Data Insights: What I Learned From The Writers’ Feedback
Posted: Sun Jan 05, 2025 6:36 am
Valuable Insights on Our Content Briefs
Among the respondents, only one started writing for Rock Content in 2023, while the others have been with us for at least one year. This timeframe allowed them to compare our old briefs with the new, enhanced ones.
To start off, I’d like to share the freelance writers’ opinions on how much the quality of the brief impacts their writing process. Here’s what I found out:
Graphic - writer's opinion on content briefs importance
Some of their remarks regarding this topic included:
“The brief bridges what the clients want with what I write. If it’s not clear, it leaves too much up to interpretation by me. When that happens, the client rarely gets the piece they envisioned.”
“A good brief makes writing an article easy and simple. […] A poor brief leaves me more confused and unsure about what needs to be included and what subtitles and headings will make the client happy with the outcome of the blog.”
“I refer back to content briefs constantly as I write and often copy/paste keywords, necessary links, and requested important points into a separate document so that I can cross each one off as I include it. The more direction there is, the easier it is for me to mentally plan the piece and bring it together as I work on it.”
“This is more specific to new clients than to Rock Content. Without a full understanding of the clients’ marketing scope and the stage of the customer journey, having the additional information in the brief is critical for success. In addition, having the tone and voice guidelines available in the brief helps ensure that the content I provide blends seamlessly with their other marketing assets.”
“If the brief isn’t clear, it’s a guessing game to deliver what you want. It’s also less helpful, and takes up a lot of time, when there is so much information that I have to pick through it to find the bits that I actually need.”
As I mentioned before, content briefs are like road maps, and I’m glad the writers recognize it. Now, let’s explore some other questions from the form.
Close-ended questions
One of the most important ones was: “Have you noticed any improvements in the briefs you received during the months of April and May [when the changes were implemented] compared to the ones you received earlier”?
80% of the freelance writers noticed some kind of improvement in the briefs, among them 50% noticed a lot of improvement.
I also asked the respondents about the clarity of our content briefs, using a rating scale from 1 to 5. A rating of 1 meant “not clear at all,” while a rating of 5 meant “very clear.” Interestingly, none of the respondents rated the briefs as 1 or 2, and a majority of 60% gave them a top rating of 5 for clarity.
I was also curious to know if the new briefs provided a thorough understanding of the topic to be covered, 40% voted “all of them” and 60% voted “most of them”.
Then I asked the writers to indicate their level of agreement with the following statement: “There were insights or guidance provided regarding the user intent or needs of the audience.” Here’s their response:
When it comes to how clearly we state our tone and style in the content briefs, 50% agree that they’re clear, and 20% strongly agree with that. On the other hand, 20% are neutral about it and 10% strongly disagree.
When asked about sections in the brief that they consider unnecessary for their work, some data worth mentioning is that 70% considered “Author information” useless, 50% indicated “Visual elements” and 30% don’t see value in our list of “Top-ranking competing content”.
I was particularly interested in the writers’ feedback regarding their satisfaction with the overall quality of our new briefs compared to the old ones. It was important for me to gather their responses and compare the two.
When queried about their satisfaction with the new briefs on a scale of 1 to 5, with 1 being “extremely dissatisfied” and 5 being “extremely satisfied,” 80% of the writers voted 4 or 5. None of them voted 1 or 2. However, the feedback for the old briefs was different. Only 10% voted 5, while 80% voted 3 and 4, and 10% voted 2 (dissatisfied).
Open-ended questions
Additionally, I gathered insights by posing open-ended questions regarding the writers’ preferences and critiques regarding both the new/updated and old briefs. Here are a few excerpts from their feedback:
“[…] I’d say the more recent the briefs, the better/more clearer they’ve been. I wasn’t dissatisfied with the old briefs, but I really like the amount of detail included in the new ones.”
“This content brief provided just enough information on what needed to be included, while still allowing for the writer to use [their] own creativity. Briefs that include too much micro-management in what is to be written are stagnating, at least to this writer, so this one had just the right mix.” (Referring to an updated brief)
“Generally, the less information/direction, the less I liked the lebanon phone numbers brief. I just really like knowing that the client and I are on exactly the same page.”
“I can’t remember individual ones, but I remember not even picking up some articles because the language on the brief just wasn’t clear enough to tell me what was needed.” (Referring to old briefs)
“I have written articles for clients who simply gave me a single word to go on […] and others who provide full outlines. Given my preference, I would say something in the middle is best for me. As a senior-level marketer with 15 years of corporate experience, I intuitively know where to take much of the content so the additional info is often just “noise” for me to scroll through.”
“The only complaint I have is that the briefs are very long. I find myself having to open the page on two tabs – one to reference the brief and another to write the content. If there’s a way to shorten or format the brief so the outline is close to the text box, that would streamline the writing process.” (Referring to updated briefs)
I’m sure you have drawn your own conclusions after reading the writers’ feedback shared in the previous section. However, I invite you to explore what I have learned:
Among the respondents, only one started writing for Rock Content in 2023, while the others have been with us for at least one year. This timeframe allowed them to compare our old briefs with the new, enhanced ones.
