Search Results

If you’re over 30, “search” still probably means typing into a box on Google. If you’re under 30, search is visual, social, and personalized —and half the time it doesn’t start on a traditional search engine at all. Younger users want tools that look  like the rest of their digital life: swipable, visual, interactive, and tuned to their tastes without a lot of typing. That’s why “What are some innovative search tools that offer a personalized and visual approach?” is becoming a real question for marketers, not just a fun tech thought experiment. Let’s walk through the tools that are quietly becoming the real  search layer for younger demographics—and what that means for your brand. 1. Pinterest: The original visual search engine Pinterest has been calling itself a visual search engine  for years, and it’s earned that label. Users can search with images instead of text  using Pinterest Lens, which lets them snap or upload a photo and find visually similar products and ideas. Pinterest’s own business messaging now leans into that “a-ha” moment: visual search that helps people define their unique taste and feel confident in their choices. For younger users, Pinterest is less “mood board” and more idea engine : outfits, room decor, niche aesthetics, DIY, recipes, and gift ideas all found visually rather than keyword-first. Takeaway for brands: Treat Pinterest like a search channel, not just a place to repost Insta graphics. High-quality vertical images, keyworded descriptions, and shoppable pins give you a shot at being the answer when someone searches with their eyes instead of their keyboard. 2. TikTok, Instagram & social search Search is increasingly social . About two-thirds of US consumers  now use social search—typing queries directly into T TikTok, Instagram, YouTube, and other platforms—across the entire customer journey. For Gen Z, it’s normal to search: “best mascara for sensitive eyes tiktok” “what to wear to a fall wedding” “best cities for remote workers” “what is visual search marketing” They’re not just looking for answers; they’re looking for faces, experiences, and social proof  in a format that feels native to them: short video, comments, and saves. Takeaway for brands: Think in searchable hooks  (“how to…”, “3 mistakes…”, “before you buy…”) in your social content. Use captions, on-screen text, and hashtags that someone would actually search . Treat TikTok/IG Reels as mini landing pages: strong opening, proof, and a clear next step. 3. Camera-based search: Google Lens, Pinterest Lens, CamFind Visual search isn’t just inside social apps; it’s built right into the camera. Tools like Google Lens , Pinterest Lens , and apps such as CamFind  let users point their phone at an object and instantly get product matches, price comparisons, or related content. Visual search uses AI to understand the image and return results—no keywords required. Younger demographics are especially comfortable with this “see → tap → find” flow, whether they’re: Snapping someone’s shoes to find similar options Pointing the camera at an ingredient to get recipes Using visual search to track down furniture, decor, or earrings they spot in the wild Takeaway for brands: Make sure your product images are clear, high-res, and consistent  so visual search engines can recognize them. Use structured product data and alt text so your catalog is machine-readable behind the scenes. Think about how your products look in context —lifestyle photos often perform better in visual search than sterile pack shots. Read more here: Why You Can’t Ignore Visual Search: 62% of Millennials Prefer It Over Text-Based Search 4. AI answer engines: Perplexity & friends The other big shift is AI-native search . Tools like Perplexity  sit in between classic search and a chatbot. Instead of a list of links, they synthesize an answer from multiple sources, with citations you can click into. Why younger users like them: They’re conversational  (“what should I wear to a winter wedding if I hate heels?”). They’re personalizable  over time (history, follow-up questions, preferences). They cut through clutter with a single, summarized answer —but still let you dig deeper. Right now, AI search feels more like a research assistant than a shopping engine, but that line is blurring. Being mentioned in AI answers will become its own form of visibility. Takeaway for brands: Write clear, structured content  that directly answers questions in natural language. Use headings that look like queries (“How does X work?”, “Is Y safe for Z?”). Make your expertise obvious: FAQs, explainers, and how-to guides are exactly what AI search tools like to quote. 5. Shuffles & collage-style discovery Younger audiences don’t just want visual search; they want visual play . Pinterest’s standalone app Shuffles  lets users cut out objects from photos, layer them into collages, add animations, and link products inside those collages. It’s been particularly popular with Gen Z users sharing creations on TikTok and other social platforms. Shuffles is less about “search” in the traditional sense and more about visual remixing —but underneath it, there’s still a discovery engine. Every product tagged inside a collage is another way for someone to stumble across your brand visually. Takeaway for brands: Think beyond static product images—how could your product be cut, layered, or remixed into a collage? Make sure your products are shoppable and recognizable inside Pinterest, so they’re eligible to be pulled into these visual journeys. 6. So… which of these matter most for younger demographics? If we oversimplify: Pinterest & visual search  → “Show me a look  or a vibe.” TikTok/Instagram social search  → “Show me real people using this and telling me the truth.” Camera-based search  → “Show me this exact thing  (or something just like it).” AI answer engines  → “Give me a smart friend who can explain this and pull in the best sources.” They’re all search tools , but they map to different intent states and content formats. What this means for your marketing strategy If younger buyers matter to you, “being good at Google” is now table stakes, not the whole game. A few practical moves: Audit where younger users are actually searching in your category. Are they saving ideas on Pinterest? Watching TikTok reviews? Asking AI tools for “best options for X”? Make your brand visually searchable. High-quality, on-brand imagery in multiple aspect ratios Lifestyle shots that show context, not just product Consistent naming and tagging across platforms Answer their questions in plain language. Blog posts, FAQs, and social scripts that sound like how they talk Clear explanations for complex products (especially in healthcare or tech) Treat social and AI search as part of the same strategy. Content that performs on TikTok or Instagram often makes great fodder for AI tools and visual search engines as well. Reuse the same core stories and proof points across all these surfaces. If your product is great but your story isn’t built for how younger customers search, let’s fix that. Get in touch   and we’ll turn your brand into something AI, social, and visual search can actually find.

