July 18, 2023 • 20 mins
Ever wondered how specificity in writing can lead to building trust, credibility, and a deeper connection with your readers? Join us as we decode the SPIFIC Editing Code in this episode of Communicate, Connect, Grow.
OSPeas Carl Richards, Jeffrey A. McGuire, Christine Bueller, Chris Fenwick, and Felicity Brand break down this editing code and how it can bring clarity and structure to your writing. Drawing parallels from stand-up comedy, we shed light on how being specific can paint vivid images, thus fostering empathy and connection. We also dive into the reader's perspective, focusing on their pain points to build a stronger relationship.
We also look into the significance of SPFIC for writers and editors—how being specific in your titles, narrative structure, and openings can hook readers and make a stronger impression on them. We'll top this off with examples on how specificity can give rise to an authentic communication style.
Welcome to the Open Strategy Partners podcast, "Communicate, Connect, Grow!" At Open Strategy Partners, we specialize in strategic product communication. We help you communicate the value of what you do, connect you with the people who need to know about it, and grow.
To get in touch with us, follow what we’re doing, or learn about our Writer Enablement Workshops, you can:
- Go to our website
- Email us at hello@openstrategypartners.com
- Hit us up on Twitter
- Subscribe to our podcast wherever you listen to podcasts
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Carl Richards (00:07):
Hi, i'm Carl from OSP and this is Communicate
Connect Grow, the OSP podcast.
On today's episode, we'retalking about addressing reader
pain points in your writing withthe editing code SPIFIC.
If you want to be a moreeffective writer, a more
transparent editor, developclear strategic thinking or
learn from our network of expertfriends and colleagues, that's
(00:29):
what we're here for.
We divide our episodes acrossthree themes communicate,
connect and grow.
This is a Communicate episodeand we're talking about opening
with a specific scenario orproblem space with our editorial
code SPIFIC.
The SPIFIC editing code fallsinto the scope and narrative
(01:05):
structure phase of the editingprocess and it's about being
clear what you're writing about.
In our documentation about thiscode, it says make the scenario
or problem space SPIFIC insteadof vague general claims.
Hello.
Jeffrey A. "jam" McGuir (01:20):
Jeffrey A McGuire here again.
Please call me Jam If you'dlike.
I am a founder and partner atOpen Strategy Partners.
These writing and editing codescame out of me trying to help
myself and my colleagues, tryingto understand what the heck I
was doing when I was messingwith their written words.
(01:41):
I am a huge fan of stand-upcomedy, both from the
perspective of consuming it andfrom the fact that a lot of
great stand-up comedy is highly,highly structured, mindful
communication.
The people who invest in thatart are incredible wordsmiths,
(02:04):
also maybe actors, and haveother skills.
But so many of the greatstand-up comedians have thought
so long and hard and practicedtheir delivery to make things
exactly right.
It turns out that it's wayfunnier to make your punchline
about something that's going onwith your washing machine to say
la, la, la.
That's what you get if you useTide, which is a washing
(02:27):
detergent brand, rather thansaying washing detergent powder.
There's a principle in stand-upcomedy that says the more
specific you are, the funnieryou are.
I think it's because it helpspeople get a really vivid
picture in their minds of whatyou're talking about.
Because as soon as someone inthe US context, as soon as
someone says Tide, boom.
You see the logo boom, yousmell that.
(02:48):
Boom, you remember the color ofit?
boom, you remember your collegelaundry room, whatever.
When we're specific intechnology writing, what we're
doing is trying to help peopleidentify themselves and the
problems that they're havingwith the solutions or the
(03:09):
products or the services that weare offering or, in the case of
OSP, that we're helping ourclients with.
We often do best when we goafter a specific niche.
We define very clear personas.
All of this comes to a headthen in our communications where
, instead of saying, hey, ifyou're doing stuff in the cloud,
then why don't you try ourstuff?
(03:31):
it might be, if you've beenrunning Kubernetes and Docker in
this way, then actually switchto Kubernetes plus X or to get a
Y benefit.
