“People First, Data Second”—with Stephanie Schuricht (Bauer Xcel Media)

Recorded in German—English translation of the original conversation.

Intro

Maria-Lena Matysik: Hello and welcome to Analytics Sprechstunde!

My guest today is Stephanie Schuricht. Steffi comes from online marketing, where she has an incredibly strong background with more than ten years of experience.

Her professional focus was and still is SEO. Over the past few years, though, she has worked in very different industries and positions—from Head of E-Commerce to Team Lead Performance Marketing to her current role as Head of Audience Development at Bauer Xcel Media. Bauer Xcel Media is the company behind brands like Cosmopolitan, Laura, TV Movie, and Bravo … so a large online publisher.

For data freaks, of course, that means: A lot happens online, there are lots of users—ergo lots of data! And it’s fast-paced—ergo there are lots of decisions where data helps!

In her role, Steffi is responsible not only for SEO but also works on the question of how content can be strategically planned, developed further, and managed across different channels. It’s not just about rankings or reach, but also about revenue—and about how teams work with data and how decisions about content are made.

Whether previously in SEO and performance marketing or today in the world of online publishing: This is a super data-driven environment with super data-driven disciplines. And of course data is essential for Steffi too … And yet she says: People first, data second.

That’s how she “hooked” me, and I’m very happy to have her here on Analytics Sprechstunde. So: Data is important—but only truly valuable when people can understand it, put it into context, and use it meaningfully in their everyday work.

That’s exactly what we talk about in this episode: How do companies make sure that different roles on the team truly understand data and use it for their decisions? And how do you build the structures, formats, and responsibilities that make data-driven work possible in everyday practice in the first place?

Let’s go!

Interview

Maria-Lena Matysik: Lovely, great. Hi Steffi, welcome to Analytics Sprechstunde! I’m really glad you’re here today.

Stephanie Schuricht: Hi! Yes, me too. I think we already planned this three, four, five, six years ago—good things come to those who wait.

Maria-Lena Matysik: Absolutely, all the better. To start, I’d just say: When I was thinking about what topic I could interview you on and what we could focus on, I read a bit about what you say about yourself online. And I stumbled across something you’d written somewhere: “People first, data second.” And my first thought was: That won’t do at all—in my world, of course, it’s always data first. But that made it all the more interesting to ask you exactly this question: Why “People first, data second”? What’s behind it?

Stephanie Schuricht: Haha, nice to be reminded of what you sometimes write about yourself on the internet and once said.

Maria-Lena Matysik: And then people find it.

Stephanie Schuricht: And then people find it. And yet the sentence still reflects what I see every day in the teams—regardless of the setup. If I provide lots of data, some dashboards and so on, but people don’t know how to use or understand them and which KPIs or data they’re responsible for—which is actually my responsibility—then all that data, the whole jumble of data, doesn’t do me much good.

That’s actually what this sentence is aiming at: that I create space to make data understandable, clear, and usable for people, and also give them space to learn. That’s especially important for us now that we’ve brought the Editorial Planners on board. Before, they really were editors, sat in the newsrooms and wrote—and now, as Planners, they have to look at numbers in a completely different way: How does the article actually rank, and what other aspects does it have? That means presenting and preparing data in a completely different way.

Maria-Lena Matysik: Why would you say this is such an important topic? Or why should it be “People first”?

Stephanie Schuricht: I think because—you just said that for you, data first is the thing—we all have less and less time, want to be as efficient as possible, and want to make clever, smart decisions. And quite often there’s also pressure: Why did you make this decision? Then you’d like to be able to back it up and not say: “Oh, I just went by my gut—I think writing about potatoes is nicer right now than writing about pasta.” Having a bit more foundation there and being able to say: “This is why I decided on it, this was my reasoning,” ultimately gives people, I think, much more confidence when they do have to justify their work—for whatever reason, positive or negative.

Maria-Lena Matysik: Absolutely. As you say: On the one hand, there’s the input at the front—that is, inspiration for decisions or for the questions you can ask in the first place—and at the end, of course, the basis, the justification for why you decided one way or the other.

Stephanie Schuricht: Yes, totally.

Maria-Lena Matysik: For me, of course, it’s super interesting to learn more about how you implemented this people-first-data-second approach in your team and how you handle it. Would you maybe describe what the starting situation was before you as a team actively engaged with it?

Stephanie Schuricht: It’s worth keeping in mind: I’ve been at Bauer Xcel for a year and a half now, and of course a lot happened before me, too. There was data before me as well. That means we have various Power BI dashboards, and of course we also use GA4, and the SEOs of course also use Google Search Console, Sistrix, and so on. But above all, there are dashboards that are fed and used through Power BI.

