Content Creation Over Virtual Assistance: Prioritizing Role Focus for Enhanced Training Outcomes

Health systems are revisiting a familiar question with new urgency: if clinicians are drowning in change, how do you design training that actually lightens the load? In a recent healthsystemCIO webinar, three leaders—Gretchen Britt, Liberty Market VP Information and Technology, CIO, The University of Kansas Health System; Clara Lin, MD, VP/CMIO, Seattle Children’s; and Dirk Stanley, MD, CMIO, UConn Health—described practical ways to align training with clinical reality, cut friction in the EHR, and make the ROI legible to budget-holders. Their common thread: training is not an afterthought to technology delivery; it is a product that requires design, resourcing, and measurement.

Build a Training Toolbox, Not a Single Tool

Stanley argued that organizations still tend to “focus on implementing the technology,” while failing to plan for how workflows will change for “doctors and nurses and pharmacists and case managers” who live in those tools every day. “Training is a deliverable just like everything else,” he said, “and it requires the same sort of thought, design, [and] analysis.” He frames training as a system of components—elbow-to-elbow support, champions, short videos, in-app guidance, naming conventions in the EHR, and formal curricula—deployed according to project complexity and risk. “Training is not a tool. It’s a toolbox,” he said.

Lin sees the same pattern from the provider side. The most reliable gains come from hands-on help. “The most effective and highest yield…for achieving user engagement and user satisfaction is at-the-elbow training,” she said. But because “that takes a lot of resources on the system side,” she presses teams to right-size the mix: roaming trainers on hospital floors, pop-up booths in clinics, an always-answered hotline, and “TikTok-type teaching”—brief, just-in-time tips inside applications.

Britt, a nurse by background, pushes for modality diversity so training meets clinicians where they are. “We have got to set them up for success, which means being intentional with that training.” Some clinicians want to watch a video, others prefer see-one-do-one-teach-one. Her team adds specialty-specific onboarding and first-shift elbow support, followed by a direct “bat phone” for quick rescue and escalation.

Bring Training to the Point of Care

All three leaders emphasized going to clinicians rather than expecting clinicians to come to IT. Lin’s team made that a formal strategy. If the organization won’t protect an hour for training, “we’re coming to you,” she said. Trainers show up at faculty meetings and lunch hours, bring food, and weave training into existing gatherings. The approach isn’t only about convenience; it’s about attention. Short, in-workflow content performs better than links to long videos that clinicians will “not really watch…in the middle of trying to see a patient.”

Britt’s team has refined its own brand of “infiltration.” During a push to adopt e-prescribing, they posted playful Bitmoji cards with her number behind workstations: “Hey, are you going to eSubmit that?” The light touch earned calls from physicians who “were ready to do this” after seeing the reminder for a week. The same tactic later helped with inbox improvements. The point, Britt said, is to communicate the “why,” then surround staff with multiple, low-friction ways to act on it.

Stanley adds that the more personal the engagement, the better the learning. Synchronous training lets educators “anticipate what [learners’] needs are” and reinforce difficult concepts in the moment. But when budgets or schedules don’t allow full elbow coverage, recordings and micro-lessons help close the gap—provided organizations acknowledge that some learners will “walk away with gaps” unless there’s follow-up support.

Make the Case: Budgets, Culture, and ROI

Getting the dollars is often the hardest part. Lin’s challenge is familiar: “Every hour [providers] are spending in training is every hour they’re not seeing patients.” Pulling a large group off the schedule creates visible revenue loss, which can crowd out intangible gains like reduced frustration or better quality. Her solution is a mix of structural and regulatory levers. She moved training under her purview with Informatics to integrate curriculum design with clinical insight, and she points to required training for new tools—such as consent workflows for ambient AI recording in Washington state—as non-optional events that must be resourced.

Britt built her physician support team incrementally. Early on, she relied less on formal dashboards and more on “loud voices” from clinical leaders who vouched for satisfaction and click-reduction. Over time, that word-of-mouth, plus visible turnaround on pain points, justified new hires and solidified the role as a bridge “from the technical folks to the clinicians so they can focus on patient care.” Still, she cautions against over-customizing to the point that vendor-supplied learning materials become unusable.

Stanley calls the prevailing problem “budgetary myopia.” Leaders “focus on the seed” (software and go-live) and “forget about the soil” (training and adoption). When data are thin, he recommends structured storytelling that traces failure risk straight to insufficient training. In project charters, training should be listed as a dependency, not a nice-to-have. “You can’t get to the finish line without including the training and education,” he said.

Governance: Where Training Lives Matters

Structure affects outcomes. Lin recently consolidated training, digital health, and clinical informatics under a single leader to align priorities and metrics. Previously, trainers reported directly to the CIO as “their own little island,” which diffused focus and made it harder to connect curricula with clinical realities. Now, informaticists help “design the training curriculum and…penetrate the very difficult-to-penetrate provider population,” while trainers shape the learning design for adult learners.

Partnerships across the enterprise also pay off. Lin moved knowledge content into ServiceNow so the help desk and trainers share a single source of truth; her EHR’s learning home dashboard links clinicians straight to those materials. Britt relies on marketing/communications and the chief medical officer’s platform to broadcast change and “justify the need” for clinician time. Both leaders maintain easy-to-find repositories (SharePoint, EHR-embedded portals) but accept that many clinicians will still “phone a friend”—which makes it even more important to seed knowledgeable champions in every unit.