Or it might be better, insteadof saying, if I were working for
the CK Editor, which is not aclient of mine, and I was
(03:52):
comparing it maybe to a classiccomputer environment, it would
probably be smarter of me tomake a direct comparison of
working in Word and then showhow we can do the same thing
online in CK source, rather thansaying you're generic word
processing something.
I don't know if these are thebest examples, but context
appropriate for our clients.
(04:12):
We find describing things asprecisely and specifically as we
can ends up generating moreempathy, therefore more
connection, and people are morelikely to convert and download
by try whatever it is that we'reoffering them.
Christine Buehler (04:26):
I'm Christine Bueller and I work for OSP as a
communications consultant and Icreate communications and
marketing materials for ourvarious tech and open source
clients.
The spific code is about aimingfor clarity and structure and
(04:50):
making the problem or theproblem space or the scenario
specific instead of vague orgeneral.
Chris Fenwick (04:59):
Hi, i am chris fenwick and i do copywriting and
editing at osp.
This is short for specific,which means that rather than
dealing in very generalities,you should always try to give
concrete examples when possible.
I should give an example here.
When, say, if you're doing aclient case study or something
(05:20):
like this and you know theclient is, we were faith that we
were facing many technicalchallenges due to our old droop
all installation, somethingalong those lines, that's okay,
but it's much better if you saywe were running an old
installation of droop all whichled to the following problems we
(05:43):
couldn't have multiple usersediting files on the site.
You know it was incompatiblewith some modern browsers.
It didn't allow this kind ofintegration with translation
software.
You know something like that.
And then when you give thespecific examples, you can also
then come back to them later inthe piece and say how they were
(06:03):
solved.
So it's always better to beconcrete and specific when
you're making a case for certaintechnologies or solutions.
Felicity Brand (06:12):
Hi, i'm felicity brand.
I'm a communications consultantat osp.
I write and edit a variety oftechnical content and i love
talking about writing andediting a variety of technical
content.
So the clues in the name thespecific code is about avoiding
general claims.
(06:33):
The specific code falls in ourscope and narrative structure
process so we're looking atframing your piece of writing.
So it's about making what you'rewriting about the scenario or
the problem space reallyspecific so that you're
addressing audience pain pointsor challenges.
So it's building trust Withyour reader.
(06:56):
When you directly address yourreaders pain points, you're
gaining their trust.
You gain credibility.
Your message is more likely toland.
So put yourself in your readersshoes, feel their pain And then
speak directly to thatexperience.
The quickest way to establishcredibility with your reader is
to speak directly about aspecific challenge or a friction
(07:19):
point.
So, rather than being hand wavy, you establish yourself as an
authority in the space if youcan describe a scenario with
specificity.
So when you describe achallenge that the reader can
relate to, self identify as atarget reader, they're more
likely to continue reading andthey are more likely to grow
(07:42):
into a loyal reader if they feellike you as the writer
understands the space and theworld they live in.
Carl Richards (07:50):
As part of the editing process.
Here's how this code could beused.
Jeffrey A. "jam" McGuire (07:54):
If I see the opportunity to make a
clearer picture in the readersmind, i will do one of two
things.
I will either try and refinewhat's there and make it more
specific, or use the immediatelynext door related code that we
have called example and give aspecific example.
Sometimes it's hard to knowwhich is which and behind the
(08:17):
scenes were kind of flexible asa team about the codes we use.
I might edit one thing one timeand say give me an example here
, and another time I might hit asimilar thing and say be more
specific comma, give me anexample now.
I know that doesn't sound allcut and dried right, but we're
we're trying to shape thesethings into, into the best hole
that we can on any given day.
Christine Buehler (08:40):
This is a pretty important one.
I would say it's a fairlysignificant pillar or principal,
maybe at OSP.
So I think this is one we aseditors and as writers are
always looking for.
As an editor, it just makesyour job a lot easier.
(09:02):
When this is applied, well, youknow, you don't have to sit and
puzzle out what the writer istalking about, which is wasting
valuable brain space.
You just know immediately whatthe writer is saying.