And the first thing was actually to make sure everyone even knew about them. When I was brand new, it was a flood of dashboards for me, too. I first had to filter: Which ones are relevant to me? Then some of them changed again. For example, every month we have a Company Breakfast where everyone comes together and looks at numbers together. And at some point you notice: The perception of which numbers are relevant differs here and there. Along the lines of: “Oh, you’re looking at this board? No, we’ve been using the other one for two weeks now.”

And that’s where I say: The first step is to look at which data we really need to look at and how it’s needed. So: Who needs it, and how does it need to be prepared for this team, for these people, and for these functions?

Maria-Lena Matysik: Of course, that’s always a process that doesn’t start on a specific day but is more of an ever-ongoing thing. But from your perspective, you noticed: Okay, in some cases we don’t have the same perspective on data; different people on the team have a different understanding of “their” data. And that may not have been the initial trigger, but it was a driver for you to engage with it more deeply. Is that a halfway decent summary?

Stephanie Schuricht: Yes, exactly, that fits pretty well. And I think this brings us to the point that we brought the Editorial Planners into the Audience Development team. They were selected editors. At heart, of course, they’re still editors and still write here and there. But now they’re on the Audience Development team to plan content for the various topics and our various brands. Accordingly, they always have to look at: Where are the trends right now? What are the search volumes? Is there content that needs to be optimized again or not?

Of course, this was always supported by the SEO team, but it goes into more text-heavy depth. And when we partly merged the two teams, in our first kick-off session, for example, we depicted our inner hero. Everyone came up with a fancy name that represents their own character—but also what they’re very good at and what they’re not.

It was really interesting to see who already said of themselves: “I’m a huge Excel nerd, I love spreadsheets and numbers”—and who said: “Keep that away from me, that’s not my thing at all.” Over time, this really developed into people knowing who’s good at what and whom they can approach and ask—all the way to joint sessions we now have, where we show each other: How can you use what? What can I learn from you? How do you use it in your day-to-day work? It’s actually nice to watch.

Maria-Lena Matysik: Did the Editorial Planner role exist before it was merged with SEO?

Stephanie Schuricht: No, not at all. We created it completely from scratch and introduced it.

Maria-Lena Matysik: Okay, I see. So you picked the people from the editorial team who thought in a particularly data-driven way and—with a lot of support—put them in charge of approaching the whole topic of editorial planning in as data-driven a way as possible?

Stephanie Schuricht: Not all of them were already good with data, or are now, it’s fair to say. They were also selected based on the instinct and expertise they have in their field. We’re talking about Fashion and Beauty, Food and Life, Stars and Stories—so very different fields. It wasn’t always a given that they were also data-savvy.

But the openness is really there. And I think I’ve seen how they really rub off on each other to some extent and ask questions with genuine interest. I think that’s what it’s about: awakening this intrinsic motivation in people to understand: Why are you looking at that? How would you interpret it? And that they don’t shy away from asking these questions—out of fear of exposing themselves, not looking smart enough, or making a mistake. Instead, everyone is really very open and dares to ask. And I hope that after this podcast, someone will also confirm to me that within this group there’s a sense of safety to ask these questions and to be open with each other.

Maria-Lena Matysik: I find it really interesting that you say that, because I often notice it in my day-to-day work too: You often can’t simply draw the subject-specific conclusions from objectively neutral data. You need subject-matter depth, expertise in your own target audience, in your own topic—and then the data. Only the combination of both really moves you forward.

Stephanie Schuricht: Yes, super important point, because I think so too. And to some extent also historical knowledge—without letting it block you. So also being able to say: “We already know this pattern at Easter with Let’s Dance. There’s always a dip because people would rather look for Easter eggs than watch the show.” Or knowing which connections you can link together.

Maria-Lena Matysik: Totally.

Stephanie Schuricht: If someone really only looks at the numbers at a high level, they see: Oh God, the numbers are going down—and then management asks even bigger questions: Why are the numbers going down? And the person who, as you say, has the expertise and the data understanding can say: “I dug into it again. See, it behaved the same way the previous year, and from my experience, Easter just looks like such and such.” Still questioning it and not always taking it as a given, but being able to explain it—that’s a big advantage.

Maria-Lena Matysik: The combination of asking questions and answering questions, absolutely. Could you maybe walk us through a bit more of what the process looked like for you? Where did you start, and what were the steps?

