What content leaders need to prove to their boss

Thinking through the systems behind content.

Content has become a real, material part of how modern businesses operate.

Most companies don’t just run ads and sell products anymore. They rely on content to explain what they do, build trust with customers, support long sales cycles, and show up consistently in public. In many cases, non-media brands now behave a lot like publishers, whether they planned to or not.

That makes content high-stakes.

Done well, it compounds trust over time. Done poorly, it can undermine credibility in a single moment.

As social platforms expanded, email resurged, and owned channels became essential, companies invested heavily in content teams to keep up. Over time, those roles became more specialized and more embedded in the business.

And with that maturity came scrutiny.

Leadership teams aren’t debating whether content matters anymore. They’re asking harder questions about what it’s actually doing for growth, revenue, reputation, and risk.

Content can drive visibility, accelerate sales, educate buyers over long cycles, and support the brand. But none of that happens automatically.

As content becomes more powerful, the cost of getting it wrong goes up. A sloppy post can create reputational fallout. Time spent chasing viral moments can result in attention with no lasting impact. And a growing team can quietly become an expensive cost center if its contribution isn’t clear.

Despite being in demand, content leaders are increasingly expected to prove that the function earns its place inside the business.

1. Is content contributing to revenue—directly or indirectly?

This is usually the first question leadership asks. And it’s a fair one.

Content exists inside a business, not alongside it. At some point, it has to support growth.

Where teams get tripped up is assuming this question only has one acceptable answer: direct attribution: a single piece of content with a clean line to revenue. That’s rarely how buying actually works.

In many businesses, content does its job earlier and more subtly. It shapes how people understand the product. It answers questions before sales ever hears them. It builds familiarity over time, shortens sales cycles, and helps paid campaigns perform better once they’re turned on.

That doesn’t make content “unaccountable.” It means its contribution isn’t always immediate or isolated.

Strong content organizations can explain this distinction clearly.

They know which work is meant to capture demand and which is meant to create it. They understand which pieces support paid efforts, which educate buyers over time, and which reduce friction once someone is already considering a purchase.

The proof shows up in patterns: better conversion once someone enters the funnel, more informed conversations with sales, shorter time to decision, and stronger performance when paid amplification is applied.

When content leaders can articulate how their work supports revenue directly or indirectly, the conversation shifts.

It becomes less “Is this actually working?” And more “How do we do more of what’s actually helping?”

If you’re struggling to explain how content supports revenue especially when attribution isn’t clean, I help teams map where content creates demand, where it captures it, and how to make that story legible to leadership. Request a call.

2. How are we building and protecting our reputation?

This is the part that’s easy to underestimate until something goes wrong.

Content doesn’t just drive attention. It shapes how a company is perceived over time such as how credible it feels, how trustworthy it seems, and whether people take it seriously once money or risk is involved.

Every article, email, social post, or landing page is a small piece. Individually, they may not matter much, but collectively, they absolutely do.

Content can build authority by being clear, accurate, and consistent. It can also undermine credibility by being sloppy, exaggerated, or opportunistic. This is where the temptation to chase short-term attention can backfire.

A viral moment might spike reach, but it can also introduce confusion about what the company actually stands for. A clever hook can travel fast while quietly distorting the product or overpromising outcomes. In more regulated or trust-sensitive industries, a single careless claim can create legal, reputational, or regulatory risk.

None of this means content needs to be boring, but it does need to be thoughtful. (Without getting stuck overthinking, but that’s another story for another day.)

Strong content organizations understand the difference between visibility and credibility. They have a point of view, but they also have standards. They know when to move fast and when to slow down. They review claims, protect nuance, and think about how a piece will land not just today, but months from now when it’s screenshotted, forwarded, or resurfaced.

From a leadership perspective, the question isn’t just “did this perform?” It’s “did this strengthen or weaken how people understand and trust us?”

When content leaders can show that their work consistently reinforces the company’s reputation while avoiding unnecessary risk, it stops being seen as a creative gamble and starts being viewed as a protective asset.

If brand risk, claims review, or narrative consistency are starting to feel shaky as you scale, I help teams put the right standards and review systems in place without slowing everything down. Request a call.

3. Are we set up to be running as efficiently as possible?

This is the question that usually sits just beneath the surface.

Content teams tend to grow organically, adding writers, designers, video crews, producers, and more. Over time, the work can expand faster than the structure supporting it.

Eventually, someone asks whether all of this is actually running as efficiently as it could be.

Efficiency doesn’t mean cutting corners or squeezing people, but it does mean being clear about what work is worth doing, how it gets done, and where effort compounds instead of being duplicated.

This is where systems matter.

Without clear processes, content teams end up relying on individual heroics keeping everything together through sheer effort, institutional knowledge, and late nights. That can work for a while, but it doesn’t scale.

AI has made this tension more visible.

On one hand, it creates enormous leverage. Drafts can be done faster, more variations can be created, and production costs drop. On the other hand, without standards, review processes, and clear ownership, that speed can turn into noise just as quickly as it turns into value.

Efficient content organizations are deliberate about where automation helps and where human judgment is non-negotiable. They know what should be templated, what needs review, and what requires subject-matter expertise. They have clarity around who decides what gets published, what gets revised, and what never ships at all.

From a leadership perspective, efficiency isn’t about output per person. It’s about whether the team is set up to do high-quality work repeatedly, without burnout, bottlenecks, or constant reinvention. And, whether headcount, tools, and processes actually match the complexity of the business.

When content leaders can show that their organization is designed to run smoothly, adapt to new tools, and scale responsibly, the conversation shifts again.

Content stops looking like a collection of busy people and starts looking like a well-run function.

If your team is working hard but the system feels inconsistent or AI is creating more questions than leverage, I help content organizations design operating models that scale without burnout. Request a call.

4. What are we doing to make sure we’re evolving?

Even well-run content organizations can stall.

Formats that once worked lose effectiveness, and what felt efficient or differentiated a year ago can quickly become outdated. One of the biggest risks is mistaking motion for progress.

Evolving doesn’t mean chasing every new platform or trend, but it does mean having a deliberate way to learn from what’s working, what isn’t, and why.

Strong content teams build feedback loops into how they operate, so performance informs strategy. Experiments are intentional, not random, and they’re designed to answer specific questions about audience, messaging, or distribution.

Just as importantly, teams know when to stop doing things by retiring formats that no longer earn their keep, while refining what’s showing promise.

From a leadership perspective, this is about confidence.

Confidence that the content function isn’t just producing output, but improving over time by becoming more focused, more effective, and more aligned with the business as conditions change.

When content leaders can show that evolution is built into the system, content starts feeling less uncertain and more stable.

If your content strategy feels busy but not directional, I help teams build feedback loops so performance actually informs what gets done next. Request a call.

What business leaders are really asking of content leaders

Content leaders are being asked to show that the function is well-run, commercially aware, reputationally sound, and built to improve over time.

That’s a higher bar, but it’s also a clearer one.

When content is treated as a material business function, with clear goals, standards, systems, and feedback loops, it becomes easier to defend, easier to scale, and easier to improve. It stops feeling like a constant justification exercise and starts operating like infrastructure.

This perspective is informed by my work across media, consumer brands, and regulated industries over the past decade.

If you’re wrestling with these questions inside your own organization and want an outside perspective on how your content operation is actually set up, request a call.