Why so little success with corporate storytelling? Here’s what to do instead.

Executive Summary:

Marketers interested in experimenting with storytelling can start with a low-risk, low-cost piece of collateral: the customer case study. Use narrative structure to engage prospective customers. Add resonance to your value proposition.

Key Points:

1. Social media is inviting marketing executives to take a second look at narrative structure, which is standard in top-tier business press but missing from most marketing collateral.
2. A customer case study can be repackaged to show a hero (your customer) overcoming obstacles (with your products and services) and achieving market success (your customer's aspiration).

Sound Bite:

"Your social media guru and PR team usually are not equipped to write in narrative form. Senior PR people -- in the VP, SVP and EVP levels -- may have the skills, but they don't write case studies. An ex-journalist on your team is your best bet."

*****

Read the whole article:

With little success, I’ve been trying for 10 years to teach storytelling principles to PR practitioners. Workshop and class attendees understand it and enjoy it, but the few who try to apply a narrative structure to their work get bogged down in the approval process.

I rarely recommend it these days as a workshop component or class. My own PPTs and handouts are dusty.

The only time I teach it now is within the context of a class on writing award submissions. This seems to be the one type of document where the marketing department is willing to let go.

I wonder if this will change.

Scary for old-school marketers: audience that "talks back"

If you read trade press for the advertising industry, you’ll recall that the sudden rise of social media and the audience’s new ability to “talk back” in public prompted substantial fear. This was about five years ago.

Generation gap

Since then, I’ve noticed a generation gap in marketing approaches. In my own mind, I’ve come to divide marketing executives into two groups – new school and old school. For a while, the old-school guys were in positions of authority and making decisions that struck me as anachronistic. Meanwhile, the new-school guys were too low-ranking to exert influence and lacked necessary business insight.

Humpty Dumpty

In 2010, it appears to me that a balance is being struck within some companies. I picture the old-school guys as Humpty Dumpty, fallen and cracked but alive and powerful. Their strength: They understand business. But they’ve lost their creative mojo and know it, so they yield to new-school concepts and hire people whose skills are unfamiliar to them.

Twitter, FB, etc.

But will storytelling become part of the new mix? Will videos, websites, blog posts and short-form posts (Twitter, Facebook) adopt the narrative structure that turns novelists and movie-makers into millionaires?

Sam Whitmore of Sam Whitmore Mediasurvey, who gives media advice to the tech PR industry, last week sent his clients a report raising a similar question. He pointed out significant obstacles. The details are proprietary, so I can’t share, but I can say that I concur, for reasons of my own.

Start with case studies: affordable way to break the mold

Nonetheless, if companies are interested in a small, affordable way to begin breaking the mold, I can offer one highly do-able suggestion: Start with case studies.

This is the easiest ground to give and likely to produce immediate results.

Here are my contrarian teachings:

(1) Give away the punchline in the opening paragraph. Tell the end of the story at the very beginning. In other words, take a sentence or two from what would have been the results section at the end, and move it into the lead.

(2) Don’t keep the “situation,” “problem” and “solution” in separate sections. Mix them. Instead use this framework: a heroic figure whom we care about overcomes obstacles and gets what he wants, learning lessons along the way.

In a case study, the heroic figure is your customer. The obstacles he overcomes are common to prospective customers, some of whom didn’t recognize the problem as clearly you have articulated it or didn’t know it could be solved.

In the course of overcoming obstacles, the customer uses your company’s tools. But picture the customer as MacGyver, the resourceful TV show character who could engineer his way out of any jam with scotch tape and a tin can. This means the emphasis is on the customer (MacGyver), not particularly on your tools – although the story cannot be told without your tools. Go light. Don’t sell. Just tell.

Your subheads could like like this:

Executive summary – Here you mix the “problem” (beginning) and “results” (end) in one or two sentences – briefly -- just enough to tell “a story of transformation.”

• Show change, not the “situation analysis” or “background.” Customer X had a problem common to your prospective customers; now he has business success. Ignore the middle of the story for now. That comes in the next section.
• Use your best stats in the executive summary. Don’t save them for the “conclusion” at the end, especially since most readers won’t get that far, anyway. Even if all they do is skim the first graf, the readers will walk away with the most important idea.

