Vinish Garg recently posted on the content’s role in Disruption. In his post, he shared what the experts had to say on the role that content has to play/currently plays. Here’s my opinion:
What is Disruption?
Let me first take you back in time. This started when the marketing and branding industry opened the corporate gates to the world of consumers. And, by opening the gates, I mean it transformed its value proposition from “this is what I have” to “this is what I can do”.
This is when the small brands started becoming revolutionarily big by using the power of content to reach people. Gradually, the brand communication transformed from advertisements to jingles, to sports, to brand personification, and to emails. But, this inherent idea of associating brands with emotions continued to lose its value as the size of content continued to become unmanageably big.
Today, we have a lot more touch points to reach to our consumers, yet we are far less effective in reaching the right audiences. Reason? The consumers are lost in the enormity of content. In the race of creating more content, we have forgotten to make it effectively personal. Today, the consumers have a lot of options, and each of those options is trying to be different. But, when everyone tries to be different, no one is different.
It is important to disrupt this clichéd template of communication to help consumers make informed decisions. It is important to keep consumers at the focus to design communication strategies that transform the value proposition from “this is what I can do” to “this is what I can do for you”.
This disruption is to bring back the consumers from the point of “I am being pushed” (with the product/service) to “I am being heard”. And, only such a disruption can help us engage better, listen better, and do better.
And, how can technical communication/technical communicators play a role in Disruption?
I think it is about the consumers, and not about the product. We exist because the consumers (and their needs) exist. We help build this communication ecosystem. We communicate products in an undistorted, unappealing form. But, we do connect the features and benefits. We can help our consumers answer the “what’s in it for me” question. Of course, we may not sell. But we can at least help them buy.
I look at it this way: If organizations were chemical equations, technical communicators would be the catalyst. We communicate. And, we help communicate. The information passes through us. So, it is up to us to transform that information into its utterly simple, memorable, and usable form. In fact, we can equate customers’ requirements with the developers’ intentions.
We can align tools, methodologies, and the technology while we bring clarity, insights, oneness, and simplicity (not in that order though). But of course, that all sums up as the easy-sounding commonsensical task. And, making common sense truly common is perhaps the disruption.
The Wordsmith 
Hey Suyog, thanks for reference to my post on ‘Content for Disruption’.
For your statement as “If organizations were chemical equations,….”. I would rather say it as “If a transaction/experience is a chemical equation, assume that the business goals are on the left side and the customer needs are on the right side of equation….”
As communicators, our role start much before the user purchases a product because they are already reading instructions and manuals, and they are talking about the product/service in their network (before they make a decision to buy). So, we are helping them throughout the user journey and this is where technical communication integrates with content strategy. Cheers.
LikeLike
I agree with you, Vinish. In fact, that is why I say that we are the ones who create a communication ecosystem. And, that though we do not “sell” things, we can definitely help our readers “buy” in a more informed way. I am glad that you liked my article, and that you opinion is in line with mine.
LikeLike