David C. Baker draws a distinction between content and insight that’s stuck with me.
What is insight?
I believe an insight is an opinion on a topic, drawn from patterns in observed data. When articulated, it elicits one of two responses from the reader:
- “I’ve never noticed this before, but it feels true.”
- “I’ve felt this before, but never had the words to articulate it.”
And when I say data, in the context of thought leadership, there are three types:
- Qualitative data absorbed through experience. Recognising the patterns that emerge from solving the same problem, for the same type of client, over and over.
- Quantitative data collected from a primary source. SaaS companies often have this through the nature of their product, collecting proprietary data no one else can access.
- Quantitative or qualitative data derived from a secondary source. This looks like Blair Enns reading dozens of books on value pricing, then translating his findings to the creative service industry. It looks like Dan Runcie studying how hip hop artists and labels market their music, then publishing the analysis no one else was.
Content is not insight.
Content populates space on a website, keeps a LinkedIn profile active, addresses search queries, and ticks a box on a publishing calendar.
It repeats what has gone before.
It leaves the reader exactly as it found them. It’s the equivalent of a teenager writing an essay they were instructed to write at school, not a comic book they chose to write at home, inspired after re-reading 23 Tintin editions, cover to cover.
Here’s the test I use to figure out if I’m writing content or insight:
Did I have this opinion before I started studying the data?
If I did, it’s content, not insight.