reaperinvest Thought Leadership
When to Use This Skill
Use this skill when you need to:
- Write an opinion piece that stakes a clear position on an industry topic
- Create thought leadership content that builds authority and credibility
- Produce a perspective-driven article for a blog, LinkedIn, or industry publication
- Publish a contrarian take or forward-looking prediction with supporting evidence
DO NOT use this skill for how-to content, listicles, or neutral informational articles. This is for opinion-driven, authority-building pieces.
Core Principle
THOUGHT LEADERSHIP WITHOUT A CLEAR OPINION IS JUST CONTENT — THE AUTHOR MUST TAKE A POSITION AND DEFEND IT WITH EVIDENCE AND EXPERIENCE.
Phase 1: Brief
Required Inputs
| Input | What to Ask | Default |
|---|---|---|
| Topic / position | "What is your opinion or argument?" | No default — must be provided |
| Why now | "Why is this relevant right now?" | Industry trend or recent event |
| Author's credibility | "What experience qualifies you to have this opinion?" | No default — must be provided |
| Target audience | "Who should read this and be influenced by it?" | Industry peers and potential clients |
| Publication | "Where will this be published? Blog, LinkedIn, industry publication?" | Blog |
| Word count | "Target length?" | 1,200-1,800 words |
GATE: Confirm brief before outlining.
Phase 2: Outline
Article Architecture
**H1:** [Declarative title that states the position]
**Hook** (~150 words) — Story, observation, or bold claim that sets up the argument
**H2: The Current State** (~300 words) — What most people believe or do today
**H2: Why That's Wrong / Incomplete** (~400 words) — The author's contrarian perspective with evidence
**H2: What I've Seen / Done Instead** (~400 words) — Personal experience and results
**H2: What This Means for You** (~300 words) — Practical implications for the reader
**Conclusion** (~150 words) — Restate the position and call to action
GATE: Approve outline before writing.
Phase 3: Write
Writing Rules
| Rule | Detail |
|---|---|
| State the opinion early | The reader should know your position within the first 3 paragraphs |
| First person required | Thought leadership demands personal voice — "I believe," "In my experience" |
| Evidence for every claim | Data, case studies, or personal results back every argument |
| Acknowledge the other side | Address counterarguments directly — it strengthens your position |
| No hedging | "I think this might possibly be..." kills authority. State opinions confidently. |
| Concrete examples | Abstract opinions are forgettable. Specific stories and numbers are memorable. |
| End with implications | Tell the reader what to DO with this perspective |
Opinion Strength Scale
Rate the piece before delivering:
- Level 1 (Safe): Agreeable insight most people already hold — limited impact
- Level 2 (Informed): A position backed by data that some will disagree with — good
- Level 3 (Contrarian): Directly challenges conventional wisdom with strong evidence — best for thought leadership
- Level 4 (Provocative): May alienate some readers but creates strong engagement — use with care
Target Level 2-3 for maximum thought leadership impact.
Structure Template
[HOOK: Specific moment, observation, or bold claim]
[THE CONVENTIONAL WISDOM: What most people believe about this topic]
[THE PROBLEM: Why that belief is wrong, incomplete, or outdated]
- [Evidence point 1]
- [Evidence point 2]
- [Personal experience or data]
[THE ALTERNATIVE: What the author does/believes instead]
- [How it works]
- [Results achieved]
- [Why it's better]
[COUNTERARGUMENT: The strongest objection and your response to it]
[IMPLICATIONS: What this means for the reader and what they should do]
[CLOSE: Restate the position in one powerful sentence]
Phase 4: Polish
1. Thought Leadership Checklist
## Quality Checklist
- [ ] Author's position is clear within the first 3 paragraphs
- [ ] At least one contrarian or non-obvious insight
- [ ] Every claim is backed by evidence (data, experience, or case study)
- [ ] Counterarguments are acknowledged and addressed
- [ ] Written in first person with personal voice
- [ ] No hedging language ("might," "could possibly," "it seems")
- [ ] Ends with practical implications for the reader
- [ ] Opinion strength is Level 2 or 3
- [ ] Article would generate discussion if posted on LinkedIn
- [ ] Author's credibility is established early
2. Distribution Notes
- LinkedIn: Share with a personal hook paragraph that teases the contrarian angle
- Email list: Send a condensed version with a link to the full piece
- Social media: Pull 3-5 standalone quotes for social posts
Example: "Why I Stopped A/B Testing Everything (And Revenue Went Up)"
Position: Obsessive A/B testing wastes more money than it saves for small businesses
Credibility: Ran 200+ A/B tests over 3 years at a 7-figure e-commerce company
Evidence: 80% of tests were inconclusive, opportunity cost of test setup exceeded gains
Outline:
Hook: "I spent $40K on A/B testing last year. Net revenue impact: -$12K."
Current state: The industry worships A/B testing as the path to optimization
Why it's wrong: At small traffic levels, most tests never reach significance
What I do instead: Make decisive changes based on qualitative data and customer conversations
Implications: Stop testing everything. Start listening to customers.
Anti-Patterns
- No clear opinion — "Here are some thoughts on marketing" is a blog post, not thought leadership. Take a position.
- All opinion, no evidence — hot takes without data are social media posts, not authoritative articles.
- Hedging throughout — "This might not work for everyone, but perhaps..." undermines every argument. Commit to the opinion.
- Attacking people instead of ideas — criticize practices and approaches, never individuals or companies by name.
- No personal experience — thought leadership without "I tried this and here's what happened" reads as theory, not authority.
- Burying the opinion — do not make the reader wait until paragraph 8 to discover your actual position.
Recovery
- No strong opinion: Ask "What do you believe about [topic] that most of your peers would disagree with?" If they cannot answer, brainstorm 5 contrarian takes and pick the one they feel strongest about.
- Opinion is too safe: Push toward a Level 3 position. Ask "What would a bolder version of this argument look like?"
- No supporting data: Substitute with detailed personal experience and specific results. First-person evidence is powerful even without external data.
- Author is uncomfortable being controversial: Frame it as "informed disagreement" rather than controversy. Focus on sharing a better approach rather than attacking the current one.
- Piece reads like a rant: Add structure — acknowledge counterarguments, provide evidence, and end with constructive implications.