Problem/solution – Here you tell the middle part of the story. This is your customer overcoming obstacles they have in common with your prospective customers, with your tools in hand.

By juxtaposing problem and solution, you gain tension. When you separate them, you have static facts. Tension keeps readers reading.

Ideally, the customer is learning along the way. What lessons can he share? What would he have done differently from the start, knowing what he now knows? What can other businesses learn from his experience? What’s replicable about his success?

When you mix the problem and solution, you are telling a story. When you separate them, you are writing a conventional case study. Which do you think will get higher readership?

Results – Here you amplify the phrase or sentence you pulled out for use in the executive summary. You list business results, if possible, that were outgrowths of the problem’s being solved. You give more stats, while reminding the reader of that super-great one stat you included in the executive summary.

Why adopt this storytelling framework for case studies?

1. An image of business success will now be associated with your company's products or services, even if the reader was a skimmer who quit reading after the first graf.
2. A skimmer is less likely to stop after the first graf because you’ve added an element of suspense (the missing middle), and rewarded him from the start. It’s silly to think that a reader will patiently wade through static facts in hope of a possible reward at the end. Give him confidence from the start that you aren’t wasting his time.
3. People remember stories more readily than they remember facts.
4. Your reason for writing isn’t to tell the world about your customer; it’s to draw in prospective customers who will recognize themselves and their problems in the story. Your customer is a stand-in for your prospective customer, who can now visualize himself succeeding, thanks to the concrete specifics of your story.

Breaking the mold takes courage. You might consider trying it a couple of times and watching the response. If it works, keep it. If it doesn't, toss it. It's a just a case study, right? A tiny piece of your marketing collateral. No big deal. Case studies are not costly in time or money. They aren't high-profile. There's little to lose and readership to gain.

Caveat: Your social media guru and PR team usually are not equipped to write in narrative form. Senior PR people -- in the VP, SVP and EVP levels -- may have the skills, but they don't write case studies.

An ex-journalist on your team is your best bet. Or, if you've got a member of junior staff who successfully pitches top-tier business press, give them a crash course (30 mins) and let them learn from experience. Top-tier business press often write in narrative form.

The advent of social media and questions about the rise of business storytelling give you soft ground for experimentation. The conventional powers that be as well as the audience are now in a forgiving mood. Risk for this type of experiment has never been lower.

***

For more how-to posts, check out:

• contributed articles
• making leap from trade press to business press
• key question asked by business press
• how to listen for storytelling details

Start with "why," especially if you're talking about science

Executive Summary:

Talking science to lay audiences is difficult because scientists themselves are trained for academic rigor, not public outreach. Examples from Wired magazine, TED talks and the Wright brothers demonstrate that by telling a story "out of order" -- by starting with "why" -- scientists (and their spokespeople) can influence society and invite financial security.

Key Points:

1. Just by rearranging the order of your presentation or online post, you can reach a broader audience and get peope to lean forward while listening rather than passively sit back.
2. Start with "why it matters," even if it's just your opinion or if the proportion of your presentation dedicated to that perspective is scant to nil. Let "how" bring up the rear.

Sound Bite:

"Unfortunately, science is underrepresented in social discourse, in large part because scientists are reluctant to communicate with lay audiences."

*****

Read the whole article:

If you're communicating with a lay audience about science and technology, start with "why." For most of us, that means telling the story out of order.

If you don’t start with “why,” you won’t be heard. Instead, you’ll be white noise that people easily tune out. Your audience needs a personal reason for becoming engaged with your “what” and “how.” So first create a sense of purpose, and only then follow up with facts. Give people a reason to listen and they will.

Unfortunately, science is underrepresented in social discourse, in large part because scientists are reluctant to communicate with lay audiences. When they do communicate, their “story” adheres to academic standards in which the lead is buried and the natural drama is drained out.

If you work in science PR or are a scientist willing to reach out and influence someone, this post is for you.