To start off, I’d like to share the freelance writers’ opinions on how much the quality of the brief impacts their writing process. Here’s what I found out:
Graphic - writer's opinion on content briefs importance
Some of their remarks regarding this topic included:
“The brief bridges what the clients want with what I write. If it’s not clear, it leaves too much up to interpretation by me. When that happens, the client rarely gets the piece they envisioned.”
“A good brief makes writing an article easy and simple. […] A poor brief leaves me more confused and unsure about what needs to be included and what subtitles and headings will make the client happy with the outcome of the blog.”
“I refer back to content briefs constantly as I write and often copy/paste keywords, necessary links, and requested important points into a separate document so that I can cross each one off as I include it. The more direction there is, the easier it is for me to mentally plan the piece and bring it together as I work on it.”
“This is more specific to new clients than to Rock Content. Without a full understanding of the clients’ marketing scope and the stage of the customer journey, having the additional information in the brief is critical for success. In addition, having the tone and voice guidelines available in the brief helps ensure that the content I provide blends seamlessly with their other marketing assets.”
“If the brief isn’t clear, it’s a guessing game to deliver what you want. It’s also less helpful, and takes up a lot of time, when there is so much information that I have to pick through it to find the bits that I actually need.”
As I mentioned before, content briefs are like road maps, and I’m glad the writers recognize it. Now, let’s explore some other questions from the form.
Close-ended questions
One of the most important ones was: “Have you noticed any improvements in the briefs you received during the months of April and May [when the changes were implemented] compared to the ones you received earlier”?
80% of the freelance writers noticed some kind of improvement in the briefs, among them 50% noticed a lot of improvement.
I also asked the respondents about the clarity of our content briefs, using a rating scale from 1 to 5. A rating of 1 meant “not clear at all,” while a rating of 5 meant “very clear.” Interestingly, none of the respondents rated the briefs as 1 or 2, and a majority of 60% gave them a top rating of 5 for clarity.
I was also curious to know if the new briefs provided a thorough understanding of the topic to be covered, 40% voted “all of them” and 60% voted “most of them”.
Then I asked the writers to indicate their level of agreement with the following statement: “There were insights or guidance provided regarding the user intent or needs of the audience.” Here’s their response:
When it comes to how clearly we state our tone and style in the content briefs, 50% agree that they’re clear, and 20% strongly agree with that. On the other hand, 20% are neutral about it and 10% strongly disagree.
When asked about sections in the brief that they consider unnecessary for their work, some data worth mentioning is that 70% considered “Author information” useless, 50% indicated “Visual elements” and 30% don’t see value in our list of “Top-ranking competing content”.
I was particularly interested in the writers’ feedback regarding their satisfaction with the overall quality of our new briefs compared to the old ones. It was important for me to gather their responses and compare the two.
When queried about their satisfaction with the new briefs on a scale of 1 to 5, with 1 being “extremely dissatisfied” and 5 being “extremely satisfied,” 80% of the writers voted 4 or 5. None of them voted 1 or 2. However, the feedback for the old briefs was different. Only 10% voted 5, while 80% voted 3 and 4, and 10% voted 2 (dissatisfied).
Open-ended questions
Additionally, I gathered insights by posing open-ended questions regarding the writers’ preferences and critiques regarding both the new/updated and old briefs. Here are a few excerpts from their feedback:
“[…] I’d say the more recent the briefs, the better/more clearer they’ve been. I wasn’t dissatisfied with the old briefs, but I really like the amount of detail included in the new ones.”
“This content brief provided just enough information on what needed to be included, while still allowing for the writer to use [their] own creativity. Briefs that include too much micro-management in what is to be written are stagnating, at least to this writer, so this one had just the right mix.” (Referring to an updated brief)
“Generally, the less information/direction, the less I liked the lebanon phone numbers brief. I just really like knowing that the client and I are on exactly the same page.”
“I can’t remember individual ones, but I remember not even picking up some articles because the language on the brief just wasn’t clear enough to tell me what was needed.” (Referring to old briefs)
“I have written articles for clients who simply gave me a single word to go on […] and others who provide full outlines. Given my preference, I would say something in the middle is best for me. As a senior-level marketer with 15 years of corporate experience, I intuitively know where to take much of the content so the additional info is often just “noise” for me to scroll through.”
“The only complaint I have is that the briefs are very long. I find myself having to open the page on two tabs – one to reference the brief and another to write the content. If there’s a way to shorten or format the brief so the outline is close to the text box, that would streamline the writing process.” (Referring to updated briefs)
I’m sure you have drawn your own conclusions after reading the writers’ feedback shared in the previous section. However, I invite you to explore what I have learned: