Jason Mlicki (00:27.574)
So Jeff, my understanding is that you would like this episode, you’d like to take the last 15 years of my life and all my work and everything that I’ve done, and you’ve asked me to explain it in 30 minutes, succinctly and articulately. Is that essentially the gist of what you’re asking of me today?

Jeff McKay (00:45.467)
Well, that shouldn’t take more than 30 seconds, should it?

Jason Mlicki (00:50.446)
I know that wasn’t gonna end well as soon as you opened your mouth and said that shouldn’t take more than. I’m in trouble.

Jeff McKay (00:53.403)
That was a softball. That’s a stopball. Do you want to hit stop and start over again?

Jason Mlicki (01:01.016)
So.

Absolutely not.

Jeff McKay (01:03.759)
Well, this

This is your cup of tea. It’s where my life was for so many years as a marketing leader in industry. So we bring interesting perspectives from both sides.

Jason Mlicki (01:26.2)
Did you position that well? Okay. All well, we should get to the clarity of what the topic actually is here. So the topic is elements, the working title is Elements of Distinct Thought Leadership. And we’re gonna talk about really what makes thought leadership good, I guess, or distinct and unique. Valuable? All the above?

Jeff McKay (01:53.775)
We need to come up with the right adjective there because distinct thought leadership would be redundant. Valuable. I would lean towards valuable. That’s a good one. Strong, strategic.

Jason Mlicki (02:11.522)
Well, it’s funny because as we were talking about this in setup, we were kind of arguing actually about some of what we going to talk about. I think maybe what we arguing about was the adjective because at the end of the day, I would argue that if we choose valuable, then it does change the conversation. It’s a different conversation. So maybe I like valuable better. It gets us better aligned.

Jeff McKay (02:21.527)
Imagine that.

Jeff McKay (02:39.579)
Wouldn’t it be nice if we had live audience and we could do live polling and ask what’s the adjective that’s most relevant to our listeners? I think managing partners are thinking valuable.

Jason Mlicki (02:55.47)
100%.

Jeff McKay (02:57.081)
Yeah. CMOs are probably thinking valuable or strategic.

And I think the thought leader, creative thought leadership creators are probably thinking distinct, unique. and it’s, it’s all of those are good adjectives and it’s the combination. think that probably sets the top firms apart because they have all three of those, those elements that’s valuable. It’s strategic and it’s distinct, but we’re going to get into the specifics.

elements of this from each of our perspectives.

Jason Mlicki (03:38.606)
Yeah. Well, I think as we explored this topic, I think it’s like a nesting doll. I a lot of what I thought about was that sort of the layer of distinct. And I think a lot of what you thought about was that the layer of valuable and the two actually kind of come together. And so that’s actually going to be really good. So all right, let’s just jump right in. Yeah.

Jeff McKay (04:00.443)
Can I just say, our listeners can’t see you, but you have this look of frustration on your face right now.

Jason Mlicki (04:11.014)
Why do you say that? Too much caffeine.

Jeff McKay (04:12.827)
Because you have this look you’re like, my gosh, what am I gonna do with this subject? It’s already Playing out in a very positive way. So let’s just keep rolling and Your brilliance is gonna unfold before us

Jason Mlicki (04:32.334)
Well, I don’t know about that, but thank you. Well, so if I am frustrated, I don’t mean to be. Miss Spenla must be too much caffeine. I’m all fired up today. So you got me all wound up before we even started. okay. Well, the first thing that we always talk about is it relates to thought leadership. And you and I kind of used different words, but came to the same thing, which is really just, it always starts with a very narrowly and clearly defined business problem.

ideally it’s, it’s an issue that’s enduring, think, to use your words as an issue that’s big enough to matter, right? That clients truly care about this problem and solving it. And frequently, I don’t want people to think you’re searching for some problem that was never been solved. mean, there’s all, it’s always an issue that has a solution in place, but usually that solution is not.

great or it’s suboptimal. We talk a lot about when you’re developing thought leadership, want to first understand the issue you’re trying to solve, and then you want to understand the second and third order effects of that issue. And be really clear on all of that. And then be really clear on the shortcomings of existing solutions and existing approaches. Why is the existing way that companies are solving this or people are solving this not working?

what’s the problem with the existing solution. So I think it all starts with that. of like that’s the very first thing is clarity on the issue that you’re trying to solve for. Because if you don’t have that, you definitely don’t have thought leadership. Because you just have content otherwise, right?