I suggest starting your first draft of an article or speech by asking yourself these questions from the audience’s perspective:

• Why?
• Why now?
• Why does it matter?
• Why should I care?

Also ask, “What role does the technology or research play in the larger scheme of things?” In other words, say why it matters to have that particular role fulfilled. Do not describe how it works or what you did to arrive at your conclusions – save that for later.

When you do this the first few times, it feels wrong. You'll argue, "How can I tell them why they should care if I haven't even told them what they should care about?" That seems logical, I agree. But as it turns out, telling the story out of order is only a problem for you, the explainer. Readers and listeners have no problem with it.

If you’ve got an academic paper on hand, try this: Go to the very end, even past the final summary, to the very short section where the author suggests future questions or experiments. It might only be two sentences and you may not consider it the most important point, but it’s probably there.

Now make this the opening line of your speech or article, even if presenting to an audience of scientists. Why? This is the part of the presentation the audience can act on or make decisions about – in their own lives.

I guarantee they will perk up and listen closely.

By contrast, if you start with your assumptions, they’ll half-listen, waiting with patience for the good part because they have been conditioned to do so – that is, if they’re scientists. Non-scientists will try to listen but fail to find a handle they can hang onto, and eventually their minds will wander.

After starting at the end, now go out on a limb and venture an opinion. Tell everyone why you think they should consider these suggested actions and decisions. Tell them what’s at stake. Describe what could happen if they don’t. Show them how the future could potentially differ from what we expect, and why that would be advantageous.

If it makes you feel better, tell the audience it’s your opinion, and then tell them again that it was your opinion right before you dive into the objective facts.

If you don’t believe me, try it yourself and watch the audience response.

The approach above (starting at the end of the academic paper) is just one way to find the “why.” I’ve got many more up my sleeve, which I can share with you when you hire me for a workshop.

I’m not alone in preaching the virtue of “why first, how later.”

If you look closely, you’ll notice that news stories on scientific topics start with “what’s in it for me,” “why care,” “why care now,” or “why it matters.” The “how” is always near the bottom or at most two-thirds from the top.

Below are similar messages, one from Wired magazine, the other from a TED talk. (Thank you, Edelman clean technology team (my colleagues), for bringing these to my attention.)

In the Wired article, Jennifer Ouellette – a director with a National Academy of Sciences program – is quoted as saying scientists “feel that the facts should speak for themselves. They’re not wrong; they’re just not realistic.”

Another person quoted in the story – Kelly Bush, CEO of a PR firm called ID – says, “They need to make people answer the questions, ‘What’s in it for me?’ ‘How does it affect my daily life?’ ‘What can I do that will make a difference?’ Answering these questions is what’s going to start a conversation.”

“The messaging up to this point has been ‘Here are our findings. Read it and believe.’ The deniers are convincing people that the science is propaganda,” Bush said.

In his TED talk, Simon Sinek says business leaders need to start with the why, and only later give the what and the how. (My, my! How familiar!) He uses Apple Inc., Martin Luther King Jr. and the Wright brothers as examples of history-changers who started their communications with why.

I’m heavily paraphrasing, but have a quick look:

Apple: “We believe in changing the world and thinking differently. We’re doing that by making products that are beautiful and simple to use. Oh, and by the way, we sell computers. Want to buy one?”

Imagine if the order was reversed and the why was left out: “Want to buy a computer from us? Ours are beautiful and simple to use.”

Not so credible. Not so compelling.

MLK: “I have a dream,” not “I have a plan.”

Wright brothers: “This flying machine can change our world for the better.”
Langley (who made the same effort but whose name we don’t know): “I want to build a machine and make money.”

Tell people why they should care, then backfill with the backstory. If you do it the other way around, you risk losing your audience altogether or – at a minimum – losing an opportunity to engage them in your entire presentation.

Can PR ghostwrite client blogs?

Executive Summary:

As marketing departments turn corporate collateral into blog posts, they find the task more time-consuming and difficult than imagined. Should you hire ghost writers? Yes and no. It depends on your audience's expectations. This article tells you how to decide and suggests effective small tweaks to the options you've probably already considered.

