Now, spending 70% of your time in any given year on editorial SEO is a big bet. So, why make it at any company?
Well, if your company is:
- In an industry in which traffic volume is decently established
- And you are already an authority (both of these are true for Klaviyo),
-
Then the earlier you focus on editorial SEO, the faster your flywheel starts to spin, and the more you compound.
It’s like starting to invest at 20 versus 30.
Now, you don’t have to be Klaviyo’s size to invest 70% of your time in content marketing for a year.
If your site is driving ~1,000 sessions (You’d find this in Google Analytics) to the site outside of SEO and you have ~1,000 referring domains (You’d find this in Ahrefs or SEMRush), and you are working in an industry in which search volume exists (this is most industries), then your organization is ripe for a 70% hedge bet on editorial SEO for a full year.
This is especially true if your organization has never done this before.
Get the flywheel turning, faster and faster, because not only does this help the company gain increased traction overtime in SEO dominance and brand authority (show the executives the compounding chart], but it also means that as you shift your bet down to that 40% investment in editorial SEO, the flywheel of growing organic traffic you are already driving to your site is now a distribution channel for all of your other marketing efforts.
This creates efficiency.
And efficiency matters a lot. I have seen so many brands invest in YouTube or Podcasts––and even focus on that for a full year. I say that full year because folks often argue that brands don’t invest long enough in content plays like these to see their revenue return. So, let’s put it right here and say that these brands spend an entire year on those programs, and still aren't’ seeing any lift… then you’re in trouble.
So, when the numbers don’t pan out, when the series aren’t seen, and when budgets are reevaluated (because YouTube and Podcasts can be quite expensive), these programs and often their teams get left behind and laid off.
Now, this can happen for a few reasons:
- The podcast / YouTube series wasn’t very good: Maybe the brand didn’t know its audience well enough.
-
The podcast / YouTube series didn’t get the distribution it needed: This is very likely for early stage companies, companies that don’t invest in go-to-market, and companies that don’t have a strong editorial SEO flywheel.
- A combination of the above.
Now, I know it isn’t feasible at every company for the content team to manage or have a big say in go-to-market programs. Instead, content teams often only have say over their own content properties, which means that is your only real outlet for distribution.
Focus, then, on making the channels in which you have the most say and control the ones that determine your future success. You’ll be far happier if you do––and for most of you, that will mean investing more in editorial SEO now so that you can do cooler, more creative programs in the future.
Build that case for your executive team too––the compounding effects in traffic and brand awareness, and the built-in distribution network for any future content programs.
This might be one of the only cases in which if you build it—and build it right––they will come.