If you want your brand to grow, mastering SEO is non-negotiable. It’s not just about ranking higher on Google. It’s about understanding your audience, crafting content that resonates, and making your website a magnet for the right visitors. Whether you’re in healthcare, B2B, or DTC, the right SEO strategies can transform your marketing efforts from guesswork to precision. Let’s dive into the essential SEO techniques that every marketer should master to drive scalable and profitable growth. Essential SEO Techniques You Can’t Ignore SEO isn’t a one-and-done deal. It’s a continuous process that requires attention to detail and a strategic mindset. Here are some essential techniques that will set you apart: 1. Keyword Research with Intent in Mind Keywords are the foundation of SEO. But it’s not just about stuffing your content with popular terms. You need to understand why people search for those terms. Are they looking to buy, learn, or compare? This is called search intent. Use tools like Google Keyword Planner, Ahrefs, or SEMrush to find keywords. Group keywords by intent: informational, navigational, transactional. Focus on long-tail keywords that match your audience’s specific needs. For example, a healthcare brand might target “best supplements for joint pain” instead of just “supplements.” The former attracts people ready to learn or buy, while the latter is too broad. 2. Optimize On-Page Elements On-page SEO is about making your content clear and accessible to both users and search engines. Craft compelling title tags with your primary keyword near the front. Write meta descriptions that encourage clicks. Use header tags (H1, H2, H3) to structure your content logically. Include keywords naturally in your content, but avoid keyword stuffing. Optimize images with descriptive alt text and compressed file sizes for faster loading. Remember, a well-structured page helps Google understand your content better and improves user experience. Optimizing on-page SEO elements for better rankings 3. Build Quality Backlinks Backlinks are like votes of confidence from other websites. But not all backlinks are created equal. Aim for backlinks from authoritative, relevant sites in your industry. Guest posting, partnerships, and PR outreach are effective ways to earn links. Avoid shady link-building tactics that can lead to penalties. A healthcare brand, for instance, might collaborate with medical blogs or health news sites to get credible backlinks. What is the SEO in Marketing? SEO in marketing is the practice of optimizing your online presence to attract and convert your target audience through organic search. It’s a blend of technical, creative, and strategic efforts designed to increase visibility on search engines like Google. SEO isn’t just a subset of marketing; it’s a core pillar. It supports content marketing, paid media, and even offline campaigns by driving qualified traffic to your site. When done right, SEO helps you: Understand your customers better through search data. Create content that answers real questions. Build trust and authority in your niche. Reduce reliance on paid ads by generating sustainable organic traffic. Think of SEO as the engine that powers your marketing machine. Without it, you’re missing out on a huge chunk of potential customers. Understanding SEO's role in marketing strategy Technical SEO: The Backbone of Your Website You might have great content, but if your website is slow, hard to navigate, or not mobile-friendly, your SEO efforts will suffer. Technical SEO ensures your site meets the standards search engines expect. Key areas to focus on: Site Speed: Use tools like Google PageSpeed Insights to identify and fix slow-loading pages. Mobile Optimization: Ensure your site is responsive and offers a seamless experience on all devices. Secure Website: Switch to HTTPS to protect user data and boost rankings. XML Sitemap and Robots.txt: Help search engines crawl and index your site efficiently. Fix Broken Links and Redirects: Avoid 404 errors that frustrate users and harm SEO. Technical SEO might sound complex, but it’s essential. A well-optimized site lays the groundwork for all your other SEO strategies to succeed. Content is Still King: Creating Value That Ranks You’ve heard it a million times, but it’s true: content is king. But not just any content. You need content that educates, engages, and converts. Here’s how to create content that ranks and drives growth: Answer Your Audience’s Questions: Use tools like AnswerThePublic or Google’s People Also Ask to find common queries. Use a Mix of Formats: Blog posts, videos, infographics, and case studies cater to different preferences. Update Content Regularly: Refresh old posts with new data and insights to keep them relevant. Optimize for Featured Snippets: Structure your content to answer questions clearly and concisely. Include Clear Calls to Action: Guide visitors on what to do next, whether it’s signing up, downloading, or contacting you. Great content builds trust and authority, which are crucial for long-term SEO success. Tracking and Measuring SEO Success You can’t improve what you don’t measure. Tracking your SEO performance helps you understand what’s working and where to pivot. Focus on these key metrics: Organic Traffic: Are more people finding your site through search? Keyword Rankings: Are your target keywords moving up in search results? Bounce Rate and Time on Page: Are visitors engaging with your content? Conversion Rate: Are visitors taking desired actions like filling out forms or making purchases? Backlink Profile: Is your site gaining authoritative links over time? Use tools like Google Analytics, Google Search Console, and third-party SEO platforms to gather data. Regularly review your reports and adjust your strategy based on insights. Mastering SEO is a journey, not a destination. By focusing on these essential SEO techniques, you’ll build a strong foundation that supports scalable and profitable growth. Remember, SEO is about serving your audience with clarity and honesty, backed by data-driven decisions. If you want to dive deeper into how to transform your marketing with data and strategy, check out this resource on seo for marketers . It’s packed with insights tailored for growth-stage brands like yours. Keep experimenting, keep learning, and watch your brand climb the ranks. Your next big growth leap is just an SEO strategy away.