Jeff McKay (06:22.169)
Yeah, I think that’s well spoken. Why, if the purpose of thought leadership is to move the ball, why you have to have a ball in a direction in which to to move it and it’s in the direction of clients.

Jason Mlicki (06:42.286)
It is important to acknowledge that the content era that we’ve lived in the last 15 years of content marketing, where it was just educate the market, right? And I’ve used that phrase a lot. You hear me use it a lot. There’s been this kind of like slippery slope between thought leadership and content, where content can just explain what’s going on. In fact, there’s a lot of content that we publish that’s really just, hey, here’s what’s going on on this topic. It doesn’t really…

dive into the problem, a problem and a solution. just says, here’s what’s happening. And thought leadership doesn’t do that. Thought leadership isn’t about like, you when you see, I used to do this, I haven’t done this in a while, but you know, you see reports that are say, that start with phrases like state of that tells me right away. That’s not thought leadership. It’s cause it’s just telling me kind of like what’s happening. It’s not taking a position or making a stand or speaking to a specific problem. It’s just saying, Hey, here’s what’s going on. Right.

Jeff McKay (07:41.872)
Yeah. I think that makes a lot of sense. I, as a CMO, when we were developing our thought leadership, I would break it down into three simple segments that everybody could understand. One is facts and figures, which is your, what you’re describing the state of, right? Here it is. Here’s a trend, you know, relatively straightforward.

The second one is how to’s, right? Here’s how you do acts, whatever X is. And then the third one is insights of, you know, taking the facts and figures and the how to’s, putting them in a business context and producing a different type of outcome. To your point that surpasses

the existing one, right? So you’re evolving the thinking of the industry.

Jason Mlicki (08:49.026)
Yeah. Yeah.

Jeff McKay (08:50.579)
but it, it has to be tied to an issue. And I’ve said this time and time again, the issue is either going to be a growth issue, efficiency issue, or a risk mitigation issue. There’s subcategories of that, but if you’re not focused on one of those, then you’re not focused on a business issue.

Jason Mlicki (09:09.614)
Yeah. Well, and I would argue that there are business problems that are extremely narrow and extremely small is the wrong word, but that’s the word I’m going to use. But they ladder up to one of those three issues, to your point. Think about the stuff that we’ve been talking about as it relates to all the changes in search behavior. And so I’ve written a lot about this and spoken a lot about this.

And, you know, on its surface, you go, well, people aren’t using traditional search engines as much as they used to. They’re using generative AI search engines. Okay. So what? Who cares? How does that really affect me? Right. Well, the business issue, if you ladder it up is, well, the motion I’ve been using to get my thinking and expertise into the market now is not going to work as well. So I’m going to become invisible in this new

space where clients are spending their time. Okay, that’s the business issue is that I’m not going to be visible in places that matter for clients to come to me to work with me. So I’m not going to get growth, right?

Jeff McKay (10:20.933)
Therefore, my revenue’s gonna take a hit.

Jason Mlicki (10:23.774)
Exactly. Exactly. So a lot of times it’s like laddering from the problem you’re focused on up to the business issue, which is what I always talk about second and third order effects, right? Like it’s like, are the second and third order effects of this and being able to articulate those really well is important. So I think you led us into the second kind of thing, the second element of all this. And that’s just having a better way. So it’s saying, okay,

You know, there’s this problem. has these second and third order effects and the prevailing solutions are suboptimal. Here’s why. And having a point of view that says, okay, this is the better way to do this. Here’s the other way you can solve this problem that you’re not using right now or the approach you’re not taking right now. and that’s probably the essence, but I tend to believe that’s the most important.

thing in thought leadership. If you don’t have a point of view, if you don’t have a better way, then you don’t really have much of anything, right?

Jeff McKay (11:37.093)
Absolutely. Other other way. Well, I’m thinking, uh-huh. No, Uh-huh. Uh-huh. Uh-huh. other ways, you’re just an academic. I mean, the journals are full of quote unquote peer reviewed articles that say nothing and go nowhere. That’s not what we want to produce. We want.

Jason Mlicki (11:39.694)
You pause for a second, maybe I’m wrong.

Jeff McKay (12:06.52)
something that gets to a better outcome. It’s that simple. Otherwise, you’re just an academic. Let’s just leave it at that. You’re an academic.

