Thought leadership

What a thought leadership article is

A thought leadership article is a signed piece that takes a position on a question in your trade and argues it from your own experience, so that a reader finishes it knowing something they could not have got from a brochure. The test is simple: could a competitor publish this unchanged? If yes, it is not thought leadership. It is a longer brochure with your name on it.

It is not industry commentary, which reacts to something in the news within the week it matters; that is a separate service. And it is not a case study, which proves a result. This piece persuades by argument, and the argument has to be one you would defend on a call.

Who this is for

An owner, partner or senior person who holds a view about how their trade should be done and is tired of watching the opposite view sell. The view is usually already in their head. It comes out on sales calls, at association meetings, and over coffee with peers, and nobody has written it down.

It suits a business that sells on judgement: professional services, consultancies, contractors on complex jobs, and anyone whose buyers are choosing between firms that all look the same on paper. One argued piece gives the buyer a reason to pick you that a price list cannot.

It is not for a business that does not yet know what it stands for. If the position changes depending on who is asked, the piece will read that way. Settle it first with a positioning statement. It is also not for anyone who wants an article that offends nobody. A position some readers will disagree with is the point, and if that is not acceptable, a plain explainer is a better buy.

What goes in it

The claim, in the first paragraph. Stated plainly, in one sentence, with no hedging. "Most commercial roof replacements in this region are sold five years too early" is a claim. "Roof timing is a complex topic" is not.

What you have seen. Three or four instances from your own work, anonymised where they must be, with concrete numbers you can stand behind: jobs, years, dollars in CAD. This is the evidence, and it is why nobody can copy the piece.

The strongest objection, taken seriously. The best argument for the other side, stated fairly and then answered. A piece that ignores the objection reads as advertising. A piece that answers it reads as expertise.

What a buyer should do differently. One or two instructions a reader can act on this month, whether or not they hire you. The generosity is the persuasion.

One next step. A single line to the contact page or a named service. Not a menu.

What you get

One article of 900 to 1,500 words in a shared document you own, in your voice, with the headline, a 40-character title, the meta description, and a short author line that uses only what the site already publishes. Two rounds of revisions are included, because the first draft of an opinion piece always gets one "I would never say that" and one "actually, I would go further." Both are useful.

You also get a two-paragraph version for your newsletter and three social posts drawn from the argument, so the piece can travel the week it goes up. The recording of our call is yours as well.

A worked example

An illustration, not a client. A structural engineering practice of six people competes for renovation work against firms that quote faster and cheaper. The principal believes that most residential renovation permits in the region are delayed by drawings submitted before the existing structure has been opened up, and that the cheap fast quote is what causes the three-month wait.

The article is "Why your renovation permit is late, and why it was late before you applied." It makes the claim in the first sentence. It gives three anonymised jobs: a 1970s split-level where a hidden beam change added seven weeks, a heritage duplex where an early site opening saved the client a second submission, and a job the practice lost on price that came back nine months later. It states the objection, that opening up costs money before a client has committed, and answers it with the cost of a second submission in CAD. It ends by telling homeowners to ask any engineer one question before signing. The principal spent fifty minutes on a recorded call and twenty on the draft.

How it runs

1. A half-hour call. What you believe, who disagrees, and what you have seen that convinced you. No charge.
2. A fixed price in writing. One piece or a series, revision rounds stated.
3. The argument call. A recorded forty to sixty minutes in which I argue the other side and you answer. That recording is the raw material.
4. The draft. Ten working days later, with every factual claim marked for you to confirm.
5. Your read. You strike anything you would not say aloud, and I revise. Nothing goes out without your approval.
6. Handover. The article, the newsletter version and the social posts, ready to publish.

What it costs

Thought leadership articles are quoted as a fixed price after the half-hour call. The price depends on the length, on whether the evidence comes from your own experience or needs sourcing and checking, and on whether it is a single piece or a series of four to six under one theme, which is cheaper per piece. Everything is in CAD and agreed in writing before the argument call is booked. The pricing page explains how fixed pricing works.

What happens next

One argued piece usually produces a second, because readers reply. A series under your name is executive ghostwriting, run on a calendar. The argument travels furthest as LinkedIn posts, one point at a time over a month. And if the piece lands with a trade publication's editor, placing a version there is the bylined and trade articles service.