design, while Consultant B input the information necessary for the sidebars (narrative and interactions/opportunities).
The future experience map was developed by Consultant B and myself. Like the current map, I created the map itself and the design, and Consultant B input the narrative and interactions/opportunities on the sidebars.
Competencies
This project examines the following MAWRM competencies, which align with and demonstrate an understanding of writing, rhetoric, and media:
Visual communication theories
Research and design methods
Professional communication practices
Technological and media production literacies
Writing and editing skills
Skills
Content Strategy
Workflow governance
Persona building
Experience mapping
Collaboration
Interpersonal communication
Team-building
Email writing
Zoom meeting
Review and feedback
Project Management
Time management
Agenda writing
Report writing
Communication organization
Consensus-building
Project planning
Presentation building
Software
Adobe InDesign
Canva
Google Suite
Zoom
Slack
Other Soft Skills
Creativity and innovation
Attention to detail
Understanding of commercial environment
Deadline-oriented
Reflection
Reflecting back on this project, there are a few areas that I’d like to discuss: (1) Project Strengths, (2) Different Outcomes, (3) My Weaknesses, and (4) My Strengths.
Project Strengths
Overall, I think this project was successful. It was a lot of information for our client, but PCLS seemed pleased with the results. To achieve this success, the team divided up the projects based on strengths and interests. We based those projects on preliminary research and foundational content strategy theories. By appealing to those, each deliverable team was able to create something professional and on-scope with what PCLS asked for.
Different Outcomes
There are a few things I would do differently if I could do this project again. I would have started planning earlier. For each deliverable, I would have planned longer than two weeks ahead of that deliverable. Ideally, we would have at least a month of planning before starting the drafting process. Alongside that, I think more time for the project as a whole would have helped. We were on a time constraint as we only had two months to complete all of our data collection, research, and deliverables.
I also would have liked more feedback from our clients post-presentation to give them tailored final deliverables. Post-presentation, PCLS said they felt the experience maps did not accurately represent their staff’s experiences. Experience maps offer a “fresh, outward perspective [with a] holistic process of a defined experience, from end-to-end, including actions, thoughts, and feelings” (Mapping, 285). As the information was taken directly from research, it was objectively sound, voiced by the PCLS staff. One downside to these deliverables came in the form of “mapping overload” (285). With the large intake of information, clients can often get overwhelmed with analysis. If we had more time to meet with PCLS—the presentation lasted about an hour—we may have been able to better express their staff experiences in relation to the experience maps.
My Weaknesses
As far as my weaknesses throughout this project, I tend to be a perfectionist (as shown with the need for feedback above). I want things to be perfect, which occurs in the idea that “if you want something done right, do it yourself.” Especially with a team member having an unforeseen illness, I took over almost immediately and created the persona based on my own ideas, as opposed to including my team member. Consultant B also helped pick up slack from our other team member. The software we used (Canva) was not as collaborative as the experience map team originally thought, but I was later able to share my designs with my team and received feedback.
With the project manager role, I was meant to serve as a “bridge” figure, making sure that each team member completed the work required of them (Welshman, 47). While I did fulfill that role, I focused more on other responsibilities, like leading the graduate course accompanied with this project. I took on other responsibilities and did not delegate certain tasks (i.e., logo creation, project brief design, presentation template creation, etc.). As the project continued, the Parliamentarian would remind me to delegate during meetings.
My Strengths
Though I did not delegate much, I did develop my leadership skills as the project manager, which will continue to serve me in my professional career. I also played to my strengths in terms of design and past experience. Professionally, I design logos, book covers, book catalog layouts for publishing companies, and more, so I knew designing the experience maps would complement my skills.
Along with my prior experience, I enjoy collaborative environments and being part of a team—whether with remote or in-person work. Though the remote working environment was a constraint for the project, it was not a constraint for my work priorities. The lack of a team member and tight deadlines also proved to be project constraints, but I personally work well under pressure and am very deadline-oriented.
References
Books
Managing Chaos: Digital Governance by Design, Lisa Welshman
Content Strategy for the Web, 2nd Edition, Kristina Halvorson and Melissa Rach
Mapping Experiences: A Complete Guide to Creating Value through Journeys, Blueprints, and Diagrams, James Kalbach
The Jobs to Be Done Playbook: Align Your Markets, Organization, and Strategy Around Customer Needs, James Kalbach
Websites
Usability.gov’s Content Strategy Basics, www.usability.gov/what-and-why/content-strategy.html
Usability.gov’s Individual Interviews, www.usability.gov/how-to-and-tools/methods/individual-interviews.html
Usability.gov’s Personas, www.usability.gov/how-to-and-tools/methods/personas.html
Clemson University’s Brand Guide, www.clemson.edu/brand/guide/
Articles
“Content Strategy and UX: A Modern Love Story,” Kristina Halvorson, uxmag.com/articles/content-strategy-and-ux-a-modern-love-story
“Complete Beginner’s Guide to Content Strategy,” UX Booth, www.uxbooth.com/articles/complete-beginners-guide-to-content-strategy/
“Chapter 2: Content Strategy,” Moz, moz.com/beginners-guide-to-content-marketing/content-strategy
“The Design Funnel: A Manifesto for Meaningful Design,” Stephen Hay, www.webdesignblog.gr/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/ManifestoForMeaningfulDesign.pdf
“4 Persona Samples You Can Use in Any Industry,” Jessica Wells, www.brafton.com/blog/strategy/persona-examples-from-around-the-web-and-why-they-work/
“20+ User Persona Examples, Templates and Tips For Targeted Decision-Making,” Ryan McCready, venngage.com/blog/user-persona-examples/
