Tailoring Contents

Speaker A: M foreign.

Speaker B: I'm back again with the wonderful co host Rebecca Sangster Kelly from Studium Consulting to talk about a really interesting topic that. And it's about tailoring content. So it's something that I try to do whenever I can, um, when I'm working with a client to segregate the audience and to create bespoke messages for each stakeholder group.

Speaker C: When I look at audience segmentation from my perspective, I always look at the culture, I always look at the business function, I look at the number of people in a particular department and I rarely get down to demographics. Sometimes I do, but, you know, I try to consider the country.

Speaker A: The only way real bloody politics really works is if you can totally render someone inert. If you have a stakeholder who is a micromanager who is making your life health, sometimes there's nothing you can do. It's good to accept that that person has some, um, synapses wrong with them who gets some joy or they get relief over controlling other people.

Speaker B: Hello again. I'm, um, back. It's Katy Siche with another episode of Engagement Express, here to explore on your behalf different techniques and ways to increase engagement in your organization. Now, this is a podcast that's been going for about two years now. Over two years. And we are 52 episodes in. It's for HR, internal communication and engagement professionals, and it's released every two weeks now. I'm back again with the wonderful co host Rebecca Sangster Kelly from Studium Consulting to talk about a really interesting topic that tends to get people riled or really enthusiastic, depending on who they are. And it's about tailoring content. So it's something that I try to do whenever I can, um, when I'm working with a client to segregate the audience and to create bespoke messages for each stakeholder group. But how many times have we all tried to do this as internal comms pros and come up against barriers such, uh, as lack of time, lack of resource, lack of bandwidth, lack of knowledge about the audience and what the impact of the project is. Changes initiative is on each one. So tailoring the message is not as easy as it sounds, but it is actually quite crucial to success, success to running a successful internal comms campaign. So let's dive in with, uh, Rebecca, Welcome to Engagement Express.

Speaker C: Back again as my co host, this time talking about tailoring the message. And it's so wonderful to have someone to bounce ideas off because normally I'm thinking these through things through on my own. So it's nice to have a sense check to find out if I'm not going mad or if I'm going over the top or if I'm not going far enough. And from my perspective, I have quite strong views on tailoring the message because there's always an ambition to do this in my experience. So everyone wants to. Yeah, let's tailor the message. And my strategies always include audience segmentation and a variety of different messages to suit that particular audience based on where they are, based on the jobs they do, perhaps based on the local culture, you know, certainly based on. On the business area for sure. But we never ever get that far. So it's always just. We don't have time for that. Let's crack out the message, make sure it gets to people. They actually receive it in their mailbox or they receive it as an Internet article or whatever format you use. But we don't have time to segment the message.

Speaker A: Um, yep, it can become a bit of like cutting your losses too. But at the same time, I think it's because we want to. We want everyone to feel heard or at least that we're speaking to them. I think we can by wanting to do everything perfectly because we know the impact it can have. Sometimes I think we just need to prioritize the ones who are the problematic audiences and let the other ones have a day off from the take.

Speaker C: Yeah, it was not a bad, Not a bad take. Not a bad take at all. The only thing is though, have you ever seen it work well in terms

Speaker A: of cutting losses and being like, just get it over the line or in terms of segmenting with.

Speaker C: In terms of the segment, I've been, I've been on the, the latter or the former, uh, statement that you made. I've been on the receiving end of that. I've been executing on that in that approach so many times. So let's just get it over the line. I know what that feels like. But, uh, segmentation is something I've rarely seen done successfully.

Speaker A: So when I've done segmentation, the best has been on focusing on small activities. When I was in a digital comms role where there was lots of different products and various user groups and what I focused on there with the tailoring was having a standard approach so people knew it was from this author. Because when, especially when you're in an organization, when you're not internal comms, when you're doing projects, so you have a lot of different voices going on. I, um, prioritize making sure people, when they see the email or see the message, they know it's from a specific author.

Speaker C: Right.

Speaker A: And that and having that structure and then in there. What I sometimes do is I go in and write something that can be basically the same and then highlight the certain words that need to be changed out. Always highlighting the specifics. And that's when I find it's the easiest to get it over the line. Alternatively, another way of looking at it is do all your audiences need to have emails or can you have different channels? So some are better with in person, some are better with having drop in sessions, some are better for having lunch. And do you have certain audiences because of their behavior, because of their objectives, because of their interests? You'll have more success by not even not being too bothered that the email won't. You were supposed to send them all the same email but you know that that group isn't engaging with the emails as much as they are coming, going to the Friday night drinks.

Speaker C: Yeah.