Jason Mlicki (12:21.45)
It’s funny, as you were talking, I was thinking of a story. I might tell a story real quick. This was at least 15 years ago. I went to a, I don’t even know, small conference of some kind. And I’ve probably told this story to you before. Teradata gets up there, guy from Teradata gets up there and gives a presentation about a bunch of work he’d done with a bank, a big regional bank. And there’s a whole bunch of research they’d done. And the essence of the story was they figured out through…

lots of data analysis and lots of very in-depth research that if a customer, if a bank customer makes the same request on two or more channels and it goes unfulfilled. So if I make a request online, over the phone and in person, that the likelihood that I will close my account goes up dramatically.

Jeff McKay (13:14.524)
That’s brilliant.

Jason Mlicki (13:17.294)
I thought in the back of the I was laughing to myself thinking like, well, that was a good use of resources, It took you a massive metadata analysis to figure that one out. Like, OK, OK, geniuses. So anyway, that’s what came to mind when you said you’re just academic.

Jeff McKay (13:37.063)
That reminds me of, did you ever watch Yellowstone? my gosh, you have to watch Yellowstone. It’s great. Kevin Costner’s character becomes governor and he’s working with his policy committee and they want to get rid of oil or coal or natural gas drilling to protect the sagebrush and sages.

Jason Mlicki (13:41.39)
I’ve never seen it.

Jeff McKay (14:05.076)
And instead they’re going to put in a field of solar panels. Kevin Costner says, well, what do you think a whole bunch of solar panels are going to do to the sage brush? And the policy group says, well, there’s no academic or empirical research.

on that topic, therefore there are no ramifications to the sage brush and the sages. And he ends up firing the whole policy committee. that right there is a little microcosm of, you know, it’s got to be relevant issue and produce a relevant outcome. So.

Jason Mlicki (14:37.912)
Nobody knows.

Jason Mlicki (14:58.892)
Yeah, no, think it’s so, okay, so back on track here, sorry, I took us off track with, but, okay, so we have a clear issue. I think you used the words relevant and enduring. We have a point of view, we have a better way. You actually combined this into one, but I split it off as separate, which is evidence, just.

evidence that the point of view isn’t just window dressing. And the reason I always separate that as I always make it separate is because there are plenty of business books and plenty of people out there with opinions about different ways to do things or better ways to do things. But if you really want to separate the wheat from the chaff or whatever, usually the separation point is evidence. And

I always talk about evidence needs to come in two forms and you said the same thing. It’s data and stories. You really can’t have just one or the other. If you want to have distinct, valuable thought distinct and valuable thought leadership, which is actually what I think the title of this should be. Because if all you have is a handful of stories, it’s hard for a large corporation or any smart buyer to go, I’m going to

make a big bet on the three stories you just told me. And if all you have is data, it’s also hard for a buyer to say, I’m going make a big bet on the 36 % of companies you said are doing this. They need the marriage of the two to feel confident about a path forward. And so you’ve got to get both. You’ve got to get foundational, meaningful data, and you’ve got to have firsthand stories of success. And that’s probably one of the biggest

points of separation between content and thought leadership. If you don’t have those things, you just have a piece of content. It might be kind of useful, but it’s going to come up short.

Jeff McKay (17:07.004)
That is, it, it, kind of pulls a lot of things together. And we covered that specifically when we talked about Accenture, rebrand rebranding around reinvented. And we cut up that, uh, white paper that they’d put together, you know, pretty well as an example of what that looks like. So I encourage people, if you haven’t listened to that episode to go back and, and listen to it, but they bring.

Jason Mlicki (17:18.806)
Yeah. Yes.

Jeff McKay (17:36.666)
both the numbers and the client stories. And I think those are really important.

Jason Mlicki (17:45.09)
Now, I would argue that those three things, two or three things, wherever you want to describe it, that’s what makes thought leadership distinct. But what makes it valuable is everything else that you’re about to lay on top of that, right? And that’s where I come back to the nesting doll. It’s like distinct and valuable. And you got to have both. So.

Jeff McKay (18:08.122)
Yeah. Well, I don’t want to shortchange your three, if we could call it your three, our three so far, because I do think they are valuable, particularly if the client sees themselves in that story. Right. So I think valuable is an important word here as well.

But let’s look at what makes it valuable from my perspective.

Jason Mlicki (18:41.066)
All right, building on top of that, right?

