Skip to content
Back to skills

Thought Leadership

ASecurity

Create thought leadership content including long-form articles, essays, and opinion pieces. Use when the user needs authoritative content, wants to establish expertise, or needs to articulate a unique perspective on industry topics.

  • 60 stars
  • 0 votes
  • 0 copies
  • 2 views
  • Added February 7, 2026
content-marketinggogit

Works with

  • cli

Security analysis

A100/100

Scanned February 12, 2026

npx -y skills add az9713/ai-co-writing-claude-skills --skill thought-leadership --agent claude-code

Installs into .claude/skills of the current project.

Are you the author of Thought Leadership?

Add the live security badge to your README. It updates with every re-scan.

Security grade badge for Thought Leadership
[![Security: A — Skills Directory](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/api/skills/az9713-thought-leadership/badge)](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/az9713-thought-leadership)

More formats (shields.io, HTML) on the badges page. Keep it an A: scan every change in CI with Pro.

Download with Pro
SKILL.md
---
name: thought-leadership
description: Create thought leadership content including long-form articles, essays, and opinion pieces. Use when the user needs authoritative content, wants to establish expertise, or needs to articulate a unique perspective on industry topics.
---

# Thought Leadership Content Creator

Create authoritative, perspective-driven content that establishes expertise and shapes conversations in your industry.

## Before Writing

1. **Read context profiles**:
   - `/context/voice-dna.json` - Maintain authentic voice
   - `/context/icp.json` - Understand audience sophistication
   - `/context/business-profile.json` - Align with positioning

2. **Check knowledge base** for supporting content in `/knowledge/`

## What is Thought Leadership?

Thought leadership is NOT:
- Generic how-to content
- Regurgitated industry advice
- Safe, consensus opinions
- Purely promotional content

Thought leadership IS:
- Original perspectives on industry topics
- Experience-backed insights
- Contrarian (but substantiated) takes
- Forward-looking predictions
- Framework creation
- Problem articulation that others haven't voiced

## Content Types

### Type 1: Perspective Piece
Share your unique POV on an industry topic

```
STRUCTURE:
1. [SETUP] - The current state or common belief
2. [TENSION] - Why this is problematic/incomplete
3. [YOUR PERSPECTIVE] - Your contrarian or nuanced view
4. [EVIDENCE] - Experience, data, examples
5. [IMPLICATIONS] - What this means for the reader
6. [CALL TO THINK] - Leave them with a new lens
```

### Type 2: Framework Introduction
Create a new way of thinking about a problem

```
STRUCTURE:
1. [PROBLEM] - The messy problem everyone faces
2. [WHY EXISTING SOLUTIONS FAIL] - Gap in current thinking
3. [THE FRAMEWORK] - Your new mental model
4. [COMPONENTS] - Break down the framework
5. [APPLICATION] - How to use it
6. [RESULTS] - What changes when applied
```

### Type 3: Industry Prediction
Share where things are heading

```
STRUCTURE:
1. [CURRENT STATE] - Where we are now
2. [SIGNALS] - What you're seeing that others aren't
3. [PREDICTION] - Where things are going
4. [TIMELINE] - When this will happen
5. [IMPLICATIONS] - What to do about it
6. [YOUR POSITION] - How you're preparing
```

### Type 4: Lessons from Experience
Share hard-won wisdom

```
STRUCTURE:
1. [THE SITUATION] - What you faced
2. [THE STAKES] - Why it mattered
3. [THE MISTAKE/CHALLENGE] - What went wrong or was hard
4. [THE INSIGHT] - What you learned
5. [THE PRINCIPLE] - The generalizable lesson
6. [APPLICATION] - How readers can apply it
```

### Type 5: State of the Industry
Comprehensive analysis of where things stand

```
STRUCTURE:
1. [OVERVIEW] - The big picture
2. [KEY TRENDS] - What's happening
3. [ANALYSIS] - What it means
4. [WINNERS/LOSERS] - Who's positioned well
5. [PREDICTIONS] - Where it's going
6. [RECOMMENDATIONS] - What to do
```

## Writing Guidelines

### Voice & Tone
- Confident but not arrogant
- Specific, not vague
- Opinionated with reasoning
- Accessible to ICP
- Personal experiences included

### Structure
- Strong opening hook
- Clear thesis statement
- Logical flow of ideas
- Subheadings for navigation
- Memorable conclusion

### Evidence Types
- Personal experience (primary)
- Client/customer stories
- Industry data
- Historical examples
- Logical reasoning
- Expert quotes (sparingly)

### Length Guidelines
- **LinkedIn article**: 800-1,500 words
- **Newsletter essay**: 1,000-2,500 words
- **Blog post**: 1,500-3,000 words
- **Comprehensive guide**: 3,000-5,000 words

## Content Creation Process

### Step 1: Define the Perspective

Ask:
- "What's the common belief you're challenging?"
- "What's your contrarian or nuanced take?"
- "What experience backs this up?"
- "What's the 'so what' for the reader?"

### Step 2: Structure the Argument

- Lead with the most compelling point
- Build logical progression
- Address counterarguments
- Land with actionable insight

### Step 3: Draft with Voice

- Match voice DNA throughout
- Include personal stories
- Use signature phrases naturally
- Maintain energy level

### Step 4: Polish for Impact

- Strengthen opening hook
- Sharpen key insights
- Remove hedging language
- Ensure clear takeaways

## Output Format

```
TITLE: [Compelling title]
TYPE: [Perspective/Framework/Prediction/Lesson/State of Industry]
TARGET LENGTH: [Word count]
TARGET PLATFORM: [Where this will be published]

---

[FULL ARTICLE CONTENT]

---

KEY TAKEAWAYS:
1. [Main point 1]
2. [Main point 2]
3. [Main point 3]

SUGGESTED SOCIAL SNIPPETS:
- [Quote 1 for social promotion]
- [Quote 2 for social promotion]
```

## Quality Checklist

Before delivering:

- [ ] Original perspective (not generic advice)
- [ ] Clear thesis statement
- [ ] Backed by experience/evidence
- [ ] Voice matches voice DNA
- [ ] Appropriate for ICP sophistication
- [ ] Actionable for readers
- [ ] Strong opening hook
- [ ] Memorable conclusion
- [ ] Would establish/reinforce authority

## What to Avoid

- Wishy-washy "on the other hand" without taking a stance
- Purely theoretical (needs experience backing)
- Clickbait promises without substance
- Attacking competitors by name
- Arrogance or talking down
- Generic conclusions everyone agrees with
- No clear "so what" for the reader

Attribution

Is this your skill, or is something wrong with this listing? Request removal or report an issue. Author removals are honored within 72 hours.

Comments

Loading comments…