-
8 Feb 2010
I am constantly reading what others have to say about thought leadership and am always interested in how other people define thought leadership. I would like to put up two definitions that I have recently come across.
The first is from Dana vandenHeuvel, from Marketing Savant:
“Thought leadership marketing capitalizes on your intellectual capital and unique point of view to actively position you or your organisation as an authority, a resource and a trusted advisor on industry issues. Thought leadership marketing allows you to earn trust and build credibility and recognition differentiating yourself as one who clearly understands the business needs of your audience. And most importantly, it mobilizes your audience to think and act – engaging with you over the long term.”
The second is from Eric Gruber:
“Thought leaders are experts who are recognized among their peers as an authority on innovative ideas within a particular industry. Thought leaders confidently promote their ideas. Most importantly, thought leaders have earned respect from the outside world for their deep understanding of their business, the needs of their clients and the broader marketplace in which they operate.”
There are three key words that stand out in both definitions:
- respect
- trust
- authority
To me these are the key ingredients of your positioning as a thought leader. In particular, gaining the trust of your target audience is the nirvana of any brand positioning. And therein lies the power of true thought leadership .
If you have your own definition please send it through, I’d love to hear from you.
9 Responses to “Two more definitions of thought leadership”
Leave a Reply
Follow me on Twitter
Craig, thanks for all your work. It is stimulating and helpful. I think the discussions that are ongoing are valuable and productive. I would observe that the two definitions above differ because they aren’t defining the same things.
Dana defines the goals of thought leadership. Eric defines the characteristics of a thought leader. Dana’s definition includes an individual or an organization. Eric seems to focus on individual experts. Neither definition defines whether there are thought leadership processes that are, or should be considered distinct from everyday tactics of marketing, public relations, public affairs, issues management and other disciplines.
As we proceed to define thought leadership, I think we have to discuss whether it should be its own discipline, with its own body of knowledge. Up to now, I’ve always thought about it as an approach within public relations, public affairs and issues management. I’ve tended to categorize the production of white papers as either a strong element of marketing collateral or as a communications campaign tool.
However, I’m intrigued by the recent efforts to define thought leadership as its own discipline. I don’t think that will work until we make our case for how and why it’s separate from the other disciplines.
Warren, great comments. I am especially interested in your view on thought leadership as its own discipline. I don’t think that thought leadership is or should be separate from the other disciplines of PR and marketing. It is an integral part of both – let’s keep it that way.
Craig, I use the following definition, similar to Dana’s and Eric’s: Thought leadership marketing is the active positioning of your company (or you ) as an authority, resource, and trusted advisor on issues of importance to potential customers. This positioning is accomplished using a variety of media, including books, newsletters, blogs, e-mail, events, etc. It allows you to earn trust and build credibility and recognition, differentiating yourself as one who clearly understands the business and needs of your audience. It’s a means of nurturing leads, improving customer retention, and expanding your market.
I find that thought leadership marketing is complex enough, however, that a simple definition doesn’t do it justice. To address one of Warren’s points, I don’t think of it as a discipline but as a marketing tactic. But I also think that it’s complex enough that I’ve put together a basic outline for a thought leadership maturity model that hints at the capabilities an organization would need to effectively implement a thought leadership marketing initiative.
From a tactical standpoint, the term “thought leadership marketing” means different things to different people. As in traditional marketing, there are endless possibilities for inputs (e.g., statistics, stories, analysis, opinions), spokespeople (institution or individual),outputs (e.g.,books, videos, podcasts, documentaries,articles) and objectives (e.g., credibility, awareness, loyalty, positioning). But what’s unique about real thought leadership, to me, is that it’s edu-marketing. It’s one part promotion/persuasion, one part teaching/giving. True thought leadership helps audiences make sense of things — e.g., the world, a sector, an experience, the future. It’s marketing, of course, because it drives revenue by (1)boosting credibilty; (2) engaging customers; (3) creating differentiation and (4) triggering the reciprocity reflex. But it also inspires. Our rule of thumb is that — to qualify as thought leadership — content has to pass the “4Ps” test. It must be predictive OR prescriptive OR provocative YET prudent. Thought leadership is a chance to communicate expertise…but it’s also a chance to help others have their own “aha” moments — i.e., to help customers and influencers get and feel smarter.
Jim, you’re right a simple definition doesn’t do thought leadership justice but you have to adimit it is fun hearing everyone’s attempt at a definition. I find that every definition I read, including yours, always has some really useful elements to it.
By the way, I’d love to hear more about your thought leadership maturity model when you are ready to share it – sounds very interesting.
Meg, I particularly like your comment around ‘audiences making sense of things’. I am a firm believer that thought leadership is very much about helping others have that ‘Aha’ moment. That’s why it is so important for thought leaders to be able to give abundantly. It is only by giving your insights through the many outputs, some of which you list, that you can become a thought leader.
Another great inclusion, I really couldn’t have reported this better myself.
Brilliant thanks for your feedback Olin.
[...] Behind content are two further themes: creativity and viral. All three work together. A major challenge with social media is getting consumers to advocate the content. For it to go viral. This might occur because it is fun, because it is creative, because it is relevant to consumers’ lifestyles or because it exhibits thought leadership. [...]