Jeff McKay (18:47.686)
So I think, and this one is almost so obvious that you’d think you wouldn’t have to say it at all, but I think it’s important to say it, and that’s that the thought leadership supports the brand and the positioning and the value proposition. It needs to be helping your firm build brand

preference in the markets you want to serve. You can have thought leadership that meets the first three criteria, but if it’s off target for your market and where you want to grow, what’s the point? We talked about this when we were during COVID. We were talking about things you need to think about as COVID was unfolding. And one of the things that we said is,

You got to stay in your lane because we had firms talking about COVID in washing your hands and the benefits of wearing mask and all this type of stuff that just simply was not relevant. And that’s kind of an extreme example, but I think it illustrates the story pretty well. Stay in your lane that you want to be known for and drive faster in that lane.

Go farther in that lane.

Jason Mlicki (20:21.644)
Yeah, 100%, which is why I kind of, that’s why I sort of separated it between distinct and valuable because it’s like, I could argue that the first few things we talked about, you’ve got something distinct, but it may not be hugely valuable to you as a firm if you don’t have what you just set. If it’s not in the lane that you want to be in as a firm for whatever reason, then this investment is not going to make a ton of sense, right?

And I think you’re pointing out COVID as a good example. I even wrote a piece when after liberation day, when everyone was sort of hairs on fire with tariffs. And I wrote a piece about whether you should take a position on this or not. And that was kind of one of the things that I put into that mix, I believe was, you know, would your clients expect to hear something from you about this? And you might feel like you need to rush to the table to say something, but what are…

Are you relevant on that topic or not? And if you’re not, then there’s no reason for you to be trying to get it right. So. All right, what’s next? What else?

Jeff McKay (21:32.168)
Fourth is, I guess, is this a corollary or ancillary to the other one? Not only does it need to be aligned with your brand, it needs to be aligned with the business strategy. Because the whole point of thought leadership is to demonstrate the expertise of the core while you’re expanding your performance envelope.

right, of skating to where the puck is going to be. Because as a thought leader, should be, the insight should be where the puck is, is going to be. But it makes no sense to invest the money and build an asset that is misaligned with the business strategy. So if we’re saying, you know, we’re at point A, we need to go to point B.

the thought leadership needs to be moving you in the direction of point B, not point C. And that often happens in firms because smart people think big thoughts and nobody tells them no, and they run with it. And you’ve got the tail wagging the dog more often than not because somebody has a pet project, they’re a little more energetic.

They get some resources and all of a sudden you’re confusing the market and not advancing the business strategy.

Jason Mlicki (23:05.466)
I thought you when you said we’re going from point A to point B that we’re investing in thought leadership for point A, which is what I more often than see. I see that more often than I see going to see. And what I mean by that is one of the things we try to talk a lot about with firms is when they’re prioritizing their thought leadership investments, oftentimes. The largest revenue generator, a.

Jeff McKay (23:18.503)
Mm. Mm.

Jason Mlicki (23:35.246)
gets the lion’s share of the resources, but the future of the business lies in B. And we need to over invest in the future of the business, not where the greatest profit is today, let’s say. And so it’s being clear on to your point of, we’re trying to get from A to B. We don’t want to put all of our energy into C, and we don’t want to pull our energy into A either. We want to be putting our energy into B. That’s what we’re trying to get. And so.

thought leadership to be valuable to your point, it has to be aligned with, I like the way you put it, it has to be in the right lanes for brand relevance and it has to be aligned with where the business is trying to go. And I like that you also use the phrase an economic asset, it’s an asset that you’re using to help get there. It’s not just expensive marketing, which is how it’s often kind of framed and where it ends up underperforming to use a phrase you like to use a lot.

Jeff McKay (24:32.231)
Yeah. Well, when you think about the branded content experiences that you, talk about, to me, that is a great example of an economic asset that’s building value over time. And if that’s in your lane and you keep investing in it, you keep expanding it, that is money very well spent.

Jason Mlicki (25:03.662)
Yeah, and you look at when we’ve had Michelle and Chris on to talk about the Tercera 30. And I think that the 2025, 2026 report will have released right around the time this episode drops. And that’s what they do every single year. I think they’re on year four of this. And every single year, they sort of incrementally expanded, right? They do not necessarily making it bigger just to make it bigger, but but but

kind of going deeper. So it’s like, okay, you’ve got this base research study you did and every year you’re trying to get more clarity, more depth, more understanding of what’s going on, both for you as a firm and for your clients as well, right? It’s not just about the story you want to tell to the market. It’s about learning again, back to point two in this whole journey is learning the better path forward.

recognizing that it’s not about just forcing your opinion into the marketplace. It’s about learning the best way to solve a problem and then doing your best to explain that to the world.