It's easier to edit the piecejust once premise is clear to
(09:23):
you.
Chris Fenwick (09:23):
I think if somebody's given a very good set
of examples, obviously you wantto congratulate on that.
When you need to flag things,it's usually the case that
you're reading something andthere might be a sentence in
there that sounds good At firstblush, but then you think, well,
okay, i would like a little bitmore detail here.
You just be like I haveaccelerates your workflow.
(09:46):
There'll be something like that, which might be a little bit
borderline cliche, but it'swhere You're writing about some
sort of product and there's apositive thing that it does
which can be characterized invery general terms.
But I think if somebody is thenjust leaving it there, then you
want to jump in with the codeand say, okay, please give us a
bit more detail.
Felicity Brand (10:05):
As an editor, you can normally spot specific a
mile away.
It's right at the front or itshould be in the opening, and if
you've got a vague or a generalclaim it stands out like a sore
thumb.
If you've ever heard thatdevelopers are allergic to
marketing, this code is theremedy.
So as an editor, i'll belooking out for writers trying
(10:28):
to establish context.
So sometimes, right in theopening, writers might feel that
they need to lay down a fewsentences to establish the
background and often by sentencethree or four they get to the
meat.
They'll get to the specificpoint.
So as an editor, you can oftennot always, but often you can
(10:49):
cut the first one or twosentences and the title should
lead nicely into the scenariothat the article addresses.
That's how I use specific as aneditor.
Carl Richards (11:02):
Now let's explore why this code is handy as a
writer.
Jeffrey A. "jam" McGuire (11:06):
I think we should be thinking
about it.
But I want to be fair.
The way that we produce content, we do the strategic work first
.
Then we fill that into atemplated brief that tells us
who it's for and what we'retalking about and where it's
going.
Then we create an outline in afirst draft.
Then we edit it, maybe do aninterview and add that.
(11:26):
So at the point when I'mwriting the first draft I've got
a lot of stuff there.
But honestly, i think whenwe're writing we should just
feel the keyboard, feel the flow, get it out.
My personal style is that inthe second or the third passes
where I'm looking for that andit's not something I'm focusing
on when I'm writing.
If you can, it's not a badthing.
(11:47):
Like I said, stand up comedypeople definitely look for that.
So yes and no, it depends.
Christine Buehler (11:54):
I'm definitely thinking of spific
when I'm writing.
For one thing it helps you sortof just bypass any common
marketing speak, which I thinkis usually a result of whoever's
writing just doesn'tnecessarily understand the
problem space they're writingabout very well, so you sort of
(12:18):
resort to broad general claimsare ones that just sound good.
So spific is pretty importantbecause it lets the readers know
that you're more trustworthyalso something very important in
our communication style at OSP.
(12:38):
So I'd say as a writer, thisone is pretty critical.
Chris Fenwick (12:41):
Yeah, this is definitely one of the codes that
is consciously present whenwriting, because in some sense
it's structural.
Like, if you've gone throughthe PC, if you've researched it
properly, you should havealready come up with some like
specific examples, maybe casestudies or maybe just more
concrete features of whateverthe products, like the concrete
(13:05):
things that enables, like thiswould be stuff that you have
already researched.
So, yeah, it's definitelysomething you think of when
Prepare the piece, preparingwhat it is you want to say in
each section, like what examplescan you give me?
Felicity Brand (13:17):
as a writer, the specific code is normally
handled early on in our process.
So at osp we have a contentbrief and there we will outline
The specific scenario or theproblem space that this writing
is going to be addressing.
I would argue that specificit's one of the main cruxes of
(13:41):
your whole piece.
So why are you writing it?
You're addressing something,you solving a problem,
explaining a feature or a techsolution.
So generally the whole writingstarts with a scenario like that
and that will be handled in ourcontent brief.
So As a writer, when you sitdown to write, hopefully that's
already handled for you.
So the specific code ties inwith the ethos that we have at
(14:07):
osp around authenticcommunication.
