How to turn your expertise into LinkedIn content that sounds like you.

Most content strategies start with a calendar. Mine starts with a sentence. Before anyone writes a word, we agree one positioning line for the person, something like "the silent architect" or "the introverted advisor". Every post after that radiates out from it. If a draft doesn't connect back to the line, it doesn't go out.

Then comes a step I call the one person you are for: the exact buyer, the mess they're in, and the client you'd turn away. The red flags are part of the positioning too. An expert who knows who they're not for writes sharper posts than one trying to help everyone.

When I'm learning someone's voice, I go to the interview recording before their LinkedIn history. Spoken language is the cleaner source. A lot of what people have posted has been through a colleague, a committee or an AI tool, and copying that copies the polish, not the person. The transcript has the real thing: the phrases they reach for, how long their sentences run, where they speed up because they care.

A consultant came to me convinced LinkedIn didn't work. His posts got about five engagements each and read like a report. In the interview we talked about him, not his methodology, and out came a sarcastic, contrarian side he'd been filtering out as too unprofessional. We let it into the writing. Clients started reaching out, and journalists asked him for comment.

The blocker I hear most is "I don't know what to write about". The fix is a reframe. You're not manufacturing insights. You're documenting what already happened, and everything worth posting already lives in your head:

Copy all 4 promptsor tap the ones you have a story for

• The meeting last week that changed how you think about your market.
• The hire you almost made that would have been a disaster.
• The client conversation that showed you your Ideal Buyer wasn't who you thought.
• The moment you had to change course and didn't know if it would work.

That's the content, and nobody can copy it. AI has made generic educational content free. What readers can't get anywhere else is your take. Google's search guidance asks the same of every page: does it show first-hand expertise, from having actually done the thing?

The weekly interview keeps you two weeks ahead. Industry news, a big moment in the business or a conference can't wait that long. For those there's an open lane: you send a voice note, and we turn it into a post the same day or by the next morning, keeping the raw reaction instead of smoothing it into a safe recap.

The clearest example is public. A client went to Cannes Lions for the first time as an independent, with no team and no agency. The goal: seven LinkedIn articles in seven days. He went to sessions, talked to people, and sent us voice notes in the evening. Each became an article, published the next morning before the first session started.

Most Cannes content that week was polished recaps of the same panels. His said what people in the room were thinking but not putting their name to. He came home with a full pipeline, and didn't write a word of it.

I run the weekly interview like a podcast on purpose. A host or a journalist will do the same thing later: ask questions and listen for the line worth keeping. So the transcript isn't only raw material for LinkedIn. It's rehearsal, and a store of things you've already said well. Each channel wants something slightly different from it:

• Podcasts want a guest with stories. Pitch the shows your buyers listen to, not the biggest ones. Lead with your positioning line and three stories, and the host can hear the episode before it's recorded.
• Publications want a usable line, fast. When a journalist asks for comment, a quote bank means you answer the same day, with something you actually believe, in your own words. A contributed article starts the same way: from a take you've already argued out loud.
• Events want a point of view. Whether you're speaking at someone else's event or hosting your own, bring one opinion worth disagreeing with, one story that proves it, and one thing people can do next week.

It works in the other direction too. One client built his content on honest, analytical takes on his industry's news; publications now call him first for a take when a story breaks, and the top podcast in his space has hosted him. Another texted me from a trade show: people recognised him before he'd said his name, and some of those conversations went straight into his pipeline.

Then close the loop. Every podcast, quote and talk goes back into posts: the question the host asked, the line the journalist used, what the room pushed back on. The people who react to those posts are the warm signals. A buyer who heard the episode and then comments on the post about it isn't a stranger any more. Judge every channel the same way: not by downloads, coverage or headcount, but by whether the right people come closer to a conversation.

Three rules keep it pointed at buyers rather than applause:

• Post from the person, not the brand. If a brand account could have posted it, the personal account shouldn't. Restate company news in your own words, with your own view.
• Aim at the buyer's mess, not the widest audience. Broad posts win likes. A narrower post about the buyer's real problem can look like it underperforms and still book the calls.
• Use one interview everywhere. The same 45 minutes feeds posts, a podcast's talking points and the line a journalist quotes.