A few yrs ago when I worked on a large corporate website, we converted a lot of standalone docs into a website, segmented by user roles. We called our plan & method information design, which I think now would be considered a subset of content strategy. To me, content strategy is really stepping back and getting the biggest possible picture of your content.

We need to acknowledge too that business content is really changing. All content is becoming webetized, even print. Everything is shorter, e.g., white papers, feature articles are about half the length they were 5 yrs ago. We as business communicators must reduce cognitive burden. All online content, I would say eventually, will be socialized also. I agree with you that the conversation is long over due with certain types of technical content. I’d love to see ratings, reviews & likes on technical support content. The main argument I’ve heard against using wikis and forums with public technical content is legal and monitoring issues.

I have two examples for you: Years ago, I was an intern for a US state’s chamber of commerce in Germany. My task was to find ways to promote tourism to that state. (This would be similar to your challenge to foster people’s engagement.) The results were dismal: Most Germans know neither the state nor any cities in it. The tourist attractions (and even industries) it offers are more easily available in Europe. In my opinion, getting Germans to vacation in that state would’ve required a huge effort to get Germans to know the state – and to care for it to boot.

The second example is more successful: The help authoring tool MadCap Flare has a reputation of being powerful and quirky, with a steep learning curve for newbies. Yes, there is online help, there are tutorials and videos to get you started, but much of the tricky issues are worked out in the user forums. As far as I can tell, MadCap’s involvement in them is very small: They provide the stage (the forum) and the tools (for example, you get cute titles, such as “Propellus Maximus”). Beyond that, they mainly leave users to work it out among themselves. And it works pretty well. Because many MadCap users *care* for the product.

As for your other “separating” questions: I think many of us talk about a separate content strategy at this point because many (C-level) managers have not yet understood content as a central *asset* of their companies, all talk of information economy and knowledge management notwithstanding. If we were to roll it all into the corporate strategy, it’d just get lost in the hubbub again.

First, the issue of marcomm versus techcomm. I’m not advocating for separation; I just think that’s the reality at the moment. Over time, I suspect that that line will blur just as the line between training content and tech comm content is blurring today.

Building user communities is actually in my list of business goals. For most of our customers, it’s a secondary goal, but we’re defining having a lot of discussions about it.

For this year, we did change a few track names and reorganize topics in the design, develop, and deliver areas. We also added a few tracks that were either Institutes (advanced topic areas) in the past, or are important areas related to technical communication that we wanted to include this year. Here were our thoughts:

User Experience & Accessibility – We chose User Experience instead of Usability to cover a wider range of topics. This track often includes both usability and user experience-related sessions.

People, Project, and Business Management – This track is relatively unchanged, except a slight name change for consistency.

Content Development – We changed Writing and Editing to Content Development. This change is to match the phases of the publishing model in which content is designed, developed, and then delivered. All topics related to developing information are in this track, including gathering sources, writing of all types, editing, and more.

Content Strategy and Design – We split Design, Architecture, and Publishing into Content Strategy and Design and Content Delivery. This also allowed us to focus on Content Strategy, which was an Institute in the past and is a hot topic area in our industry.

Content Delivery – After splitting Design, Architecture, and Publishing, we wanted this track to reflect the many ways information is delivered. Publishing is often thought of as printing, so we used the term Delivery to cover all methods.

Education and Training – This track remains the same as previous years, focused on instructional design and education-related topics.

Professional Development – This track remains the same as previous years, focused on your career development.

Web Design and Development – This track is new this year, though some topics from the old Web Technologies track will fit into this track. Web Design and Development is a hot topic area related to technical communication. Trends in that area directly affect how information is designed, developed, and delivered. We should also all be aware of not only the trends in this area but also the job opportunities.

Visual Design – This is a new track this year, but we have had sessions in this area over the years. Visual communication is an important aspect of technical communication and we wanted to make these sessions easier to identify. We also wanted to encourage presenters in this area. As cutbacks continue, many technical communicators are being asked to develop more of their own graphic elements. This track will focus on providing the information we need to be successful.

Social Media – This track has been an Institute the last several years, so we have moved it into the main Summit programming.

As for Communication and Interpersonal Skills, we have included those types of topics in either the Professional Development or the Management tracks. We often saw overlap in these tracks and topics, so we decided to combine them this year.

Content may be a buzz word, but it isn’t new. Information Architecture and Content Strategy are closely related, so we chose to use Content Strategy and Design to cover this area.

Content Development includes all types of writing, from Marketing and Scientific writing to Help and Policy and Procedure writing. Editing and Indexing are also part of developing content, so they are included here as well.

I hope this information has helped address any questions you may have about the track name changes and the processes the Committees use to ensure the Summit offers the latest information members of our industry need.

Thanks,

Amanda Nelson, Radian6 Community Manager

I wouldn’t let the discipline of English off the hook so easily by saying that “language is only part of the craft, but not the defining element of the profession”. Many students and teachers would hopefully disagree that this is what English as a discipline is about.

Instead, it’s been my experience that English as a discipline is one way of making sense of the world – and in academia one of the best suited ways to help train technical writers that is widely available. It’s taught me to understand what I know, to organize my thoughts and to share them with others. Not bad for a start, I think…

And your question about the apt metaphor is probably also most appreciated and best answered by someone in that department…