Key Points:

1. Social media experts generally caution against ghostwriting blogs. They say the medium and audience expectations make blogs unlike speeches and contributed articles.
2. Analyze your audience and ask key questions about your company's goals and resources before deciding which blogs to ghostwrite or whether to write a particular post at all.

Sound Bite:

"The smartest and most trusted people say, 'Don't ghostwrite company blogs.' But if you absolutely must do it, disclose the contributor's real names or only ghostwrite content the company created previously and is simply re-purposing for easy digestibility."

*****

Read the whole article:

Should your PR team ghostwrite your company's blog posts?

The short answer is "no." The long answer is "sometimes."

Let's do the long answer first. If you absolutely insist on having your PR team write some of your company blog posts, proceed with caution. Give ample thought to:

• your company's goal
• the degree of expertise/attitude/thought leadership required from the author
• originality of content

Questions you can ask yourself while making decisions:

(1) Is the content company-created and is the PR team merely re-purposing it for social media digestibility?

If so, fine. Go for it. But avoid packaging overly canned material in a business-neutral voice. If you must include posts like this, consider interspersing it with more personal and authentic pieces by individuals. Otherwise, your audience is likely to tune out, justifiably so.

(2) What are the audience's expectations?

Consider the degree of skepticism and ethical rigidity of a particular audience. What does the audience value most highly? How will they use the information? Are they likely to be forgiving of sterile business content as long as it includes a tip or resource they can use? Are they expecting a CEO blog with business acumen or an app developer blog with technical depth? If you walk a safe middle line, you may turn off the very people you hope to influence.

(3) Is the time and money worth it if the blog isn't influential?

It's safe to say that a CEO blog carries more weight when it shows incisive thinking and passion, even if not necessarily "good writing." In the world of blogs, "good writing" can be icing, since most posts are produced rapidly in response to an ongoing conversation by a person who isn't a full-time professional writer.

Do application developers carry more weight when they are irreverent and independent? Probably. In some scenarios, it's possible that this level of integrity and authenticity is almost more important to the audience than the content. A rough-around-the-edges post that's spirited and technically well grounded might be better than a smooth vanilla offering.

Writing is time-consuming. That's why people quit blogs after a while or try to hire ghostwriters. But what matters most is substantive content that will influence people. If you don't have that, should you be blogging at all?

(4) Can you manage expectations by disclosing who sometimes contributes?

This is the best practice if the author's credentials aren't the main draw. Avoid leaving a post unsigned or just using the company's name. Commonly, companies-in-the-know say something like "Contributors to this blog include Sam Smith, Jessie Jones and Betty Buttons."

But even so, better to sign each post with "Sam S. for Acme" or "S.S." or "B. Buttons" or "Jessie Jones." If you feel like you don't want the audience to see the "man behind the curtain," then you've got a problem, especially since "transparency is the new black," as they say. At any rate, hiding fake wizards behind curtains is bad -- period.

It's OK to say that your PR team creates some of the blog posts. It's better to do it and say it than to do it and not say it. Otherwise, you risk losing trust down the road. Audiences may think you are hiding something other than a writer's name ("What *else* is this company keeping from me?").

Bottom-line as I see it, the smartest and most trusted people say, "Don't ghostwrite company blogs." But if you absolutely must do it, disclose the contributor's real names or only ghostwrite content the company created previously and is simply re-purposing for easy digestibility.

It's not like a speech. Some people argue that a blog post is like a speech. Presidents of companies and nations hire speech writers, right? Yes, but we all know they do that.

Our *expectation* is that a really talented speech writer did the leg work, the president absorbed the content in full, made substantive changes as he saw fit, then practiced for hours, with coaching.

In contrast, a blog post is perceived as a more informal and less well measured opinion, often formulated quickly, as part of an ongoing social conversation.

In 2004, social media purists said, "No ghostwriting."

In 2010, I see a lot of softening in expert opinion.