Jeff McKay (26:18.578)
Good, on to the next one.

This one, you know what I’m starting to see in my head is a Venn diagram of bunch of circles overlapping because all of these keep coming back to elements of the other. And my fifth one, I feel like it does that. It goes back to some of the earlier ones we’ve talked about, but.

Jason Mlicki (26:28.739)
You hear that?

Jeff McKay (26:49.806)
It’s this concept of the point of view that takes a stand that is counter to what the market thinks. You know, it says you may think A, but the truth is it’s B. It creates dissonance in the market. And I give you a great example this morning. I was listening. I don’t know how I stumbled across this, this podcast. but there was this woman, academic,

who posited that woke the experience of woke was nothing more than the feminization of our major institutions of the courts of academia and of corporate America that the feminist persona and writ large at an institutional level.

Jason Mlicki (27:26.492)
boy.

Jason Mlicki (27:31.603)
boy.

Jeff McKay (27:51.199)
created woke culture. That is going to get lots of people’s, I don’t know if I can say this, undies in a bundle.

But that’s going to disturb a lot of people. And I’ll put a link to this podcast. If you listen to it, it is incredibly well argued and a serious academic piece. And it does have business ramifications because I think we see in this political environment

Jason Mlicki (28:05.292)
No idea where you’re going with this.

Jeff McKay (28:31.902)
what’s going on around this topic. It’s timely. but it’s those types of subjects in those stances.

If they meet the other criteria that you described, right? They’re grounded in facts. There’s case studies and client stories that go with it. Really get attention and move the ball. And this woman is doing just that. And I think it’s a great example. Well, it’s not a business example for traditional professional services. I still think there’s a really good lesson to take away from it.

I’ll put a link to it. If you want to listen to it, listen to it. If it’s too sensitive for you, don’t listen to it. but you, you, you need to make a stand because strong brands repel and they attract.

And there’s just so much noise. This woman broke through the noise. I can say that for sure. And she did it in a serious way.

Jason Mlicki (29:37.196)
Is there an inherent difference between taking a stand and having a point of view? Is there a reason that we need to separate those two concepts?

Jeff McKay (29:57.993)
Really? No, I think it would be pendantic to separate them. When I think of a stand, I think of a courageous action. When I think of a point of view, I think of an idea articulated. There are probably a lot of great ideas out there that don’t get articulated for fear of the repercussions of sharing those ideas.

So maybe the distinction is important, but you can’t separate them.

Jason Mlicki (30:35.16)
Yeah, it’s funny because, you know, I think there’s there is in great thought leadership, there is real magic to how you unpack the story and tell a compelling story. But that doesn’t really show up in this conversation, I don’t believe, because that’s not necessarily a requirement for thought leadership to be distinct or even valuable. I just think it makes it a lot more valuable.

when you know how to unpack and tell a great story. And there’s a big separation between a well-researched, well-written, well-designed point of view and something that really grabs the attention and emotions and excitement of business leaders and business people or whoever you’re trying to connect with.

You know, some of the examples of ones that we’ve had on here that I think have done, mean, Matt Dixon’s been on this show a couple of times and he’s, he’s, I would argue that he’s captured that lighting in a bottle twice already in his career. And that’s pretty rare for people to pull that off or Jim Collins books on my shelf. He captured it multiple times where, you know, he just captures the, and it’s, and it’s part of that is storytelling. And I think that that.

There’s having a compelling argument, which is the point of view, and taking a stand and telling a great story are not necessarily one and the same, I think is what I’m trying to say. I don’t know if that’s helping.

Jeff McKay (32:16.734)
Yeah. I think that’s incredibly important, which leads me to my next one. I think great thought leadership, creates a dialogue, not a monologue because one of the three brand preference drivers is Simpatico and brands do, repel and attract.

You need to speak to a client’s point of view and thought leadership needs to comfort the afflicted and afflict the comfortable, if you will.

Jeff McKay (33:05.115)
You need to think about that one.

Jason Mlicki (33:06.454)
I had to think about that one. I don’t know if I’m comfortable or afflicted. I don’t know which bucket I fall in.

