In motivational theory, there is a concept called ‘hygiene factors‘. These are elements of a job that do not create satisfaction, but their absence will cause dissatisfaction. Examples would be safety precautions, proper tools needed for the job etc.
After writing yesterday that content is a necessity, I started to think about it through this perspective: That the mere presence of content on a platform (your usual TV channel, your Facebook feed, your Spotify app) is not something that makes you inherently happy. It is a prerequisite for purchasing access (a TV set, a broadband subscription, a smartphone) in the first place, but only by having your favourite content available can the platform hope to really delight you.
Saying that content is king derides the meaning of deeper fan engagement, offered by content brands. Generic ‘content’ is a hygiene factor. Engaging content brands are motivators.
Hi Nick. Interesting perspectives. I agree; the distribution platform & device has increased value in relation to content of personal preference available.
On a generic level; when it comes to entertainment, you consume content that is available.
Thus accessibility and availability is a necessity, a hygiene factor, to all meaningful content.
I wonder if access to content in today’s fragmented, selective distribution channels plays a little bit of a motivational role as well…?
I guess it’s a matter of perspective. My view is that a complete lack of content will kill a device and/or ecosystem. But generic content per se will not make anyone ‘love’ their device, distribution channel or other platform. It is only the brands that manage to create a relationship with their fans that become motivators for viewers to purchase acccess to a certain platform.
That is very true, and approach and perspective are directly related to what is being emphasized.
I think there can never be too much dialogue about content, its’ distribution methods, nor elements adding value to it! 🙂 Looking forward to your upcoming posts.