Blog
A list of channels is not a marketing strategy
Before deciding what to post, decide what you are trying to change.
“We’ll do LinkedIn, a monthly email, a few blogs and perhaps a webinar.”
Fine. But what is the strategy?
“We’ve also got a content calendar.”
Excellent. The spreadsheet has entered the conversation. The question remains.
There is nothing wrong with those channels. I use them. I recommend them. But a list of places to put your marketing is not the same as a reason for doing it.
It is a distribution plan.
Why this matters more when we can produce more
AI gives this distinction a sharper edge. LinkedIn’s 2025 B2B research reported that 95% of surveyed B2B marketers used AI at least weekly. Content production is firmly part of that conversation. (linkedin.com)
My concern is not that we will struggle to make enough marketing. It is that we will become exceptionally efficient at making marketing we have not properly thought through.
A weak proposition does not become stronger because it now exists as a blog, six social posts and a video script. It becomes a weak proposition with excellent availability.
The opportunity is to use that production capability after making the strategic choices. Here are the choices I would put first.
1. What needs to change for the business?
- “More visibility” is a starting point, not a complete brief.
- Visibility among whom? For what? To support which commercial priority?
Compare:
“We need to post more about our services.”
With:
“We want existing customers to consider us for implementation and ongoing support, not just the initial purchase.”
The second statement suggests a perception to change, an audience to understand and a conversation to develop.
It also gives us something more useful to discuss at the review meeting than whether Tuesday’s post received enough applause.
Before choosing an activity, define the business change it should support.
2. Who matters most, and what matters to them?
“Decision-makers” is not quite an audience.
I would want to understand the specific people we need to reach, the situations they face and the decisions they are trying to make.
Imagine a technology provider promoting a device refresh.
One possible message is:
“Discover our comprehensive end-to-end device solutions.”
Another is:
“How do you replace 2,000 laptops without turning your IT team into a delivery department?”
The second is an illustrative alternative, not a universal winning headline. But it gives us a concrete problem to investigate.
Does that concern actually matter to the customer? Who owns it? What language do they use?
Those questions should shape the message before the design team opens a file.
3. Why should anyone choose us?
There is nothing inherently wrong with words such as innovative, customer-focused or end-to-end. I simply would not ask them to carry an entire positioning strategy.
Try this exercise:
Remove your company name from the opening paragraph of your website.
Could a competitor use it unchanged? If the answer is yes, I would revisit the proposition before increasing its distribution.
A useful proposition should help someone understand:
- Who the offering is for.
- Which problem it addresses.
- Why your approach is worth considering.
- What evidence supports that promise.
4. What should people think differently?
Before asking what people should click, ask what they need to understand.
Perhaps you want them to move from:
“They supply the technology.”
To:
“They can help us make the technology work across the business.”
That is a useful communications task.
Now we can evaluate content against it. Does the proposed article demonstrate implementation expertise? Does the customer example show the wider contribution? Does the sales follow-up reinforce the same idea?
This is also where I would connect brand and demand activity: agree what we want people to remember, then decide which immediate actions make sense.
Not every post needs to request a meeting. Sometimes it needs to make the next meeting more likely to be relevant.
5. What are we choosing not to do?
My test of a strategy is whether it helps the team say no.
- No to an audience we cannot serve particularly well.
- No to a topic that attracts attention but has little connection to our expertise.
- No to launching another channel before we can maintain the existing ones properly.
“Everything, everywhere, every week” is an ambitious production brief. I would hesitate to call it a focused strategy.
Make the trade-offs explicit. Otherwise, every attractive idea becomes another item in somebody’s already heroic content calendar.
Now we can talk about channels
Once those choices are clear, channel planning becomes a better conversation.
For this particular objective:
- LinkedIn might introduce a perspective and encourage relevant discussion.
- A blog might explain the approach and provide evidence.
- Email might share that explanation with a specific contact.
- A conversation might establish whether there is a genuine need.
Each has a role. None needs to perform every role.
And we can decide how to assess progress: audience response, changed understanding, relevant enquiries or qualified opportunities, depending on the objective.
Write the sentence before building the calendar
Before planning the next quarter, try completing this:
We want [specific audience] to see us as [relevant value], because we help them [important outcome], supported by [credible evidence]. Marketing will contribute by [defined role].
It will not replace the research, budget or delivery plan.
But if the team cannot agree on that sentence, I would pause before commissioning another month of content.
The calendar tells us when we are publishing.
The strategy should tell us why anyone should care.
Get in touch if you think any of the above is useful and would like to discuss this further with me.