Jeff McKay (33:13.842)
Yeah. Yeah. I wish I could say I, I own that phrase, but I think that goes back to Dorothy day. but thought leadership has to be a mirror. have to see myself in what you’re saying. And it also needs to be a map. It needs to show me a way forward or out of where I am because, if I’m afflicted, it means I’m uncomfortable.

I see my issue, I want this issue solved, I want to get to a better place. And I think great thought leadership demonstrates empathy.

Jason Mlicki (33:54.914)
Yeah. Well, I think so much of what you just said kind of dovetails on what we just talked about as it relates to taking a stand and telling stories. and, you know, I’ll point back to those authors again. You know, I think that one of one of Dixon’s greatest gifts in terms of how they’ve gone about this in their thought leadership and in their research is by. Sort of labeling certain types of people.

So, know, in the Challenger sale, was the Challenger. The Challenger does this. In his latest research, it’s the Activator. The Activator does this. And it makes that somebody that you can connect with. And you feel like you’re part of this. Or I was even thinking about, again, I have all these Jim Collins books on my shelf for whatever reason. The Hedgehog concept, right? Everybody can relate to the Hedgehog concept back when that was published, I think, and built to last. And it was part of the lexicon of the time, right? Everyone would talk about

in a business setting because they were to your point, it was they related to it and they felt like they were part of the dialogue in that sense. So I like that phrase a lot, know, creates a dialogue, not a monologue. It draws people in versus sort of to your point, you know, coming down upon high and explaining here’s how this is done the right way. You’re doing it wrong, which is.

I mean, you look at the very beginning of the essence of thought leadership, what we talked about, that’s really what I said and what we said is like, there’s a problem, you have a solution, it’s not very good, here’s a better way. But there’s a magic to bringing people into that tent versus making them feel like they’re being lectured to.

Jeff McKay (35:44.243)
Yeah. Yeah. I often, I often wrestle with this because I tend towards a more direct and in boisterous way of articulating my point of view. you know, when I talk about the BS of PS, which in and of itself is, you know, kind of a direct term, I talk about the dysfunction of professional services firms and,

People have pushed back on that saying, Hey, that’s kind of a negative term. Can’t you just say in efficient or, cumbersome or some other word. And I’m like, I could, but dysfunction describes it the best. And when I’m around my ideal client and I say dysfunction, they laugh and they nod their heads. So.

I think the words that we use are important, but the words that we use will attract and repel. It’s just that simple. And if you have, if you’re focused on an ideal client, the right language will be readily apparent.

So.

Jason Mlicki (37:08.438)
It’s interesting because I think even, you know, again, back to that kind of bit of storytelling, it’s like the BS of PS to me, it grows the tent. I know that sounds silly. It’s a silly way to put it, but it should, like you said, it shows to your clients that you’re relatable to them because they say, yeah, I can relate to that. I experienced that every day. And the way you described it gave me a smile, made me laugh and maybe say, Hey,

we’re philosophically aligned. We could work together if nothing else. okay. Yep.

Jeff McKay (37:45.769)
So here’s my last one. We can bring this to a wrap. And you’ve already alluded to this one as well. But I think thought leadership and invaluable thought leadership, distinct thought leadership.

Jeff McKay (38:07.57)
demonstrates your craft, your firm’s excellence, your ability to argue and articulate an idea. And I talk about this in the roles that every marketing team needs about the creative of making things understandable to the market. And I think great thought leadership

communicates to the market how your firm thinks. It thinks strategically. It thinks holistically. It thinks big picture or it’s down in the weeds and it’s pulling apart concepts or whatever the case may be. The way you articulate that is incredibly important because

the market will get a feel for how you think and by extension, how you work. And that’s critical. McKinsey, McKinsey and the strategy firms in general, right? When you think about a four square.

Jason Mlicki (39:10.605)
Yeah.

Jason Mlicki (39:25.314)
Yeah.

Jeff McKay (39:26.108)
Yeah, or a simple bell curve or a Venn diagram. These are key concepts that just immediately communicate volumes about how somebody thinks about a given topic.

So, and not that you’re limited to those three modes, but you get what I’m saying.

Jason Mlicki (39:52.014)
Well, it’s funny because as you said that, know, what came to mind for me was, know, cash cows and rising stars, right? Like taking a innocuous two by two box and making it something that is a major part of business lexicon and a incredibly well-known brandable asset that people associate with.

