Introduction to BAMM!:

Concept:

A 1- 5 level system akin to a Capability Maturity Model but applied to content quality.

Each level has 10 points. 

In order to achieve a level all points of that level and previous levels need to have been completed. 

Points for further levels can be checked off, but those levels cannot be achieved by the individual content asset. 


Scoring:

The final scoring tally should produce a Content Quality Score out of 50. 

This can be doubled to produce a percentage. 

A percentage figure is preferable to a points figure as you can add points to the different levels as appropriate and simply perform the necessary calculation against the total number of points to determine a percentage. 

Example:

40/50= 80

60/75= ~80

Adding further points as the model evolves does not need to impact the benchmark targets. 


Targets:

Content must achieve a level 1 in order to progress. 

All content should aim to be a level 4. 

The goal is scores over 80 - broadly equivalent to a level 5.


This process is designed to be run prior to publication by an editorial team on each piece of content to be published, but it could also be applied to published content as part of a blog audit.


Updates & Iterations:

  • [Record process updates & improvements here]

Enter checklist details

  • 1
    [Edit this checklist and add the names of your content team here]

Determine level 1 performance

PROFESSIONALISM & SEO

It is professional to a high standard and has adhered to SEO best practices (the content is well-written, has considered keywords, does not contain errors).

  • 1
    The content is over 2000 words unless specifically requested otherwise.
  • 2
    The chosen keyword appears to be the most appropriate keyword to target for this subject and the content meets the specific search intent of the chosen keyword.
  • 3
    The content reads well and is accurate throughout - minimal mistakes, formatting, pacing, tone, spelling, US/UK Eng, etc.
  • 4
    The content uses hyperlinked sections to guide the reader
  • 5
    The content is well structured and provides a coherent narrative appropriate to the keyword
  • 6
    The keyword is used in h2s, h3s, image alt tags, image URLs, and body text.
  • 7
    Selected long tail keywords have been used in appropriate tags.
  • 8
    The content has been optimized for a knowledge graph format appropriate to the keyword.
  • 9
    The content is interesting with an engaging/appropriate introduction.
  • 10
    The article makes use of formatting options or media to break up the article and make it easier to scan.
Interpretation notes:
  1. -
  2. -
  3. -
  4. -
  5. -
  6. -
  7. -
  8. -
  9. -
  10. - Could be block quotes, H2s/H3s, template embeds, Zap embeds images, use of tables, graphs, numbered/bulleted points

Determine level 2 performance

REPUTABILITY & QUALITY OF SOURCES

The content is reputable to the highest standards and provides expert industry information.

  • 1
    The article ELI5s the premise of the discussion at the beginning
  • 2
    All key concepts are explained and outlined with further reading provided where beneficial
  • 3
    Hypothetical examples are used to provide context and communicate concepts or situations clearly and simply
  • 4
    Real world examples are drawn on to highlight the information in practice along with any further variables, caveats, or further knowledge this may provide
  • 5
    The article draws from reputable data in the first 200 words to inspire trust in the reader, to highlight a problem or solution, or to illustrate market activity.
  • 6
    Includes a relevant quote from an industry expert/relevant high-quality source
  • 7
    The article contains multiple sources of a high academic standard or industry equivalent - or draws multiple academic learnings from a single metastudy.
  • 8
    The content is more valuable (relative to the search intent) than the other posts currently on the front page for that keyword.
  • 9
    Critically engaging with one of the reputable sources (more than just mentioning them/quoting them).
  • 10
    Reputable information is represented in video or images (can be custom or found images e.g. graphs/charts)
Interpretation notes:
  1. -
  2. -
  3. -
  4. Real-world examples qualify:
    1. when they reveal further information of some form.
    2. when they reinforce information in more detail.
  5. -
  6. -
  7. -
  8. Value is about understanding search intent. The content we write should be both informative and actionable:
    1. Some top search results (eg) Wiki contain more information, but we can beat them in terms of actionable value 
    2. Others (eg, WP template lists) are highly actionable but lack deeper information on the topic, which we can capitalise on
  9. -
  10. Information can refer to non-quantitative information (e.g. something that visually explains the information) providing it highlights relevant elements of the topic, and/or helps to explain a core concept; adding significant value

Determine level 3 performance

SELLING THE PRODUCT

The content is of a high professional standard and effectively sells or promotes the product.

