Reengineering the white paper, part 1

Several months ago, I began talking with colleagues Bob Buday and Tim Parker about "reengineering the white paper." Our basic idea was that, although white papers have flooded the Web for years, and more and more companies are investing in them to help demonstrate expertise and thought leadership, the reality is that most of them are pretty bad. They're unoriginal, boring, and overly promotional, which pretty much rules out having the intended impact of generating interest and leads.

Despite their common failings, however, we're still firm believers that white papers can be one of the most effective tools in the marketing toolbox...if they are developed and marketed the right way.

Having worked on and marketed countless white papers ourselves, we think we know the right way. 

The first part of our three-part series, "Developing a Point of View," explores the aspect of white paper production that is most often lacking: the creation of a powerful, credible, and novel argument about how to address an important business challenge. Subsequent parts will focus on marketing white papers and overcoming the typical organizational obstacles in creating and marketing them effectively.

The first and biggest mistake companies make, we argue, is treating white papers primarily as writing assignments. Instead, they should be viewed as projects to create strong and distinct points of view -- which subsequently can be written up in a white paper. Good writing is obviously important, but the bulk of the work in building an argument, gathering evidence, creating new frameworks and so on should precede the writing.

I don't want to repeat the whole article here, but I do hope you'll give it a look and let me know what you think. Given the amount of time and money spent on white papers these days, the impact of a more effective way to produce them can be substantial indeed. 

Photo by kevindooley.