As a writer, you need specificto show that you really
understand what you're writingabout, why your readers should
care And it's your chance toshow empathy.
And you can't make that up.
You need to have knowledge ofthe space or the product or the
feature that you're writingabout to be able to be specific
(14:27):
about it and then to be specificabout The value or the benefit
that that might bring the reader.
And then, as a writer, youreally letting yourself down.
If you've done all this hardwork, you've got a great title.
You've structured yournarrative.
You've gotten your referencesand evidence lined up.
Don't sell yourself short witha vague opener.
(14:50):
You can't just hope thatreaders will come along for the
ride.
So specific is your chance tohook them.
Tell them what you're writingabout, make it personal and
they'll follow you.
They will read what you'vewritten And hopefully land on
that cta at the end.
Carl Richards (15:09):
This writing code is very beneficial to readers
for many reasons.
Jeffrey A. "jam" McGuire (15:13):
I suppose that if I give a
specific example That somebodycan relate to, then they're
going to choose to take ourinformation a little more
seriously or let it influencethem or think better about us.
Now, that's not the benefit forthem necessarily put that way,
but I do think that, given moreaccessible, more vivid content,
(15:38):
people have a better experience.
It might be more pleasurable orquicker or easier to understand
and apply what we're trying toshow them, and I think we all
come out better for it in theend.
Christine Buehler (15:50):
For me personally as a reader, if I'm
reading something that is vagueor general, i just get bored and
I want to stop reading.
Vague is just, it's notinteresting to read And again,
you know, kind of hitting thattrustworthiness aspect, if I'm
(16:11):
reading something that's notspecific, then I'm going to be
thinking you know why should Itrust this company or this
person with my time, with mymoney, with my, you know, energy
?
I think spific is alsoimportant because it shows that
you understand the problem spaceenough to be writing about it.
Chris Fenwick (16:36):
I think it's important because it makes the
piece more convincing.
I don't think it's the casethat without specific examples,
the readers just going to dropthe piece and like leave or
close the tab.
I think you know that's thecase with some other things,
like if the language is off, ifit's too complicated, but in the
case of this code it's morethat it makes the piece more
(16:58):
convincing and makes it morememorable.
Felicity Brand (17:00):
As a reader, nothing is going to make you
leave something faster than avague claim What a snooze fest.
There's nothing more powerfulthan feeling seen.
If I see myself in your openingstatement about friction points
or daily frustrations, i'm morelikely to keep reading.
When you directly address mypain points, i'm going to trust
(17:25):
you.
I'm going to trust that youknow what you're talking about.
I'm going to trust that youunderstand my world and the
message in the writing is morelikely to land.
I'll buy what you're selling.
I'll click the link.
Carl Richards (17:54):
I hope you, dear listener, could relate to some
of the pain points we addressedin this episode.
Next time you're writing, tryto put yourself in your reader's
shoes and feel their pain.
Speak directly about theirexperiences and your message is
more likely to land.
Share your examples orquestions with us via Twitter at
openunderscorestrategy, oremail hello at
(18:14):
openstrategypartnerscom.
This was one of the editorialcodes we use at OSP.
We'll be sharing more of themas we go.
If you'd like to learn more inthe meantime, come over to
openstrategypartnerscom, have alook at our writer enablement
workshops, case study offeringor get in touch to talk about
your strategy or productcommunication needs.
(18:36):
Thanks to everyone whocontributed to this podcast All
the P's at OSP.
Thanks to our clients whobelieve in us Shout out to
Patrick Gaumont for ourhigh-energy maple syrup flavored
theme music And to Mike Snowfor additional horn arrangements
.
Thank you for listening andsubscribing About our three
(18:57):
themes on the podcast.
You'll hear from differentmembers of the OSP team hosting
episodes over time.
Communicate All things.
Communication We share how wetackle writing, editing, word
choices, formats, processes andmore.
Connect In-depth conversationswith interesting, smart people
(19:17):
about who they are, what they doand how they approach their
life and work as communicators,technologists and leaders.
Grow We cover strategicapproaches to understanding and
expressing the value of what youdo, including tools, templates
and practical applications.
