Thought Leadership Strategy in Action
Last week, we took a close look at a recent example of successful adtech thought leadership. In this post, I am going to showcase another real-world example of effective thought leadership strategy at work.
The article in question, “Identity Resolution Misses The Mark Without Systemic Measurement and Attribution,” was published on AdExchanger by Kunal Nagpal, SVP and GM Publisher Platform and Exchange at InMobi. In it, he surveys the challenges facing adtech’s attempts to modernize media buying as the data privacy revolution shakes up conventional forms of identity resolution.
Nagpal’s article stands out as an example of well-executed thought leadership for its distinct perspective, strategic and compelling structure, and lucid breakdown of a complex issue.
Unconventional perspectives should animate your thought leadership strategy
When it comes to writing, little can do more to make or break your reader’s interest in what you have to say than your opening sentence. The first line of Nagpal’s article is a surefire example of this: “We’re at the end of the beginning of online privacy reformation.” This sentence is simple but powerful. It introduces his topic with clarity and efficiency, yes, but more notably, it frames a familiar story — the ongoing digital privacy revolution — from a novel perspective. A lot of digital ink has been spilled about the changes wrought by the data privacy revolution, understandably so.
But, as Nagpal points out, much of the conversation about the evolving use of consumer data overlooks a critical issue: media buying practices have not fully evolved to match this new era, due in large part to inconsistency in reform adoption across the industry, Chrome’s deferred third-party cookie rollback, and smaller companies’ struggle to keep up with regulations.
Nagpal’s characterization of the present moment as the “end of the beginning” of an era provides allows his intervention to stand out from the majority of content published on privacy. The opening sentence shows Nagpal is going to reframe our understanding of ongoing privacy reforms, not just tout the need for the same reforms every other data privacy column pushes.
They’ve got questions, and you’ve got answers
Last week, I noted the benefits of the “problem and solution model” for guiding thought leadership strategy. Thought leadership content that anticipates and directly addresses audience problems is an efficient way to communicate the stakes of your content and generate interest.
Nagpal deploys a similar strategy in the following two sections of his article. First, he makes the section title into a question — one which arises naturally from his observation at the end of the prior section about the sluggish changes to the ad buying process: “What’s forcing the industry to rethink its approach?” In other words, what are the specific problems facing advertisers as they attempt to catch the data privacy wave? Appropriately, the heading of his article’s final section sets us up to expect some solutions: “How can we resolve this mess?”
The interrogative section headings lay out a clear roadmap for readers, who can easily follow the structure of each portion of the article.
Thought leadership strategy owns its insights
Framing your thought leadership content as the answer to your audience’s questions is a reliable way to establish expertise. But Nagpal avoids the trap inherent to expertise: delving into an answer that is too long-winded and complex for the platform. Instead, he takes the opportunity to break down his analysis of an understandably complicated issue into concise, bulleted responses to his two structuring questions. This allows him to highlight the experience and knowledge contributing to his nuanced viewpoint while also offering readers concrete, digestible talking points.
This practice is most powerful in the final section of the article, where Nagpal distills his recommendations into three areas that represent promising solutions to the current ad buying quagmire. After outlining these recommendations, the article closes with a brief reflection on future challenges. These last few sentences are a testament to the depth of knowledge informing Nagpal’s recommendations. They add nuance to a reader’s understanding of Nagpal’s insights, not to mention weight to his points. To that end, I think their substance would be better appreciated if integrated into the rest of the body of the article, rather than placed in the conclusion.
If beginnings are critical to successful thought leadership, endings are just as well: the conclusion is your final opportunity to leave your reader with a resonant point that they can take away. Nagpal does well to avoid stripping his insights of nuance by reducing them to an overly simplified conclusion (after all, one of his central points is “there is no single answer”). But a conclusion doesn’t have to be reductive to be resonant: a concise, but earnest and informed final statement of purpose is an effective way to leave your readers ruminating on your ideas long after they’ve finished reading.
Too long; didn’t read
Nagpal’s piece breaks away from the familiar tropes of crisis and reform that dominate the discourse around data privacy within adtech today. He frames his incisive take on the overlooked challenges and ramifications of the great data revolution in an engaging manner that emphasizes comprehensible takeaways.
Appropriately, one of these astute takeaways is the observation that “there is no single answer.” Where this may hold true in terms of the way forward for universal ID solutions, it’s also a fundamental challenge at work in thought leadership itself. Authoritative thought leadership content strikes a balance between nuance and clarity, information and action points, as this article nicely illustrates.
