During the past few months, I’ve noticed a pattern in conversations with marketing and content leaders. Nearly every discussion about AI visibility begins the same way: “Tell me everything you know.” Marketers want the new optimization playbook or the equivalent of keyword research. What they need is different: a way to decide what’s worth creating in the first place.
The instinct makes sense. For years, marketers responded to every major search change by learning optimization techniques. Today, many assume answer engines work the same way and go looking for the sources that AI appears to favor.
But those conversations don’t stay on optimization for long. They shift toward the kinds of information other people want to reference: original research, customer evidence, expert perspectives, proprietary data, and industry recognition. Google’s recent comments encouraging marketers to create original, useful content reinforce that broader shift. The real opportunity is in deciding what information is worth creating in the first place.
Marketers Are Solving For The Wrong Constraint
AI has dramatically changed the economics of content creation and optimization. Organizations can now generate, adapt, personalize, and optimize content faster. As content becomes abundant, competitive advantage comes from contributing information the market doesn’t already have. Search professionals have long described this as “information gain” — contributing something genuinely new rather than repeating what already exists. Answer engine optimization (AEO) raises the importance of that principle and changes how marketing leaders should think about their content portfolios. That means creating evidence that contributes original insights and demonstrates expertise the market can’t get anywhere else.
Once we talk about the information that AI systems frequently retrieve and reference, the conversation shifts away from producing more content toward producing stronger evidence. Customer stories become more valuable because they’re independently verifiable. Original research becomes more valuable because it’s uniquely yours. Benchmarks and third-party validation become more valuable because other people trust and reference them.
At Forrester’s B2B Summit this year, I found this conversation extending well beyond content teams. Product marketers, communications leaders, and analyst relations professionals were all beginning to rethink where they should invest. They recognized that original research, expert perspectives, analyst engagement, customer proof, and credible media coverage contribute to a body of evidence that compounds over time. Those investments require collaboration across teams and patience.
Original research isn’t conceived, published, trusted, and widely referenced within a month. Experts need time to develop meaningful points of view. Customers need time for adoption, then opportunities to share measurable outcomes. Analysts, journalists, industry publications, and practitioners need time to discover, evaluate, and discuss those ideas. The strongest authority signals emerge over months and have durability for years because credibility compounds gradually. That long-term perspective feels very different from the optimization mindset or quick hacks that marketers expect when AI visibility first becomes a priority.
Build Evidence That Others Want To Cite
In my research, I’ve encouraged marketing and content decision-makers to collaborate with experts to build content that drives authority. That recommendation has become more relevant as AI changes how buyers discover information.
Experts create differentiated knowledge. Internal subject-matter experts contribute implementation experience, product expertise, customer insights, and original thinking that competitors can’t easily replicate. External experts — including customers, analysts, researchers, and industry practitioners — provide independent perspectives that strengthen credibility and extend the reach of those ideas. Together, they help organizations create information that earns attention, discussion, and long-term authority. This should change the conversations that leadership teams have during planning and budget season. Instead of focusing on content volume or campaign calendars, they should challenge their teams with questions such as:
What expertise exists only inside our organization?
What evidence can only we produce?
What investments will strengthen our authority one year from now?
What information would customers, analysts, journalists, partners, or practitioners choose to reference?
Midyear planning and 2027 budget planning discussions are the right time to begin shifting both investment and attention. Look across your content portfolio and how your teams spend their time. If most effort goes toward producing more assets, begin shifting capacity toward authority investments, such as original research, customer evidence, analyst engagement, credible media coverage, and industry discussion. Those investments require coordination across marketing, communications, and product teams, which is exactly why teams should start plans well before they’re needed.
The organizations that build lasting advantage over the next few years will treat authority-building as an operating capability rather than a campaign or optimization project. They will build repeatable ways to capture expertise, produce original evidence, involve customers, and earn independent validation as part of how marketing operates.
Building authority takes time, and every organization starts from a different place. If you’re evaluating your content strategy, authority investments, or AI visibility priorities, contact us. We’re glad to help you determine where to focus first.
