Thought Leadership 2.0: A New Approach

Feb 18, 2022

4 min

The term “thought leadership” has been exploited by self-proclaimed experts and overuse of the phrase has made the market weary of its practice. But before it was a buzzword, thought leadership was the crown jewel of content marketing.

According to the Oxford Dictionary, thought leadership is “intellectual influence and innovative or pioneering thinking.” In practice, thought leaders leverage research and experience-based content to draw in audiences and support their organization’s reputation as an industry authority. This marketing concept has the power to transform product pitches to strategic insights and approaches into best practices, but not everyone found the same success with their programs – and there are a couple of good reasons why.

This Is A Classified Project

While it’s still true that thought leadership boosts customer engagement, some programs simply lack the depth needed to connect with audiences and see meaningful results. Many organizations are quick to jump on the latest marketing trend, but they don’t always have the vision to turn their expertise into a viable solution for their business. In fact, a leading research and consulting firm, Sirius Decisions, has suggested that “the purpose and process of thought leadership are widely misunderstood and misapplied, causing mixed results.”

One of the most significant issues with thought leadership is that the C-Suite and other top-level teams tend to lead programs in a silo from the rest of the organization. It’s not uncommon for executives to outsource their thought leadership activities to special teams and agencies as a series of projects. This approach leads to disconnected outputs that miss the mark when it comes to audience engagement. It not only prevents subject-matter experts from elevating your content, but it also dismisses the wealth of knowledge they have about your audiences.

Experts know who is looking for content, where they’ll go to find it and which topics they’ll follow. So when you exclude them from the process, you’re going to miss out on opportunities to drive market visibility, brand reputation and new customer connections.

Your Experts Are People Too

When you put something on a pedestal, you make it easy for people to see but hard for them to reach – and that’s a problem in the digital world. People want to deal with organizations who provide the information they need on the channels they use, and in a voice they understand. To be successful with thought leadership, it’s vital to understand these needs and take a human approach to your marketing and communications.

Unfortunately, many thought leadership programs take a campaign-oriented approach and can mimic the dated marketing practices that centre around products rather than people. They come off as too formal and use “corporate speak” which makes them far less approachable. Worst of all, they often lack the authenticity audiences are looking for – so why not let your people do the talking?

Your in-house experts make great brand ambassadors for your organization. By expanding your notions of thought leadership, you open the door for many voices to share your message in a manner that’s inclusive, genuine and accessible. This also makes it easier for you to maintain your online presence and insert diversity into your content marketing. Rather than repeating the same ideas over and over, your broader team of experts will be able to capture varying perspectives and insights – supporting your position as a leader in that domain.

Evolving Thought Leadership

While the concept of thought leadership still resonates with audiences, it’s time to make a few changes. Here are just a few reasons to transition dated thought leadership projects into profitable expertise marketing programs:

Excerpt from the Complete Guide to Expertise Marketing

As you can see, expertise marketing takes the best parts of thought leadership and makes it more inclusive, sustainable and agile – and all at a lower cost. On top of this, expertise marketing incorporates human connections as a fundamental component of both the strategy and execution. It surfaces diverse expert perspectives, delivers authenticity and creates two-way conversations between you and your audiences. Most of all, it can easily be adapted as our environments change and new audience needs emerge.

If your thought leadership program lacks results, you’ll likely have to broaden your views on expertise and leadership. Take a closer look at all of your people and the value they bring to your business. This inclusive approach to expertise marketing will not only make it easier to manage thought leadership, but it will also deliver the long-term success you want from your marketing.

Download The Complete Guide to Expertise Marketing

For a comprehensive look at how expertise marketing benefits the entire organization and drives measurable return on investment, follow the link below to download a copy of ExpertFile’s Complete Guide to Expertise Marketing: The Next Wave in Digital Strategy or download one of our tailored Guides for Corporate & Professional Services , Higher Education Institutions, Healthcare Institutions or Association & Not-for-Profits.

Connect with:

Peter Evans

Co-Founder & CEO

Recognized speaker on expertise marketing, technology and innovation

Media TrendsThought LeadershipMarketingTechnologyInnovation

Find Experts

Jul 30, 2026

2 min

Who Owns the World Cup?

A plan to sell minority stakes in the commercial business surrounding FIFA competitions has triggered a major confrontation with European soccer. UEFA and its 55 national associations have reportedly agreed to boycott FIFA competitions while the proposal remains active. The dispute touches on sports governance, private investment, legal authority, media rights and the growing commercialization of the World Cup. Writing a story around this unprecedented event? Connect with leading experts below for insight and commentary. Matthew Robinson — University of Delaware Robinson specializes in international sports governance, sport diplomacy and global sport development. His work is particularly relevant to the power struggle between FIFA, UEFA and national associations—and what a coordinated European boycott could mean for FIFA’s authority. Thomas Smith — Emory University’s Goizueta Business School Smith studies sports economics, finance and the business of entertainment. He can provide insight into the financial thinking behind FIFA’s proposal, including the trade-off between receiving capital now and sharing future World Cup revenues. Tim Derdenger — Carnegie Mellon University’s Tepper School of Business Derdenger studies sports markets, sponsorship and the commercialization of major sporting events. His research is relevant to the potential effects on broadcast value, sponsors, fan interest and the overall World Cup brand. Klaas Baks — Emory University’s Goizueta Business School Baks specializes in private equity, alternative investments, mergers and acquisitions and business valuation. His expertise can help explain how investors might value FIFA’s commercial assets and what they would typically expect from a minority investment. Andrew Brandt — Villanova University Brandt’s expertise spans sports law and sports business. That experience is relevant to questions about FIFA’s authority over its members, the legal consequences of a boycott and the potential impact on players, sponsors, broadcasters and host countries. Tim DeSchriver — University of Delaware DeSchriver researches sport finance, economics and marketing. His work can help frame the broader financial question: Is FIFA unlocking the value of its competitions, or giving up a share of long-term revenue in exchange for immediate funding? Reach out to these experts now for your next story. All inquiries are monitored to ensure time-sensitive request and deadlines are met. For more FIFA and WorldCup information visit our World Cup Expert Hubs.