People now admit there are gray areas where careful consideration can make a ghostwritten blog OK. For more on that, see an excellent discussion led by Toby Blomberg and John Cass. Thirty-nine contributors weigh in. My favorite comments were those by Lynn Anne Miller, who looked at social media from the corporate perspective.

Edelman's Steve Rubel foresaw the debate in 2004 and said, "What we need to do, however, is separate what works from what doesn't and what level of transparency and input is required. Time will tell."

I agree that we are still determining best practices and that they are likely to change as the blog-reading public itself continues to mature and evolve.

Bad Editors Are Bad for Business -- How to Cope

Your bosses or clients might in fact be the problem. If they are re-writing, sending you a lot of tracked changes, or making vague demands like "make it more punchy" or "make it less like a brochure," you are in the majority.

If I could wave a wand and fix the world in one graceful sweep, I'd make everyone a better editor. Poof! Now people are respectful, appreciative, nurturing and specific. If that's not how you'd describe your boss or client, it's a good thing you met me.

Bad editors are not only bad for morale, they're bad for business. First, there's the immediate waste inherent in over-editing that takes up time on deadline without altering the eventual business outcome. Second, an insidious dynamic develops within the team and poisons efforts yet to come. All kinds of weirdness ensue: blame, apathy, polarization, ineptitude ... don't get me started. For perspective, ask: "Will this edit alter our business outcome?"

So, how to cope with bad editors?

First, don't take it personally. I'm a mercenery myself. I do this for a living, not for my ego.

Second, don't join in the over-reacting.

Third, OK, now it's going to get a little messy. To go on, I need to know more about your situation. Please tell me your specifics, but mask the names of people and companies, of course.

Before getting too far into this, I need to let you know that I only coach smart people. My clients are professional writers at companies that are famously smart. So this blog is not a confessional or ghetto for writing washouts.

Know that your problem is many people's problem. You are just the one with the guts to speak up about it. Take a stand. Be a leader. Articulate the problem. I guarantee you won't be alone in experiencing it.

That qualifier aside, here's a bit of generic editing advice, in case you are able to suggest something like this to your taskmaster of the moment.

1. Try side-by-side editing. This means the writer sits beside the editor as he reviews the document. The editor thinks out loud, so you can hear his thoughts immediately rather than try to guess later what he was trying to get at when he made the entire page bleed.

It also takes no extra time. The editor doesn't have to make an appointment with you to "walk you through the changes," as so many bad editors tend to put it. Instead, you just sit there in real time, observing while it happens. Both parties will learn from this exercise, painlessly.

2. Step back and look for patterns. Rather than fixing every little thing, reacting one by one to each micro-episode of mental discomfort, the editor distances himself from the document. He looks for repetitive choices or a missing perspective.

He sends you a note with two or three questions that get you to think differently about the content. He sits back and waits, then gets a pleasant surprise. The quality ratchets up about 200 percent. And he didn't do a thing.

3. Decide what really matters and let the rest go. Sometimes your editor is horrid simply because he's gifted -- at writing, not editing. It may be that you will never be as good as he is.

Your editor needs to accept this reality, even if it hurts. He needs to make a list of two to five things that are really important to him and let the rest go (crying or gnashing his teeth, fine, but he needs unloose those white knuckes).

Once you can do everything on his list, he can add other items, one at a time. He needs to let you evolve over time. You can't be him. You'll never be him.

Editors with this problem always say to me, "Yes, but I need to uphold quality standards for the client's sake." Yes, but some quality standards matter more than others. Choose.

4. Proofreading is a separate issue. It's something to be done at the very end and done surgically. That is, the editor removes only the tumor while leaving all healthy flesh intact.

Yes, your grammar and punctuation need to be impeccable. That's a credibility issue. And yes, your business needs to convey credibility.

But senior people shouldn't be doing this particular task, so I'm not counting it as editing in this particular blog, which is about edits by bosses and clients.

Change is hard, I know. A mantra that can help you keep this advice in mind while under duress on deadline is the question I posed earlier: "Will this edit alter our business outcome?"

If you are the writer, this question can help you steady your emotions. If you are the editor, it can help you keep your eye on the ball. A red sea of tracked changes helps no one.