Take it Away

• Treat training as a product with requirements, design, and owners; tailor the toolbox (elbow support, champions, micro-lessons, in-app tips, formal class) to project risk and complexity.
• Put trainers where clinicians already are: rounds, faculty meetings, clinic lunches, and unit pop-ups—then reinforce with always-on hotlines.
• Use regulatory and safety requirements (e.g., consent for ambient AI tools) to secure time and attention for mandatory workflows.
• Centralize knowledge in a shared platform (e.g., ServiceNow) and link it from the EHR’s learning dashboard; keep content short and searchable.
• Align training under clinical informatics leadership so curriculum design is clinically literate and metrics tie to outcomes.
• Win budget debates with narrative plus risk framing: show how inadequate training jeopardizes adoption, patient safety, and satisfaction.
• Don’t over-customize the EHR to the point that vendor education becomes unusable; balance local needs against supportability.
• Seed credible, specialty-specific champions and give them direct lines to IT; measure satisfaction, call patterns, and time saved to demonstrate ROI.

For executives balancing cost, change fatigue, and rising AI-driven complexity, the message is clear: treat training as a designed service with clear owners, metrics, and channels that meet clinicians in the flow of work. Britt’s emphasis on intentional, multimodal support and Lin’s insistence on in-person, in-workflow touchpoints frame an approach that turns adoption into habit. Or, as Stanley put it, “Training is a deliverable just like everything else.”

What are the key differences in skillset between a content creator and a virtual assistant?

Defining the Core Difference: Content vs. Support

Many organizations, notably those scaling rapidly, face a crucial decision when building their support teams: prioritize dedicated content creators or lean heavily on virtual assistants (VAs) to handle content needs alongside administrative tasks. While VAs offer undeniable value, focusing on specialized content roles demonstrably improves training outcomes, brand consistency, and ultimately, customer satisfaction. This isn’t about dismissing the role of VAs; it’s about strategic role allocation for maximum impact. Key terms to consider include knowledge base content, technical writing, and content strategy.

Why Specialized Content Creation Trumps generalized VA Support

The skillset required for effective content creation differs considerably from that of a virtual assistant. VAs excel at task completion, association, and administrative support. Content creation, however, demands:

* Deep subject Matter Expertise: Understanding the nuances of your product or service is paramount.

* SEO Proficiency: Creating content that ranks requires keyword research (SEO keywords, long-tail keywords), on-page optimization, and an understanding of search engine algorithms.

* Writing & Editing Skills: Clarity, conciseness, and grammatical accuracy are non-negotiable. This includes content editing and proofreading.

* content Strategy & Planning: A cohesive content strategy ensures all materials align with business goals and address user needs.

* Visual Communication: Incorporating images, videos, and other visuals enhances engagement and comprehension.

Attempting to combine these responsibilities often leads to diluted efforts and subpar content. A VA tasked with writing a detailed troubleshooting guide may lack the technical depth or writing experience to produce a truly helpful resource.

The Impact on Training: A Direct Correlation

investing in dedicated content creators directly translates to better training materials – for both internal teams and end-users.

1. Internal Training: Well-crafted internal documentation (sops, training manuals, onboarding guides) streamlines employee onboarding and reduces the learning curve. This leads to faster proficiency and increased productivity. Consider the impact of clear process documentation versus ambiguous instructions.
2. Customer Self-Service: Extensive help center articles, FAQs, and tutorials empower customers to resolve issues independently, reducing support ticket volume and improving customer satisfaction. Effective customer support content is a key driver of loyalty.
3. Reduced Support Costs: By proactively addressing common questions and issues through self-service content, you lower the burden on your support team, freeing them up to handle more complex inquiries. This is a direct ROI benefit of strategic content marketing.

building a Content-Frist Culture: Practical Steps

Transitioning to a content-first approach requires a deliberate strategy:

* Identify Content Gaps: Analyze support tickets, customer feedback, and website analytics to pinpoint areas where content is lacking. Content audit is a crucial first step.

* Hire Dedicated Content Creators: Look for individuals with proven writing skills, subject matter expertise, and a passion for creating helpful resources.Consider roles like technical content writer or knowledge base specialist.

* Invest in Content Tools: Provide your content team with the tools they need to succeed, such as:

* content Management Systems (CMS): WordPress, Drupal, etc.

* SEO Tools: SEMrush, Ahrefs, Moz.

* Grammar & Style Checkers: Grammarly, ProWritingAid.

* Establish Content Style Guides: Ensure consistency in tone, voice, and formatting across all content.A strong brand voice is essential.

* Implement a Content Review Process: Peer review and subject matter expert validation are critical for accuracy and quality.

Case study: streamlining Onboarding with Dedicated Content

At a previous client, a SaaS company experiencing rapid growth, we shifted from relying on VAs to create onboarding materials to hiring a dedicated onboarding content specialist. The results were important:

* Onboarding Time Reduced by 30%: New employees were able to become productive faster thanks to clearer, more comprehensive training materials.

* Support Ticket Volume Decreased by 15%: Improved self-service resources reduced the number of onboarding-related support requests.

* Employee Satisfaction Increased: Employees reported feeling more confident and prepared in their roles.

This demonstrates the tangible benefits of prioritizing specialized content creation.

Leveraging VAs Strategically: A Complementary Role

This isn’t to say VAs have no place in the content ecosystem. They can be invaluable for:

* Content Formatting & Publishing: Taking finished content and preparing it for publication on various platforms.

* Image Sourcing & Editing: Finding and optimizing visuals to accompany content.

* Content Repurposing: Transforming existing content into different formats (e.g., blog posts into infographics).

* Basic Content Updates: Making minor revisions to existing content under the guidance of a content creator.

However, these tasks should support the core content creation process, not be the process.

Future Trends: AI and the Evolving Content Landscape

The rise of AI writing tools (like those utilizing natural language processing) presents both opportunities and challenges.