Chicago Symphony Orchestra, featuring the Marc...Image by jordanfischer via FlickrDeciding what to write about – and where to write about it – are daunting tasks for people responsible for corporate Web sites. One approach I’m finding that works really well is to start with a Web site evaluation. I began offering my own content evaluation program in the hopes that it would lead to copyediting business – tactical tweaking, if you will. Instead, what winds up happening is clients use my critique as a platform to discuss their entire approach to communicating with customers and prospects.

A full scale content review is an easy place to start because it’s tangible. Talking about content strategy in the abstract is difficult. For most clients, it’s easier to picture changing something that already exists than to contemplate creating something entirely new out of thin air.

A second reason this approach works is because it forces the client to explain why each content component was created the way it was. In many cases, content seems to evolve for no particular reason. Page content is often the product of committee compromise, over delegation, or incremental cutting and pasting. In all cases, the Web site’s message lacks cohesion and therefore persuasive power.

Stepping back, considering the elements as a whole, leads to consistency and focus. It exposes content weaknesses and acknowledges strengths. It eliminates off point verbiage and replaces it with important themes. It ensures that each page of the site fulfills a purpose. It changes a site from a noisy conglomeration of Web pages into a symphony.

I feel this approach works so well, companies ought to engage in it once a year. Considering how quickly business moves, is it possible to create fresh content today that’s still fresh 12 months later?

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]