We also feel strongly aboutbuilding a mindful, positive,
(19:40):
human first culture at work.
That's bound to pop up fromtime to time too.
This podcast is us figuring outcommunication, connection and
growing together.
Subscribe now on YouTube, applePodcasts or the podcast channel
of your choice.
Follow us, suggest guests andtopics, ask us questions.
(20:01):
On social media, we are at OpenUnderscore Strategy on Twitter
Until next time.
Thanks for listening toCommunicate.
Connect.
Grow, the OSP podcast.
Hi, i'm Carl from OSP and this is Communicate
Connect Grow, the OSP podcast.
On today's episode, we'retalking about addressing reader
pain points in your writing withthe editing code SPIFIC.
If you want to be a moreeffective writer, a more
transparent editor, developclear strategic thinking or
learn from our network of expertfriends and colleagues, that's
(00:29):
what we're here for.
We divide our episodes acrossthree themes communicate,
connect and grow.
This is a Communicate episodeand we're talking about opening
with a specific scenario orproblem space with our editorial
code SPIFIC.
The SPIFIC editing code fallsinto the scope and narrative
(01:05):
structure phase of the editingprocess and it's about being
clear what you're writing about.
In our documentation about thiscode, it says make the scenario
or problem space SPIFIC insteadof vague general claims.
Hello.
Jeffrey A. "jam" McGuir (01:20):
Jeffrey A McGuire here again.
Please call me Jam If you'dlike.
I am a founder and partner atOpen Strategy Partners.
These writing and editing codescame out of me trying to help
myself and my colleagues, tryingto understand what the heck I
was doing when I was messingwith their written words.
(01:41):
I am a huge fan of stand-upcomedy, both from the
perspective of consuming it andfrom the fact that a lot of
great stand-up comedy is highly,highly structured, mindful
communication.
The people who invest in thatart are incredible wordsmiths,
(02:04):
also maybe actors, and haveother skills.
But so many of the greatstand-up comedians have thought
so long and hard and practicedtheir delivery to make things
exactly right.
It turns out that it's wayfunnier to make your punchline
about something that's going onwith your washing machine to say
la, la, la.
That's what you get if you useTide, which is a washing
(02:27):
detergent brand, rather thansaying washing detergent powder.
There's a principle in stand-upcomedy that says the more
specific you are, the funnieryou are.
I think it's because it helpspeople get a really vivid
picture in their minds of whatyou're talking about.
Because as soon as someone inthe US context, as soon as
someone says Tide, boom.
You see the logo boom, yousmell that.
(02:48):
Boom, you remember the color ofit?
boom, you remember your collegelaundry room, whatever.
When we're specific intechnology writing, what we're
doing is trying to help peopleidentify themselves and the
problems that they're havingwith the solutions or the
(03:09):
products or the services that weare offering or, in the case of
OSP, that we're helping ourclients with.
We often do best when we goafter a specific niche.
We define very clear personas.
All of this comes to a headthen in our communications where
, instead of saying, hey, ifyou're doing stuff in the cloud,
then why don't you try ourstuff?
(03:31):
it might be, if you've beenrunning Kubernetes and Docker in
this way, then actually switchto Kubernetes plus X or to get a
Y benefit.
Or it might be better, insteadof saying, if I were working for
the CK Editor, which is not aclient of mine, and I was
(03:52):
comparing it maybe to a classiccomputer environment, it would
probably be smarter of me tomake a direct comparison of
working in Word and then showhow we can do the same thing
online in CK source, rather thansaying you're generic word
processing something.
I don't know if these are thebest examples, but context
appropriate for our clients.
(04:12):
We find describing things asprecisely and specifically as we
can ends up generating moreempathy, therefore more
connection, and people are morelikely to convert and download
by try whatever it is that we'reoffering them.
Christine Buehler (04:26):
I'm Christine Bueller and I work for OSP as a
communications consultant and Icreate communications and
marketing materials for ourvarious tech and open source
clients.
