Thought leadership has always been that awkward term PRs look to avoid but use without a better alternative. It’s easily recognizable in-house and simple to market to clients.
Moreover, it’s a term that’s increasingly popular as more people strive to become thought leaders than ever before. Stakeholders trust and rely on people more than faceless companies, which is why up to 60% of consumers prefer to buy products and services from companies with visible leadership teams, according to our research.
Even journalists are favoring thought leadership more than ever. Cision’s 2024 State of Media Report has revealed that almost 1 in 2 journalists value industry experts as their top inspiration.
That said, even while thought leadership can be a powerful tool, we risk it becoming oversaturated if we’re not careful, leading to less and less original content, crowding out the good from the bad. Think about it: how many times have you seen someone post on LinkedIn about whether AI is good, bad, or not quite there yet over the past year? We’re likely all fed up hearing about AI by now, despite it being so groundbreaking.
Yes, I understand LinkedIn’s algorithms favor popular topics, but leaders are straying from their expertise entirely just to be seen and heard. Instead, they should be commenting on issues they’re actually qualified to speak about — that’s what real thought leadership is.
Surely, as PR professionals, this is our own doing?
Far too often, we favor what’s trending over what’s original to pump out content for a client. But ultimately, this only leads to bad practices. It encourages a cycle of shoehorned opinions that lack depth and originality, reducing engagement and bringing no real value.
The best thought leaders are made over time, where they can build credibility and develop a unique voice. This involves not only consistent engagement but deeper insights and a willingness to tackle complex issues.
Explaining this to clients can be tough in a fast-paced, results-driven world. Clients often expect immediate results and may see tokenistic thought leadership as a quick win to become relevant. But this couldn’t be further than true, and it’s already blunted the effectiveness of our work.
Ideally, we need to spend more one-on-one time with clients to carefully outline their areas of expertise and identify three to four overarching ideas they can own, constantly revisit, and hammer home. Keeping it simple is sometimes better than saying too much.
This may even mean pushing back on clients when their ideas are far-reaching or advising against commenting on topics irrelevant to them. You might even reject the chance to work with a client entirely if they fail to grasp what thought leadership is, or worse still, try to dictate to you.
In the coming years, people will increasingly look at executives to take the lead on key issues such as the climate crisis or tackle the threat of misinformation. We’ve got to ensure that we set a better standard for impactful thought leadership that audiences can rely upon.
This is the only way to set realistic expectations, cut through the media, leave a lasting impression on social channels, and ultimately bolster our client’s brands and the organizations they support.
That’s the objective, and we’re the experts, right?