Jul 23, 2026

3 min

New Gallup–Lumina Study Data Suggests Parents Can't See What a University Degree Is Really Worth

Sixty-three percent of Americans say four-year colleges are doing a poor job of making education affordable. Twelve percent say they're doing well. That figure is getting a lot of attention along with other results in the latest Gallup and Lumina Foundation survey of 2,043 adults. Ironically, this data will surprise very few people working in the sector who are paying attention. When you look at the data, one number stands out and provides hope for institutions. Among parents who hold a college degree, 48 percent want a four-year university for their child. And among parents with some college or a high school diploma, fewer than 20 percent do. Both groups want education after high school. What separates them is whether the parent has personally experienced what a degree does to employment, earnings and job satisfaction. So the case for the four-year degree is currently being carried by "lived experience", which, by definition, does not reach families who haven't had it. These are the families four-year institutions most need to reach. Community colleges, by contrast, show what the alternative looks like when it's explained well. They're rated good or excellent by 68 percent on access, 61 percent on quality, 54 percent on affordability and 52 percent on workforce preparation. Four-year institutions lead in one category: advancing knowledge and new discoveries, 53 percent to 46. Price is where institutions have hurt themselves most directly. Net prices have fallen across income brackets and institution types over six years, yet colleges continue publishing sticker figures that most enrolled students never pay. Courtney Brown calls transparency “the missing link in rebuilding trust.” A family that can't determine the price before applying will assume the advertised number is the price. The 3 Themes Run Through this Data Evidence has to Connect with Audiences Who Have No Reference Point: Institutions often position for families who already understand how higher education works. And the survey suggests the persuadable audience is the one that doesn't. Unexplained Value Doesn't Count: A college credential that costs less, takes two years, and ends in a job explains itself. A benefit that compounds over thirty years does not, and most institutions have responded by falling back on median starting salary. Universities need to show other evidence of value. Scattered Evidence Isn't Discoverable: Aid data, outcomes, faculty expertise, and research impact each live in a different department, in different faculties, and in different systems. It’s challenging for CMO’s to unify all this information. But the market isn’t waiting for that to happen. Students and families now hand that assembly job to an AI search tool, and whatever it retrieves and attributes is functionally what the institution has said. None of this starts with a campaign. Write down the ten questions families ask most often, then check what your website, your faculty pages and an AI assistant currently return for each one. Most institutions find the evidence exists and nobody can locate it. At ExpertFile we understand we can’t fix all of these problems. Nonetheless, we’re working hard to make faculty expertise and research more findable and relatable to a variety of audiences - this includes the students and families that have important questions about the value of university. Americans have not given up on higher education. They just want clearer evidence of what it costs and what it returns, and they want it from credible voices willing to put their names to it.

Jul 9, 2026

2 min

Expert Insights on the Manhattan High-Rise Structural Concerns

The unfolding structural emergency at the former Pfizer headquarters on East 42nd Street in Midtown Manhattan raises urgent questions issues such as load limits, weight redistribution, structural steel, emergency shoring and in general the challenges of converting older office towers into residential buildings. As officials and engineers continue to investigate what happened, the incident points to a larger issue facing many major cities: how safely can older commercial buildings be adapted for new uses, especially when vertical additions, new floor loads and major structural modifications are involved? ExpertFile has a range of structural engineering experts available to help journalists and audiences understand the engineering issues behind this story. Featured Experts Edward Sippel, P.E., Ph.D. Assistant Professor, Milwaukee School of Engineering Edward Sippel is an expert in structural engineering at the Milwaukee School of Engineering with a focus on steel structures, stability and structural analysis. His expertise in structural steel, finite element analysis and nonlinear analysis makes him especially relevant to questions about column buckling, steel-frame behavior, temporary reinforcement and how engineers assess whether a damaged steel structure can be stabilized or repaired. David O. Prevatt Professor, University of Florida David O. Prevatt is a structural engineer at the University of Florida whose areas of expertise include structural load paths, structural engineering and resilient building performance. His expertise is especially relevant to explaining how loads move through a building, what happens when weight is added or redistributed, and why engineers must understand the full path that gravity loads take from upper floors down to the foundation. Key Questions Experts Can Address How do added floors or major renovations change the way weight moves through an existing building? What causes a steel column to buckle, and how is that different from other types of structural failure? Why do transition points between older and newer parts of a structure require special attention? How do engineers use temporary shoring, jacks and steel reinforcement to stop movement during an emergency? What should cities, developers and regulators consider as office-to-residential conversions become more common? Additional Structural Engineering Experts Available Beyond load paths and steel mechanics, this story also raises broader questions about structural health monitoring, building inspections, retrofits, aging infrastructure, concrete systems, structural dynamics and resilient design. ExpertFile includes additional experts who can speak to these related issues, including: For journalists covering the Manhattan high-rise situation, office-to-residential conversions, emergency building stabilization or the future of urban infrastructure, these experts offer relevant structural engineering expertise that may help add context, clarity and perspective to your reporting. Looking for more experts? Visit: www.expertfile.com About ExpertFile ExpertFile is the worlds largest open-access, curated search engine for experts. ExpertFile is the best way to search and connect with credible experts on over 50,000+ topics. Our award-winning software platform is trusted by leading knowledge-based organizations to help them manage and connect their research and perspectives to a broader audience. Download the ExpertFile Mobile App.

View all posts