The spific code is about aimingfor clarity and structure and
(04:50):
making the problem or theproblem space or the scenario
specific instead of vague orgeneral.
Chris Fenwick (04:59):
Hi, i am chris fenwick and i do copywriting and
editing at osp.
This is short for specific,which means that rather than
dealing in very generalities,you should always try to give
concrete examples when possible.
I should give an example here.
When, say, if you're doing aclient case study or something
(05:20):
like this and you know theclient is, we were faith that we
were facing many technicalchallenges due to our old droop
all installation, somethingalong those lines, that's okay,
but it's much better if you saywe were running an old
installation of droop all whichled to the following problems we
(05:43):
couldn't have multiple usersediting files on the site.
You know it was incompatiblewith some modern browsers.
It didn't allow this kind ofintegration with translation
software.
You know something like that.
And then when you give thespecific examples, you can also
then come back to them later inthe piece and say how they were
(06:03):
solved.
So it's always better to beconcrete and specific when
you're making a case for certaintechnologies or solutions.
Felicity Brand (06:12):
Hi, i'm felicity brand.
I'm a communications consultantat osp.
I write and edit a variety oftechnical content and i love
talking about writing andediting a variety of technical
content.
So the clues in the name thespecific code is about avoiding
general claims.
(06:33):
The specific code falls in ourscope and narrative structure
process so we're looking atframing your piece of writing.
So it's about making what you'rewriting about the scenario or
the problem space reallyspecific so that you're
addressing audience pain pointsor challenges.
So it's building trust Withyour reader.
(06:56):
When you directly address yourreaders pain points, you're
gaining their trust.
You gain credibility.
Your message is more likely toland.
So put yourself in your readersshoes, feel their pain And then
speak directly to thatexperience.
The quickest way to establishcredibility with your reader is
to speak directly about aspecific challenge or a friction
(07:19):
point.
So, rather than being hand wavy, you establish yourself as an
authority in the space if youcan describe a scenario with
specificity.
So when you describe achallenge that the reader can
relate to, self identify as atarget reader, they're more
likely to continue reading andthey are more likely to grow
(07:42):
into a loyal reader if they feellike you as the writer
understands the space and theworld they live in.
Carl Richards (07:50):
As part of the editing process.
Here's how this code could beused.
Jeffrey A. "jam" McGuire (07:54):
If I see the opportunity to make a
clearer picture in the readersmind, i will do one of two
things.
I will either try and refinewhat's there and make it more
specific, or use the immediatelynext door related code that we
have called example and give aspecific example.
Sometimes it's hard to knowwhich is which and behind the
(08:17):
scenes were kind of flexible asa team about the codes we use.
I might edit one thing one timeand say give me an example here
, and another time I might hit asimilar thing and say be more
specific comma, give me anexample now.
I know that doesn't sound allcut and dried right, but we're
we're trying to shape thesethings into, into the best hole
that we can on any given day.
Christine Buehler (08:40):
This is a pretty important one.
I would say it's a fairlysignificant pillar or principal,
maybe at OSP.
So I think this is one we aseditors and as writers are
always looking for.
As an editor, it just makesyour job a lot easier.
(09:02):
When this is applied, well, youknow, you don't have to sit and
puzzle out what the writer istalking about, which is wasting
valuable brain space.
You just know immediately whatthe writer is saying.
It's easier to edit the piecejust once premise is clear to
(09:23):
you.
Chris Fenwick (09:23):
I think if somebody's given a very good set
of examples, obviously you wantto congratulate on that.
When you need to flag things,it's usually the case that
you're reading something andthere might be a sentence in
there that sounds good At firstblush, but then you think, well,
okay, i would like a little bitmore detail here.
You just be like I haveaccelerates your workflow.
(09:46):
There'll be something like that, which might be a little bit
borderline cliche, but it'swhere You're writing about some
sort of product and there's apositive thing that it does
which can be characterized invery general terms.
But I think if somebody is thenjust leaving it there, then you
want to jump in with the codeand say, okay, please give us a
bit more detail.
Felicity Brand (10:05):
As an editor, you can normally spot specific a
mile away.
