Essay for Writing Course

If I were in charge, I would change how content quality is defined at my workplace. A Herculean task, eh?

Quality is a misused term. As a concept, it is misinterpreted, misrepresented, and at times, royally ignored. Quality is also fluid; its definition and benchmarks are easily manipulated. At least this is what I observed while working as a content writer and editor at a business research firm.

In terms of content, a quality product tells a well-woven story, offers clear insights and outcomes for the audience, uses a language that captures attention and inspires creativity, and above all is legal and ethical.

Coming back to the things I want to change, I understand there are five stages in the project management process – Initiate, Plan, Execute, Quality Check, and Deliver. Editors come in at the quality check stage. My problem is the low-quality content I am given to edit and why this low quality is okay for some. I am often told, “The client wants only numbers and doesn’t care much about the language. Just do a quick grammar and spell check.” This drives me crazy. I refuse to correct grammar in a logically flawed sentence.

Conceptually, low benchmarks defeat the purpose of quality. If I were in charge, I would define content quality and set a benchmark at the beginning of each project. Some of the parameters would be:

• Have we answered the client’s question?
• Can our content be understood by any type of audience, such as a layperson?
• Is our data correct? Is our research methodology legal and ethical?
• Is our content legal and ethical?
• Is our content telling a story? Is the tone appropriate?
• Are the sentences short, clear, and logical?
• Have we separated ideas into paragraphs or sections? Have we used clear headings and sub-headings?
• Have we used bullets to list related items/ideas?
• Have we used tables, graphs, and illustrations where necessary?
• Are there any sections that look redundant?

For benchmarking, I would look at content pieces that we aspire to create. In addition to this, I would make changes throughout the project management stage:

1. Introduce the editor to the client and the analyst team: This will remove misinterpretation and coordination issues that coincide with projects with several sub-teams. I will also attempt to establish trust between the parties and remove prejudices, making the project a joint responsibility.
2. Assign tasks based on skillset: A better researcher gets to research and is not forced to write. A better writer is encouraged to write and work with the editor throughout the writing process. The editor is encouraged to fuel the creative voice of the writer, while offering constructive feedback. This will keep the timelines in check and the focus of quality checking would be on improving not just cleaning and correcting.
3. Reiterate quality benchmark and end goal: I will establish checkpoints throughout the execution process to correct and encourage team members. Most teams start and end each task with the goal of checking a box and are not focused on the overall project objective, e.g., what business problem is the client looking to solve.
4. Quality check overall content: This is something that the project manager should do before the document is sent for editing. Are they satisfied with the product? Do they need developmental editing? They should identify the missing piece at this stage.
5. Encourage open dialogue between the writer and editor: I will make this a mandatory step. As editors, we are told to ignore “technical stuff” and focus on language. Writers are constantly told off for their convoluted sentences and redundant content. These conversations could be made more productive with the eye on the end goal.
6. Share learnings: After each project is closed, I will gather all team members for a quick dos and don’ts session. This step will help in reducing the effort spent on similar projects, opening up avenues for quality improvement.

With my eye on delivering aspirational quality, I will constantly check my approach and alter if necessary. This approach may require more time and resources, and could lead to a power struggle. But in the long term it should work.