Stephanie Schuricht: The process of how we started working with the team, or the learning sessions we set up?

Maria-Lena Matysik: Exactly—from the point where you said: Hey, we want to bring data more into the team, through defining the role of the Editorial Planner, to where you stand today when it comes to working with data in the team.

Stephanie Schuricht: Yes, exactly. For one thing, we have a data team that we try to have a pretty good connection with and that we exchange with regularly.

The first thing we did within Audience Development—once we’d also started calling ourselves that—was, for example, to launch an exchange session every two weeks. It always takes place on Wednesdays. There, the SEOs, but also the planning people, show how they implement best practices in their day-to-day work. But we also sometimes bring in someone from the data team, or recently our Global SEO Director was there and presented the newest SEO tool that we all really like to use—namely SEOgets—to show that you can actually get a lot out of it in terms of data. I think that was a good step: having guests who join and share their knowledge, and everyone sharing their approaches with each other.

Another important point was: The dashboards we already have are okay and somehow work, but they’re not really anchored in day-to-day work yet. We’re not finished yet, but we’re on it. And this ties back to what I said earlier: We have so many boards, and nobody knows all of them or who uses them and how we look at them—because they were set up without actually talking to people. I think it’s about not immediately saying: “I need a dashboard, now I’ll give it to the team, and they should please use it somehow.” But rather that this dashboard is born from within the team—of course with a bit of input and thoughts from me.

Maria-Lena Matysik: So again: People first.

Stephanie Schuricht: Exactly, we’re back to People first. So asking: Which numbers do you look at every day? I, for example, look at three different tools—can we maybe consolidate that in one dashboard? Not at the depth of the individual tools, of course, but so that it gives you a first look in the morning: What do I need to focus on today? That’s a step that’s of course still ongoing and that we’re working on.

Then we also have NLK sessions across the whole company—company-wide, for example also with the UK—where we keep sharing knowledge, also across international borders, to support each other. Next Level Knowledge.

Maria-Lena Matysik: Ah, that’s what NLK stands for.

Stephanie Schuricht: Yes, Next Level Knowledge. And there we always try for a combination of someone from the SEO team and someone from the editorial teams—because then we’re back to someone who brings expertise. We SEOs always have ideas about what content should look like, how it should work, and how it should be structured. And we try to bring that into the newsrooms as best we can so they actually implement it—and not just from the top down along the lines of “This is how you have to do it.” Instead, we try to set up these sessions as real partnerships with the editors. That gives a bit more street credibility when someone’s there who otherwise works with it every day themselves—and then it’s just as much fun for us.

I think that covers most of the points pretty well.

Maria-Lena Matysik: And when defining the Editorial Planner role: To what extent did you pay attention to where there are touchpoints with data or requirements for data?

Stephanie Schuricht: When we introduced the Editorial Planners—and we also changed other roles within the company—we set up a RACI matrix, so Responsible, Accountable, Consulted, and Informed, to have a first blueprint of how we think these roles work together. As initial guidance, I think that’s always good, but it also needs fine-tuning. Because as leadership, you’re not fully immersed in the day-to-day work. You put a lot of thought into how it should look and then find it logical: The SEO asks the Editorial Planner, who then informs the editor—that’s how it all works, you think.

And then three pairs of eyes look at each other and wonder: What on earth did they come up with there? I think as a first draft, the RACI is good for having guidance and maybe also a basis for discussion—so a starting point from which you can improve and adapt it.

Maria-Lena Matysik: What were the main areas for improvement or stumbling blocks where you realized: It didn’t work quite that smoothly right away?

Stephanie Schuricht: We’re actually still right in the middle of it. But what’s emerging is, of course, to some extent the question: Who is ultimately responsible for the numbers? So: Who is responsible for it being successful, and to what degree? Because we also have the Content Leads, who were previously …—don’t ask me what they used to be called, I’ve already blocked that out again.

Maria-Lena Matysik: The old world. Very good—you’re already living in the new world.

Stephanie Schuricht: Silly me, what’s it called … editor-in-chief, a form of editor-in-chief. Forgive me, I’m still very new to the publishing world. It’s my first time at a publishing house—before, I was at start-ups, where everything was much smaller. Publishing is a completely different business.