It's right at the front or itshould be in the opening, and if
you've got a vague or a generalclaim it stands out like a sore
thumb.
If you've ever heard thatdevelopers are allergic to
marketing, this code is theremedy.
So as an editor, i'll belooking out for writers trying
(10:28):
to establish context.
So sometimes, right in theopening, writers might feel that
they need to lay down a fewsentences to establish the
background and often by sentencethree or four they get to the
meat.
They'll get to the specificpoint.
So as an editor, you can oftennot always, but often you can
(10:49):
cut the first one or twosentences and the title should
lead nicely into the scenariothat the article addresses.
That's how I use specific as aneditor.
Carl Richards (11:02):
Now let's explore why this code is handy as a
writer.
Jeffrey A. "jam" McGuire (11:06):
I think we should be thinking
about it.
But I want to be fair.
The way that we produce content, we do the strategic work first
.
Then we fill that into atemplated brief that tells us
who it's for and what we'retalking about and where it's
going.
Then we create an outline in afirst draft.
Then we edit it, maybe do aninterview and add that.
(11:26):
So at the point when I'mwriting the first draft I've got
a lot of stuff there.
But honestly, i think whenwe're writing we should just
feel the keyboard, feel the flow, get it out.
My personal style is that inthe second or the third passes
where I'm looking for that andit's not something I'm focusing
on when I'm writing.
If you can, it's not a badthing.
(11:47):
Like I said, stand up comedypeople definitely look for that.
So yes and no, it depends.
Christine Buehler (11:54):
I'm definitely thinking of spific
when I'm writing.
For one thing it helps you sortof just bypass any common
marketing speak, which I thinkis usually a result of whoever's
writing just doesn'tnecessarily understand the
problem space they're writingabout very well, so you sort of
(12:18):
resort to broad general claimsare ones that just sound good.
So spific is pretty importantbecause it lets the readers know
that you're more trustworthyalso something very important in
our communication style at OSP.
(12:38):
So I'd say as a writer, thisone is pretty critical.
Chris Fenwick (12:41):
Yeah, this is definitely one of the codes that
is consciously present whenwriting, because in some sense
it's structural.
Like, if you've gone throughthe PC, if you've researched it
properly, you should havealready come up with some like
specific examples, maybe casestudies or maybe just more
concrete features of whateverthe products, like the concrete
(13:05):
things that enables, like thiswould be stuff that you have
already researched.
So, yeah, it's definitelysomething you think of when
Prepare the piece, preparingwhat it is you want to say in
each section, like what examplescan you give me?
Felicity Brand (13:17):
as a writer, the specific code is normally
handled early on in our process.
So at osp we have a contentbrief and there we will outline
The specific scenario or theproblem space that this writing
is going to be addressing.
I would argue that specificit's one of the main cruxes of
(13:41):
your whole piece.
So why are you writing it?
You're addressing something,you solving a problem,
explaining a feature or a techsolution.
So generally the whole writingstarts with a scenario like that
and that will be handled in ourcontent brief.
So As a writer, when you sitdown to write, hopefully that's
already handled for you.
So the specific code ties inwith the ethos that we have at
(14:07):
osp around authenticcommunication.
As a writer, you need specificto show that you really
understand what you're writingabout, why your readers should
care And it's your chance toshow empathy.
And you can't make that up.
You need to have knowledge ofthe space or the product or the
feature that you're writingabout to be able to be specific
(14:27):
about it and then to be specificabout The value or the benefit
that that might bring the reader.
And then, as a writer, youreally letting yourself down.
If you've done all this hardwork, you've got a great title.
You've structured yournarrative.
You've gotten your referencesand evidence lined up.
Don't sell yourself short witha vague opener.
(14:50):
You can't just hope thatreaders will come along for the
ride.
So specific is your chance tohook them.
Tell them what you're writingabout, make it personal and
they'll follow you.
They will read what you'vewritten And hopefully land on
that cta at the end.
Carl Richards (15:09):
This writing code is very beneficial to readers
for many reasons.
