I had an interesting debate last week about whether it’s a good idea to have multiple writers work on a piece of copy.
The argument goes that multiple writers will step on each other’s toes, leading to work produced by committee with inconsistent tone and voice.
I don’t disagree with that assessment. I think as a rule one person should be responsible for your copy. The thing is, one copywriter spends a decent amount of time overwhelmed or stuck.
I’m proposing a new model. We’re all constrained by our own experience and perspective. I actually think it’s helpful to have multiple creative minds engaged with the ideas and research phase, as long as only one person selects the final approach.
It’s also helpful to have multiple people involved in the editing and sharpening process at the end, because we’re all too close to our own work. I’ll spot points of development in someone else’s writing that I’ll miss in my own.
With clear direction and robust ideas, plus sharp editing support, a single writer can do the writing part in the middle much faster without going off track. Everybody wins.