Speaker A: So I think we can by looking at the behavior of some people and engagement and also so for my Tuesday morning, Tuesday morning running videos, I originally made them for to help people in office jobs understand the importance of comms. I didn't expect to have comms people, marketing people, PR people as prime watchers. I thought that was teaching them how to suck it.

Speaker C: Interesting. Love your videos. Love those videos.

Speaker A: Oh thank you. Well, you know, I underestimated the benefit of taking things back to its foundation, looking at the elements. And I think sometimes we can over obsess about the importance of specificity without realizing that sometimes the basics are applicable to everyone.

Speaker C: Right.

Speaker A: But it's about looking for the unexpected audience, the unexpected reactions, the unanticipated engagement. And that's what I'm looking at more and more now as I go in with a theory of who I think who I know we need to engage with who I think is going to look at this and then I look to see what the behavior is after of who's actually responding.

Speaker C: Yeah.

Speaker A: Because then after that then you can tailor more.

Speaker C: And the idea about taking the basic message and this is the thing about repurposing, you know, I love the idea of repurposing. It sounds so good when you say it. Oh yeah, repurpose. Because I don't need to reinvent the wheel each time. But the way you just said it makes it sound easy. So I've never actually done that. I think that that's an excellent approach whereby you just take the message and you highlight keywords that need to be changed, removed or just. Or changed Depending on the audience. And that's a really good way to look at repurposing. Because when you say audience, let's do audience segmentation. Let's, let's create specific bespoke messages. People think, oh my God, that's going to take so long. You know, we don't have the time for it. We don't have. And in fact, it's not even going to deliver much of, um, a dividend. The investment is not worth it.

Speaker A: And just as on a side note of that, just because I know some people are going to be like, but, but we need to have sign off. Like, if you have sign off, that's specifically around like four words on how you're saying it, you can at least get the stakeholder to review those four words without them having to review all of it and start making changes to every other copy.

Speaker C: Yeah.

Speaker A: So if you already have them signed off, the approach, the intro, the such, then you have, like, for this audience, we're going to say this. For this audience, we want them to do that. And then you get, you funnel the decision maker into a, ah, yes or no, or a, um, different adjective. And you get them to have to see that they have to make a decision rather than being overwhelmed by the amount of words they're looking over.

Speaker C: Right, exactly. And this is something I wish I'd have got you for an upcoming episode that, uh, I'm doing. I've written it now actually, and recorded. It's on approval, the approval process, which is always boil the ocean. And I love what you said about confining people, because that's the whole podcast episode. That's what it's about. It's confining people to what they can and what they can't edit. And I think it's so much easier for the stakeholders involved because if you present them with communication, the temptation is then to say, right, okay, I've got, you know, I've got, um, agency to change everything, absolutely everything. And you don't want people saying, why don't we say delighted instead of happy? Why don't you say frightened instead of scared? Because no one cares. At the end of the day, the message is not to do with those words. The message is to do with the action or the behavior that's required. So, you know, that speaks to that.

Speaker A: I'm having reminiscence of a stakeholder. I had, uh, Microsoft Word gave them red for the edits and they were four days late with the feedback. We'd missed our deadline and they rewrote the edits. Whole effing newsletter.

Speaker C: Oh, yeah, I've seen that.

Speaker A: And I was like, well, what was the point of bringing me in if you're going to be an effing micromanager who's not even taking on board what your other three sponsors have written? But hey, I. Yeah, keep paying my day rate. Like, but what's the point? Demoralizing as a communicator when.

Speaker C: Totally demoralizing. Totally. And the thing is then you. That you then become redundant to some extent.

Speaker B: You.

Speaker C: You become an administrator, which is definitely not great.

Speaker A: But one thing I do want to add, just for anyone who's listening, who's like, oh, you've been through that too. Always remember, though, especially with stakeholders, especially with influencing. Because people are like, oh, you can influence people. The reason Game of Thrones is so good to watch is because they're able to kill idiots off. In corporate world, you cannot off anyone, sadly. Ah, I know. So the only way real bloody politics really works is if you can totally render someone inert. So with that in mind, if you have a stakeholder who is a micromanager who is making your life help, it's not. Sometimes there's nothing you can do.

Speaker C: Right.

Speaker A: And it's good to accept that that person has some, um, synapses wrong with them who gets some joy or they get relief over controlling other people. M. And no matter how someone's like, oh, you just need to figure out what they need, that person needs to be in control. So no matter what you do, they're gonna find another way to be in control.

Speaker C: Yeah, we've all been there. We've. We've all seen that. And, and to some extent, that, that. Yeah, that's. That's, um, that's. That's a whole subject in. Of. In of itself. Oh, you can go deep dive on that one psychologically anyway.

Speaker A: But I just wanted to add that in because I know that some people can feel like it's all their fault, like. No, true. Not your fault.

