How to Eliminate the Sales/Marketing Disconnect With CRM-FM Read More >>
80% of Sales Lead Generation Costs Wasted Due to Lack of Lead Development Read More >>
Sales-Optimizing On-Demand CRM Marketing Campaigns, With CRM-FM Read More >>
Where On-Demand CRM Meets Marketing: What Marketers Need to Know Read More >>

MAKE SURE YOU CONTINUE TO RECEIVE EACH ISSUE OF TUESDAY MARKETING NOTES—CLICK HERE TO RENEW YOUR FREE SUBSCRIPTION (IF YOU'VE ALREADY SUBSCRIBED, NO NEED TO RE-SUBSCRIBE)

Guiding Copy Through the Approval Mill

by Jonathan Ward

The idiosyncrasies of human beings are probably never more maddening than when we have to obtain approvals for marketing communications copy. Whether you're working from within a corporation or from outside as a communications agency, copy approvals are a major sticking point in what might otherwise be a smooth, orderly process of production. The copy in question might be for an ad, a brochure, a report, a press release, a newsletter—you name it. Whatever you're working on, human foibles can make the copy approval process take a far greater toll in time and suffering than it should. By looking at our end goals and understanding some of the things that can go wrong from a human relations perspective, I think we can devise a set of rules to make the unpleasant task of copy approvals less taxing and more efficient.

Consider, first, the purpose of business-to-business marketing communication. To the greatest extent possible, it's supposed to pave the way for a business relationship, whether that means getting a sales rep's foot in the door or causing an existing client to order more products or services. When the sales piece arrives, it's making a sales call of its own, to some extent, so it needs to speak with a single, coherent voice that represents the company and its objectives. Sales literature must be a useful tool for the Marketing department and the sales force, not something they're ashamed of.

You probably wouldn't send a team of five people with different agendas and objectives to visit a sales prospect or an existing customer. Nor would you have those people deliver a vague, five-headed, incongruous pitch to their audience. You'd be better off—far better off—to make no contact with the prospect whatsoever than to deliberately hamstring yourself with an indecipherable sales message. Why, then, should five or more different people be asked to "edit" the copy for your sales literature?

Just as the saying holds that there are no statues of committees, so it goes that good B-to-B marketing copy isn't written by the combined efforts of a large group. Passing copy around for general remarks—and then making the mistake of incorporating those remarks—is a proven way to turn what might have been strong sales copy into something with a little less vitality than a cow pie. The result is a dysfunctional sales piece with multiple personalities, and it likely does you more harm than good.

I thought of a couple of immutable laws while working on this article. In my experience, these laws are not only as universally applicable as Newton's laws of physics, they're also every bit as unbending:

Law One: The complexity of (and the time consumed by) a marketing communications project increases geometrically with the number of people on the copy review squad;

Law Two: The coherence and quality of a marketing communications piece varies inversely with the number of people on the copy review squad

Just how can you get a piece of marcom copy approved and on its way to production? Properly executed and managed, the copy approval process should take days instead of weeks, as is often the rule.

Keep the following points in mind as you plan your copy review strategy. If you're with a communications agency, you'll have to discuss these points with your client to be sure he or she understands the need for keeping both hands on the steering wheel:

• In the first place, be certain one person is responsible for the grammatical accuracy and phrasing of the piece, as well as its stylistic voice. Distributing a sales piece that speaks with multiple voices is roughly equivalent to delivering a dead fish to your sales prospects and expecting them to get excited about your company. Unless you're in the dead fish business, this is to be avoided;

• You'll usually have the best luck by using a writer from outside your company. The human tendency to meddle with copy is considerably reduced when an outside professional is used, compared to in-house efforts. An outside writer can have the further benefit of bringing badly needed objectivity to the process. It's also worth mentioning that in-house copy is frequently abominable;

• Limit the number of people reviewing the copy. Unless their situation is immediately affected by the content of the project, they shouldn't be in the loop. Their title or hierarchical rank in the organization shouldn't have anything to do with it, ideally;

• Give each reviewer a separate copy to work on. Passing the same paper around and letting them critique each other's remarks not only diverts attention from the central task, but ultimately leads to chaos;

• "Review" is the operative word here, not "edit." The people to whom you send the copy should be instructed to verify the factual accuracy of the statements being made, and no more. Many people fancy themselves editors (after all, they wrote that article for the church newsletter back in 1985), and they will "edit" your copy right down the water closet. Limit their input, and everyone will ultimately be happier with the results;

• Restrict the reviewers to making constructive, understandable comments. The inexplicably circled word here and question mark there detracts from the purpose at hand. Make them explain anything they write on the copy. While it may be too much to ask, having them use standard proofreader's marks will make their input much more coherent;

• Give them one shot at reviewing. Many people feel they have to modify any copy placed in front of them, even if they've reviewed it six times previously. Allowing endless revisions sets the stage for projects that never get finished. It also gets expensive, because people will still be making copy revisions when your literature is in the color proofing stage;

• Keep your reviewers within time constraints. In most cases, the world's slowest reader wouldn't need more than half an hour to review a piece of marcom copy. Anyone who can't turn the copy around in a week should be dropped from the review squad;

• If you can, keep the Legal department under control. Some lawyers have a tendency to remove all sales claims from copy as proof that they're earning their money and protecting their client. The result is copy that reads: "The products described herein may or may not be inferior to other similar products. No claims are made regarding fitness or suitability for a particular purpose." If the lawyers really have to gut your copy to this degree to limit your company's liability, you might be in the wrong business;

• Try to think your way around the rank problem. The people who review your sales literature copy may be your "superiors," for want of a better term, and as such you may find it difficult to get them to follow your suggestions. By carefully explaining the benefits of adhering to the guidelines described in this article, you might well be able to convince them there's a better way to do things, and everyone will benefit. That's the optimist's perspective. It's equally possible your reviewers might be pompous, autocratic buttheads who won't listen to you. In that case, exercise as much control as you can, and hope for the best;

• Finally, stand up for yourself. There's no law that says every comment made by every reviewer must find its way into the final document. Remember to emphasize the focus of your message, and discard anything that doesn't add to its strength. Ironically, it's a fair bet many of your reviewers won't even remember the changes they made when they see the final piece. Smile, thank them for their input, and proceed with impunity

Marketing communications copy production is typically dogged by two central yet avoidable problems: It doesn't speak appropriately to its audience, and it takes too long to produce. Careful, proactive management of the copy review process can give you powerful gains in quality and production speed, which can make you a winner all around. Company management will appreciate efficient production of superior material, and your clients and prospects will reward you with more business when the literature does its job. But I didn't say it was going to be easy.

Jonathan Ward (jjw@jonathanward.com) is a writer who specializes in business development for companies in technical disciplines.

Comments? Questions? Send them to me us: ericgagnon@verizon.net