  • 1
    The article contains a minimum of 3 custom images. All custom images including the header are branded and any further annotation needed on the image is present.
  • 2
    Your company is mentioned by name in the introduction, capitalized, and linked to the homepage.
  • 3
    There are a minimum of 20 internal links included in the post
  • 4
    The content meets and exceeds the required prepublish offsite (>5) links so long as the links are contextually relevant and valuable.
  • 5
    The content meets and exceeds the required prepublish help site (>5) links so long as the links are contextually relevant and valuable.
  • 6
    Some aspect of the product is mentioned as a solution to one of the pain points in the article.
  • 7
    The article briefly explains what the product is and how it functions.
  • 8
    The content contains at least one product-related video if relevant. If none are relevant, then a relevant non-product video that is relevant.
  • 9
    The content specifies that a reader can sign up for free.
  • 10
    The article makes a compelling (related to the topic) CTA.
Interpretation notes:
  1. -
  2. -
  3. -
  4. -
  5. Doesn't need to be part of main argument; can be a related, but not primary, pain point.
  6. -
  7. -
  8. -
  9. -

Determine level 4 performance

STORYTELLING & RHETORIC

The story-telling of the content leverages best practices to deliver the highest quality standards to the reader.

  • 1
    The content contains a unique element - a personal story or another detail which would make it difficult to copy.
  • 2
    The content leads the reader to a discovery. e.g. The writer could use a classic narrative structure of thesis, antithesis, and synthesis. Or, the article makes the strongest possible argument for its position.
  • 3
    The article rejects some form of received knowledge, putting itself in opposition and conflict with old ideas. e.g. The article actively highlights and rejects out-of-date ideas, presenting a new, improved alternative approach.
  • 4
    The article includes some sort of framing effect. This nudges the reader to look at the content either in a positive or negative light. An example would be the inclusion of a loss/gain frame.
  • 5
    Incorporates a CTA that leverages a framing effect to encourage readers to take action now e.g. FOMO, or Big Promises
  • 6
    The article includes some form of the Social Proof heuristic e.g. social media embeds, rhetoric, reviews, case studies, written or video testimonials, etc.
  • 7
    A positive Representative heuristic is used when mentioning the product or its functions/use cases. An example of this would be to mention non-competitive but highly trusted brands in contexts where the product is also mentioned.
  • 8
    The article goes above and beyond in offering value to the reader, without diluting the experience. This should include additional free content such as links to or embeds of relevant templates, related articles or product videos/webinars, or an offer to join our early access program. This utilizes Reciprocity.
  • 9
    Repetition priming around the product's core value proposition is used at least 3 times throughout the piece. An example of this would be to reiterate the value prop of the product to the specific piece multiple times in the article.
  • 10
    The author is able to connect the expertise of the brand/company to the topic, or leverage relevant personal experience to add authority to their voice (without claiming to be an authority on the topic).
Interpretation notes:
  1. The unique element should:
    1. ... bear reference to the topic,
    2. ... be more substantive than a remark
    3. ... serve as a story
    4. ... present a problem or solution related to the keyword
  2. -
  3. -
  4. -
  5. -
  6. -
  7. -
  8. -
  9. -

Determine level 5 performance

WORKFLOW

The workflow required to publish the post has been completed to the highest standards and in good time.

  • 1
    The correct checklist was completed with all tasks checked off and undertaken by the writer up until the point of BAMM review
  • 2
    The keyword research has been evidenced, or the keyword checklist completed
  • 3
    The draft was submitted for peer review greater than 3 days before the due date
  • 4
    The peer review was delivered greater than or equal to 3 days before the due date
  • 5
    The images were requested greater than 3 days before the due date
  • 6
    The post title options were posted into the slack channel for voting
  • 7
    The finished post was completed by the due date
  • 8
    The finished post had the opportunity to be scrutinized by the team at least 1 week prior to publication.
  • 9
    Recommended edits or improvements from the team meeting or peer review were implemented in time for the BAMM review
  • 10
    The BAMM review was completed before the final editor review.
Interpretation notes:
  1. -
  2. -
  3. -
  4. -
  5. -
  6. -
  7. -
  8. -
  9. -
  10. The publish date should be considered the date the article was originally intended to be published when the work was assigned.

View results

{{form.Level_1_Pass_or_Fail?}}: {{form.Level_1_Score}}

{{form.Level_2_Pass_or_Fail?}}: {{form.Level_2_Score}}

{{form.Level_3_Pass_or_Fail?}}: {{form.Level_3_Score}}

{{form.Level_4_pass_or_fail?}}: {{form.Level_4_score}}

{{form.Level_5_pass_or_fail?}}: {{form.Level_5_Score}}

Add any further notes

LEVEL 1

{{form.If_all_the_above_have_not_been_met,_leave_notes_here_to_be_passed_to_the_author_for_improvements}}

LEVEL 2

{{form.Level_2_notes}}

LEVEL 3

{{form.Level_3_notes}}

LEVEL 4

{{form.Level_4_notes}}

LEVEL 5

{{form.Level_5_notes}}

Communicate these notes to the author.

Sign up for a FREE account and
search thousands of checklists in our library.

Sign up for a FREE account and search thousands of checklists in our library.