Jeffrey A. "jam" McGuire (15:13):
I suppose that if I give a
specific example That somebodycan relate to, then they're
going to choose to take ourinformation a little more
seriously or let it influencethem or think better about us.
Now, that's not the benefit forthem necessarily put that way,
but I do think that, given moreaccessible, more vivid content,
(15:38):
people have a better experience.
It might be more pleasurable orquicker or easier to understand
and apply what we're trying toshow them, and I think we all
come out better for it in theend.
Christine Buehler (15:50):
For me personally as a reader, if I'm
reading something that is vagueor general, i just get bored and
I want to stop reading.
Vague is just, it's notinteresting to read And again,
you know, kind of hitting thattrustworthiness aspect, if I'm
(16:11):
reading something that's notspecific, then I'm going to be
thinking you know why should Itrust this company or this
person with my time, with mymoney, with my, you know, energy
?
I think spific is alsoimportant because it shows that
you understand the problem spaceenough to be writing about it.
Chris Fenwick (16:36):
I think it's important because it makes the
piece more convincing.
I don't think it's the casethat without specific examples,
the readers just going to dropthe piece and like leave or
close the tab.
I think you know that's thecase with some other things,
like if the language is off, ifit's too complicated, but in the
case of this code it's morethat it makes the piece more
(16:58):
convincing and makes it morememorable.
Felicity Brand (17:00):
As a reader, nothing is going to make you
leave something faster than avague claim What a snooze fest.
There's nothing more powerfulthan feeling seen.
If I see myself in your openingstatement about friction points
or daily frustrations, i'm morelikely to keep reading.
When you directly address mypain points, i'm going to trust
(17:25):
you.
I'm going to trust that youknow what you're talking about.
I'm going to trust that youunderstand my world and the
message in the writing is morelikely to land.
I'll buy what you're selling.
I'll click the link.
Carl Richards (17:54):
I hope you, dear listener, could relate to some
of the pain points we addressedin this episode.
Next time you're writing, tryto put yourself in your reader's
shoes and feel their pain.
Speak directly about theirexperiences and your message is
more likely to land.
Share your examples orquestions with us via Twitter at
openunderscorestrategy, oremail hello at
(18:14):
openstrategypartnerscom.
This was one of the editorialcodes we use at OSP.
We'll be sharing more of themas we go.
If you'd like to learn more inthe meantime, come over to
openstrategypartnerscom, have alook at our writer enablement
workshops, case study offeringor get in touch to talk about
your strategy or productcommunication needs.
(18:36):
Thanks to everyone whocontributed to this podcast All
the P's at OSP.
Thanks to our clients whobelieve in us Shout out to
Patrick Gaumont for ourhigh-energy maple syrup flavored
theme music And to Mike Snowfor additional horn arrangements
.
Thank you for listening andsubscribing About our three
(18:57):
themes on the podcast.
You'll hear from differentmembers of the OSP team hosting
episodes over time.
Communicate All things.
Communication We share how wetackle writing, editing, word
choices, formats, processes andmore.
Connect In-depth conversationswith interesting, smart people
(19:17):
about who they are, what they doand how they approach their
life and work as communicators,technologists and leaders.
Grow We cover strategicapproaches to understanding and
expressing the value of what youdo, including tools, templates
and practical applications.
We also feel strongly aboutbuilding a mindful, positive,
(19:40):
human first culture at work.
That's bound to pop up fromtime to time too.
This podcast is us figuring outcommunication, connection and
growing together.
Subscribe now on YouTube, applePodcasts or the podcast channel
of your choice.
Follow us, suggest guests andtopics, ask us questions.
(20:01):
On social media, we are at OpenUnderscore Strategy on Twitter
Until next time.
Thanks for listening toCommunicate.
Connect.
Grow, the OSP podcast.
Popular Podcasts
United States of Kennedy
United States of Kennedy is a podcast about our cultural fascination with the Kennedy dynasty. Every week, hosts Lyra Smith and George Civeris go into one aspect of the Kennedy story.
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com