Writing / Growth
Growth

95% of thought leadership contains no actual thoughts

If your take could be generated by prompting a model with "write a post a CMO would agree with," it isn't thought leadership. It's thought followership.

On this page

Open LinkedIn and scroll for sixty seconds. Count the posts that say something the author would lose an argument over. The number is close to zero. That’s the tell.

Followership wears a leader’s costume

Most “thought leadership” is consensus, reworded. It restates what the audience already believes, in slightly nicer sentences, so the reader nods and the author gets credit for wisdom they didn’t risk anything to hold.

A take that costs you nothing to publish is worth roughly what it cost.

If a model prompted with “write a post a CMO would agree with” could produce your insight, you didn’t have an insight. You had a vibe.

The cheap test

Before you publish, ask one question:

  • Would a smart, informed person in your field actively disagree with this?

If the honest answer is no, you’re not leading a thought anywhere. You’re escorting it back to where everyone already stood. Say the thing that might cost you the easy applause. That’s the only kind worth reading.

Related reading: score yourself with the matching audit · start with an audit · read the manifesto · I deleted 140,000 visitors a month on purpose · The Quarterly Business Review: How to Run a QBR That Customers Don’t Dread

NT
Nathan Thompson
Practitioner, not a guru. I built the growth engine at Copy.ai from scratch, then left to build Systems-Led Growth: the system that runs a company's go-to-market with one operator instead of a department. I document what I build.
Start with an audit →
Barely Shipping

I build the whole thing in public.

The podcast and newsletter where I show the frameworks, the real numbers, and the parts that don't work yet. No hustle-culture, no fluff.