Speaker C: No, it's really not. It's really not.

Speaker A: People don't know how to be stakeholders. That's the problem. They don't know how to support the advancement of.

Speaker C: Right. Indeed. Yeah. And there are some people who are just in the mix to cause chaos and mayhem. I mean, when I look at audience segmentation from my perspective, I always look at the culture, I always look at the business, the function, if it's a function. I look at the number of people in a particular department, and I rarely get down to demographics. Sometimes I Do. But, uh, you know, I try to consider the country and the strategic objectives of that particular region. But what are your categories for audience segmentation? If we're talking core categories.

Speaker A: Ooh. So I usually focus around what I need them to do. So for me, it's all about the activity. Even if it's down to needing to build trust with them, make them aware of things. It. I tie it to what they. Yeah, no, it's about what they need, what I need from them, what my client or boss needs. And then because that's the activity I want to drive and the objective I want to measure. And I know that not. We don't always have a specific objective, um, activity, but it's going. It's activity, actually interest. Because when I think of like, where. With some. Where you're trying to inform, there's people gonna be interested in certain things. But I think that sometimes with the interest, you can have bigger groups for the activity. You can narrow the group down in some respects. But you can tell me I'm wrong.

Speaker C: I'm just thinking as you're talking, I think it's interesting because you think of it. You're probably thinking of it differently. To me know, when I think of audience segmentation, I always look at. And maybe. And, um, there's no right or wrong. You know, it could well be that you look at it from the standpoint of what is it we're trying to get people to do? What is it we're trying to get people to think? What is it we're trying to get people to feel? And then we tailor from that perspective. But when I look at it, I always think to myself, okay, where are people at? What are they doing? Where do they sit? Where are they on the hierarchy? And then I. I look at the message.

Speaker A: But yeah, so I would say from those aspects you've mentioned, I would say what they're. That for me, is what they're interested in.

Speaker C: Right.

Speaker A: What's the interest? Why should they care about my email? Why should they care about the post? Why should they care or even feign interest in attending a town hall? Well, you know, I don't know if you've noticed this with. With, um, lockdown that, uh, with virtual town halls, there would be a bunch of people stuff still logged into teams to a town hall the night, the morning after, because they just went in to be seen, but they never forgot to log out.

Speaker C: Oh, my God, I've done that. Rebecca. I'm one of those. Gosh, I didn't think anyone else noticed that you've noticed too?

Speaker A: Oh, yeah. No, because it'd be a few of them and it was a monthly town hall for one client and you just saw the same name. So you're like, you guys weren't even paying attention. You just logged in and you never, you, you never. Because when teams stopped it where when you left, you didn't actually leave.

Speaker C: You didn't log off.

Speaker A: Yeah, yeah, yeah. Especially if you like, we're recording. You realize half an hour later, oh, I'm still recording that meeting. I have to go back and stop the recording. Yeah, that kind of thing. Um, but yeah, that's. So when I say stay in interest, it's like, so for me, it's so it comes down to the why. Because it's all well and so. Because I need that. I need that when I work with clients. Because otherwise people just like, oh, this needs to go out. But if I can't get them to sit back and be like, so why should they care about that?

Speaker C: Right.

Speaker A: Tell me why they should care. Because otherwise comms becomes a ego boosting glorification of I did this.

Speaker C: Yeah.

Speaker A: Oh, actually there's this one. Um, I organized some lunch and learns for a client. And we had the month, uh, every two weeks. We had, um, during the. When lockdown was happening, we wanted to get some people together. And I made sure that the people talking about their applications, different digital improvements, they had to talk about something that went wrong, something unexpected that happened and how they solved it because it had to be a learning. So I had. I forced people to admit something wasn't perfect. But we problem solved. And people wanted to hear those things. And it's about. Because otherwise lots of comms can become just like, oh, yes, we're amazing. We accomplished this. And then people are like, so did I have to sit through that to know that?

Speaker C: Exactly.

Speaker A: What's in it for me? What's my time? And as people are getting more stretched for time and expectations they want to make, they want to get that promotion, they're going to spend their time wisely.

Speaker C: Yeah. I love the idea about, you know, trying to work out what's in it for them. And people are nosy and, uh, people do have, uh, a desire to find out when something's gone wrong because it's entertaining. And so you're right. Yeah. Let's be more realistic when it comes to comms. I could talk to you forever. I think, I think there are a number of different topics we've identified in there that we should revisit. Thanks.

Speaker B: Thanks.

Speaker C: Again, Rebecca, for being a wonderful co host on this, uh, particular topic. And yeah, I can't wait to speak to you next time.

Speaker A: Well, thanks for having me, Kate. And I hope you have a wonderful rest of your week.

Speaker C: Thank you. Cheers.