But exactly at that point: To what extent does the Content Lead bear the main responsibility for their brand and what they oversee running properly? And how much do the Editorial Planner or the SEO team support them in that, and in what form? This demarcation—who looks at which numbers—is still the biggest point of friction. Or also: Who gets to make which decision where? Actually a really interesting topic. The expertise from editorial planning looks at it and says: “I’d say it’s potatoes—new potato season is starting, I’d start writing about asparagus and potatoes now.” And from an SEO perspective we see: “Well, wild garlic is on the rise right now …” And who makes the final decision and then also bears the responsibility for having made it?

Those are still the most intense points, and we certainly won’t always make everyone happy. I think even after the review and finalization, there will certainly still be one person who isn’t quite so happy with it. But I think that’s how it is sometimes.

Maria-Lena Matysik: Absolutely. Is there anything where you’d say: If I did the whole process or individual parts of it again, I’d do it differently? Or have you generally set yourself something for the future where you say: Hey, I still want to implement that, I see even more value there?

Stephanie Schuricht: What I’d definitely do the same way again are the exchange sessions with the Planners. I really see how more and more input is coming from the other teams and how people ask: What can we do next? They bring their own ideas. Just now, for example, we had the topic of SEO myth-busting: Which SEO myths still prevail in the newsrooms that are two, three, four years old and long outdated? And especially in times of AI and further optimization, new ones are being added. You can put everything a bit into perspective. And people decide for themselves what they want to talk about. Everyone brings something, and I think that creates real learning and real interest. I’d definitely do that again.

What I’d do differently: involve the people who are ultimately affected by the RACI and who have to live it much more closely from the start when introducing it. I think there are various reasons why people don’t do that. After all, I only joined as this transition was already underway—a lot of groundwork had been done before we actually went into the change. Then all of a sudden time pressure comes into play, you have a fixed date in mind and think: Oh well, we’ll just quickly do this now. But if you then step back, go into it calmly, and really bring people along, then acceptance within the teams to really support and live it is simply much higher. That’s something I’d definitely do differently.

Very quickly, I have one more point: With the NLK sessions, or learning sessions in general, we’re trying to find a format to follow up on what’s been learned. For example, we spend 10–15 minutes presenting, lecture-style, how to write the best headlines. But how does that stay in the editors’ heads? That’s really the tricky part at the moment, because in six months it’s forgotten again. Do you collect the knowledge everywhere and send it around once a week with a note: “Remember, we had a guideline here”? Or how often do I have to repeat a topic for it to stick? We still have room to improve there.

Maria-Lena Matysik: And again, a people topic.

Stephanie Schuricht: Yes, totally.

Maria-Lena Matysik: Okay, last question: From what you’ve learned over the past months or years, do you have a point or tip you’d pass on to other team leads or CMOs—about how a team works in a data-driven way, or how you can help your team think and work in a data-driven way?

Stephanie Schuricht: My tip would be not to start with the dashboard right away, but to some extent with the question: Does every person on my team know which data they’re responsible for and which data they should use? And did that person help shape it themselves, and can they get behind it? If the answer is no, then even the best tool won’t change that. Then it doesn’t matter whether it’s a Power BI dashboard or any other. People really have to take on responsibility for what they are or were involved in. I think that’s something I’ve been able to observe across all companies, and it’s really important. That would always be my advice.

Maria-Lena Matysik: Perfect closing words. Thank you so, so, so much for your time, all your input, and for sharing your knowledge. Thank you!

Stephanie Schuricht: You’re very, very welcome. Thank you for asking and for listening. I hope I could help.

Maria-Lena Matysik: Absolutely.

Outro

Maria-Lena Matysik: When I sum up the conversation with Steffi for myself, what sticks with me most is that data-driven work is, of course, much more human than many might think at first glance. It’s not primarily about dashboards, reports, or tools, but about giving people—who ultimately make decisions and do and implement things—a foundation and guidance: Which numbers are relevant to me? What am I responsible for? And what do I actually need to be able to work well with this data?

What I also took away from Steffi: Real work with data that’s integrated into a team’s DNA doesn’t come from prescribing structures, but from having everyone on the team participate. Especially when roles change or new processes emerge, it makes a huge difference whether teams are merely informed or truly involved.

And a third thought that I found very valuable is the importance of shared learning formats. Data literacy doesn’t grow on its own, nor does it appear out of thin air. It develops when teams regularly, together, in small steps, keep looking at topics, asking questions, sharing knowledge, and learning from each other.

And—to repeat in closing what Steffi observed: Data-driven work isn’t a goal you reach at some point. It’s an ongoing process.

Those were my closing words 😉 Follow me on LinkedIn and feel free to send me feedback on this episode—or your ideas for future episodes: topics or guests you’d like to hear on Analytics Sprechstunde.