Organizations in transition: old and new roles in (content) marketing

I posted this chart on Facebook and Google+ some time ago and received some criticism. The criticism was that it was far too complex (and complicated), that no company could depict it and that it wasn't even necessary. An editor-in-chief and a well-trained editor would actually be enough. Okay, they said, if there is a lot of dialog, maybe a community manager, but the editor could normally do that as well. And I still defended the role model...

Now I'm getting support from Joe Pulizzi, who is considered the "content marketing guru" in the US. Yesterday, he published a blog post with the "10 content marketing roles for success in the next 10 years." This prompted me to topic the topic , as I consider topic a key topic : it determines whether great content marketing ideas can actually be implemented. If not, even the best ideas are worthless. And I believe that companies (both large and small) need to restructure their marketing departments. Only then will they be able to meet future challenges. Here is a model for doing so:

The most important thing to understand here is that this is a role model. The "roles" correspond to specific functions and competencies—not necessarily to individuals and certainly not to "positions." In theory, these roles could also be filled by someone working part-time. Theoretically. If there were someone who could combine all these functions. But the important thing is that the roles must be filled by people who are proficient in them. The days when the editor "knows a little Photoshop" and therefore designs the graphics themselves are over. The roles show which skills are important for good content marketing. As I said: not done "somehow," but competently. However, the role model makes it possible, for example, to fill two positions (in corporations this is called "FTE," or "full-time equivalent") with six people. In this case, different departments "share" one person – e.g., a media designer who may work in traditional marketing but also helps out with content marketing. Or you can fill this role with a freelancer who is only employed for 6 hours a week, for example.

The head of the whole thing is the "content strategist." Joe Pulizzi calls him the "chief content officer." Sounds cool. But it's the same thing. Some also call him the "chief storyteller" or "corporate story architect."

So there is a large selection of titles. But why not just call him "editor-in-chief"? Simply because a "content strategist" does something different from an "editor-in-chief". The editor-in-chief is usually the "boss of the editors" (banal, right?) and as such also has the authority to issue instructions to the editors. The content strategist does not have that. The content strategist develops the content strategy and ensures that it is implemented in the company. Above all, this means that they understand the processes of how (and where) content is created in the company and, above all, how content "adds value". But he does this with completely different means than the editor-in-chief. This is because many different units produce content in companies. The content strategist can develop recommendations, train people and give them tips, and can also bring ideas together. But they never have the authority to issue directives to other departments. However, it is also true that in small companies where only one department (with two people) develops content, there is no difference between "editor-in-chief" and content strategist.

The second man (or the "first officer") is the boss on duty. Pulizzi calls him the "managing editor". He is the interface between "Strategy" and "Operations". He implements the strategy and is also the project manager.

He is the master of Excel, Google Docs - or ideally a "Content Marketing Suite", which he uses to manage all content. He leads the editorial meetings, maintains the topic plan and keeps the editorial calendar up to date. While the content strategist concentrates on the strategic elements (surprising, isn't it?), he only takes care of the implementation. And he also ensures that the content is strategically planned and then implemented in line with the strategy: In terms of tonality, the style guide, protagonists, media selection, format selection - whatever is part of the strategy. And it makes sense to separate these two roles. Because while the content strategist has to keep an eye on the big picture and think creatively and visionarily, the CvD's job is more like that of an accountant: their area is the details.

The community manager is the interface between the community and the company. She represents the interests of the company externally to the community and the public, and the interests of the community and the public internally.

In addition, she enforces the community rules in dialogue. In this respect, she has a "triple mandate" similar to that of a social worker. She also works with customer care, usually a call center, if the company has chosen to run customer support via social media as well. As such, she also provides content to support. Here, too, it is advisable to have a role other than that of content strategist, managing editor (or editor), as she must be able to devote herself entirely to the customer without being distracted by other operational tasks. She also needs special empathic skills that are not as important in other roles. At Pulizzi, this role is called "Chief Listening Officer," which places it somewhat higher in the hierarchy and thus gives it more strategic power. However, the function of securing the "outside-in perspective" remains the same.

The editor is probably the most "ordinary" member of the team. They must be able to write and topics . Journalistic training is very helpful in this regard. However, their main task is to implement the strategic guidelines of the content strategist.

And a good editor is certainly fit for the challenges of content marketing in the coming years. Because a well-trained editor masters the various journalistic formats such as interviews, reports, glossaries, commentaries and much more. They can also write for online media and are familiar with SEO. This role can be scaled relatively easily: There are a lot of good freelancers on the market with whom you can fill out your team if necessary.

The media designer takes care of the visual language. It plays an increasingly important role. And it simply needs a specialist.

As I said above, the days when you could quickly create a graphic in PowerPoint are over. The competition is too fierce to score points with that. It's also not enough to just quickly select images from a photo archive. The images need a uniform language. Incidentally, this function is easiest to fulfill with a freelancer. In most cases, this is not a full-time job. Nevertheless, it is advisable to have a professional on the team here.

The channel manager (Pulizzi calls him the "Channel Master") is familiar with all channels. He knows what works well where.

And he knows what the special features of each channel are - both technically and tactically. And in case of doubt, he also takes over the placement of the content in the corresponding channels. This also relieves the editor, who could certainly take on this role themselves in many cases. However, the editor has other important tasks. In this respect, a distinction also makes sense here.

I personally see these six roles as the core of a content marketing team. In his article, Pulizzi mentions other roles that I believe can be used in addition, especially in larger companies:

• The Influencer Relations Officer deals exclusively with influencers. I see this role as more of a supplement to the seven roles mentioned above. However, if a company topic not topic particular emphasis on this topic , this role should be able to be performed by the Community Manager and the Content Strategist.
• At Pulizzi, the Director of Audience is responsible for monitoring and for the technical systems that serve the target groups, such as marketing automation software and emailing systems. This role is likely to be reserved for large companies that have special software for these areas.
• Pulizzi also sees a need for "HR for Marketing", as a kind of "coach" for employees in social and content marketing.
• The chief technologist is responsible for (surprise!) technology. Personally, I see this role as more common in large corporations.
• And the person responsible for "Freelancer and Agency Relations" mentioned by Pulizzi should probably also be used primarily in corporations if they have a particularly large number of freelancers and agencies
• And last but not least, Pulizzi mentions the "ROO", the "Return on Objectice Officer". A great title, isn't it? However, I wouldn't think that it really has any place alongside the content strategist. After all, ensuring the return on objectives is precisely his or her job.