BCG, right? That is BCG, isn’t it? I say that as I say, I’m like, hmm, maybe I’m wrong.

Jeff McKay (40:24.702)
Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah. I was trying to think. There’s four. There’s cash cow, rising stars, dogs. And I can’t think of the fourth one. This is why you brand in threes. People can’t remember four. Our listeners know what the fourth is.

Jason Mlicki (40:35.852)
I don’t remember.

Jason Mlicki (40:42.444)
Yes. But what’s interesting about that is like, again, it comes back to some of the stuff you talked about it. So again, creating a dialogue, not a monologue. you know, it’s it’s it becomes part of the conversation, part of the lexicon. And if someone said to me, you know, 30 years ago, I’m going to I’m going to build a brand around a two by two box. And so that’s the craziest thing I ever heard. You know, and yet yet they’ve successfully done that.

and use it to your point as a framework to show how they think, how they approach different types of problems. It’s really interesting. And all of that kind of ladders up to what you said. It’s an extension of your brand to some extent, right?

Jeff McKay (41:31.068)
You know what great thought leadership does?

Jeff McKay (41:36.924)
in its essence, I think, is it trains to market to see and think like your firm does.

Jeff McKay (41:48.357)
And that’s powerful. That’s brand preference, right? When you see the world through the lens of a challenger salesman or a great company, the innovator’s dilemma, whatever the case may be, when you start to use that lens to see the world,

That’s when you know that you’ve had your flirting with greatness.

Jason Mlicki (42:23.82)
Yeah, no, I would agree with that. And there was something else I wanted to say as you were saying that, which is that, shoot, cut that out.

lost it whatever it was so 40 minute 42 30 something like that

Jeff McKay (42:44.892)
Let’s go back and recount the seven and it’ll come to you.

Jason Mlicki (42:53.006)
So all right, well, we should probably call it a day.

As I hear it, I think the seven that we netted out on, although it got a little murky there, I actually think there are some things missing that need to be isolated as their own things. um, one is that you’d have to have a clearly defined problem that ladders up to a relevant and enduring business issue. Um, I would argue underlying that you have to understand all the second and third order effects of that. And you have to have a

understanding of the shortcomings of any prevailing solutions to the problem and those issues. You need a validated point of view that describes a better way. when I say validated, I always talk about data and stories. So you need to be able to substantiate the contentions you’re making with real data. And you better show up with some unique specific stories of people who’ve successfully done what you’re suggesting.

Jason Mlicki (44:00.632)
Third, it has to support your brand position. So it has to stay within the lanes that you want to build brand relevance around and brand preference around, as you always talk. Four, it has to be aligned with your business strategy, meaning that we talked about the idea of it’s helping you on your path to get from point A to point B, not point A to point A or point A to point C.

Fifth, we talked about it has to take a stand, which is a little bit intertwined with this notion of a validated point of view. But I think in the end that there, argued about whether it was semantic or not, but I actually think they are a little bit different in that you can have a point of view, but you can package it without a whole lot of courage, right? And taking a stand is a little bit more about courage and owning it to the extent you can.

Six, you talked about creating a dialogue, not a monologue, which to me is largely about storytelling and finding ways to make what it is that you have to say, not feel like it’s coming down from a pond high, but rather it’s a shared vision of what great looks like that people can get their arms around and get excited about and feel like they’re part of.

And then seven, you put out this notion of demonstrated excellence, which really, I think just comes back to that. You are putting something into the world that demonstrates the way you think as an organization, the type of culture you have, the way you want to show up, I guess, maybe is something that you talk a lot about in your work that I’ve always liked this idea of like, Hey,

thought leadership is extension of how you show up as an organization and then so it matters how it shows up I guess.

Jason Mlicki (46:05.666)
So I think that’s the synopsis. guess that’s all anybody needed to listen to.

Jeff McKay (46:12.862)
I think that was well done. So now we know how to create thought leadership that is distinct and valuable.

Jason Mlicki (46:17.122)
So, all right, well.

Jason Mlicki (46:27.335)
and bye.

Yeah. All right. Well, thanks for taking me on this ride. you know, it’s nice to encapsulate, you know, the last 15 years of my life and under an hour. so, but, uh, no. All right, man. I’ll talk to you next week.

Jeff McKay (46:42.942)
Well done.