There’s a moment in a lot of founder conversations where someone sighs and says: “I think we need to fire our agency.” Sometimes that’s true. Sometimes the agency really is  phoning it in. But often, what looks like an “agency problem” is actually: A data problem A brief/strategy problem A budget and expectations problem Firing the agency without checking those things first just means you’ll be in the same spot again six months from now—with a different logo on the invoice. Here’s how I coach clients through the “do we fire them?” question, and what to have ready if you do. The Usual “Agency Symptoms” Founders Complain About If any of these sound familiar, you’re not alone: “The numbers are getting worse and no one can explain why.” “We’re seeing a lot of activity, but not a lot of revenue.” “They keep telling us it’s the algorithm / seasonality / creative, but there’s no clear plan.” “Reporting feels like a recap, not analysis.” “We only hear from them when we chase.” “They seem more interested in defending their work than in fixing what’s wrong.” Those are legitimate red flags. Before you pull the plug, though, it helps to get specific. That’s where a simple agency scorecard  comes in. A Simple Agency Scorecard: 4 Things to Look At First You don’t need a 20-line rubric. Start with four areas: 1. Reporting & Insight Ask yourself: Are we getting regular, scheduled reports ? Do they go beyond “what happened” to “so what and now what”? Do we understand attribution assumptions and data caveats? A good report should make your decisions easier, not add to the confusion. 2. Testing & Iteration Look at the last 60–90 days: What tests did they run? (creative, audiences, bids, landing pages?) What did they learn ? What changed in the account as a result? If you can’t see a clear test-and-learn rhythm, you don’t have a performance agency—you have a maintenance agency. 3. Transparency & Communication Consider: Do they proactively flag concerns and propose options? Do they explain results in plain language, or hide behind jargon? Do you feel comfortable asking “naïve” questions? Healthy relationships are collaborative. If every conversation feels defensive or foggy, that’s data too. 4. Strategic Thinking Finally, ask: Are they simply pushing buttons, or are they helping shape channel mix, budgets, and offers ? Do they understand your margin, CAC caps, and business model ? Do they bring ideas that connect to your actual goals, not just platform benchmarks? An agency doesn’t have to be your CMO, but they should at least be operating within a clear strategy—and be able to talk about it. If your scorecard is low across most of these, firing them might be the right move. But before you do… Five Checks to Run Before  You Fire Your Agency These checks do two things: They help you be fair about what’s actually broken. They make your life much easier if you do  switch agencies or move to a fractional CMO / in-house model. Check 1: Is Your Tracking and Data Trustworthy? If GA4, Shopify/Stripe, and platform dashboards all disagree and  no one has reconciled that, you’re trying to fly a plane with three broken gauges. Questions to ask: Are core events (purchases, leads, booked calls) firing correctly? Is there a consistent UTM and naming structure? Has anyone documented how we measure CAC/MER/ROAS? If tracking is a mess, a new agency won’t fix that by magic. You may need a data/analytics clean-up  first. Check 2: Did You Give Them a Real Brief and Clear Targets? A lot of agencies are operating off something like, “We want growth” and “Try to keep ROAS good.” Before you blame them for vague results, sanity-check: Do they know your revenue and margin goals ? Do they know your acceptable CAC  and payback period? Did you agree on priority products , audiences, and countries? If you haven’t spelled that out, your first move might be to tighten the brief  and see if performance (or clarity) improves. Check 3: Are Your Expectations and Budget Even in the Right Zip Code? If you’re spending: $3K/month in a crowded DTC category, expecting 3–5x ROAS, with no brand awareness and a cold audience… …it’s not just an agency issue. You’re asking the wrong question of the wrong budget. Ask: Are we expecting enterprise-level outcomes  on a test-level budget ? Does our budget give them enough room to test and learn? Are we evaluating performance over a reasonable time window? Sometimes the fix isn’t “fire the agency,” it’s “adjust the economics or get honest about what this budget can do.” Check 4: Is the Offer and Website Pulling Its Weight? Even the best media buying can’t save: A confusing offer Low conversion rate Slow, clunky site No social proof or trust elements Before you fire the agency, look at: Landing page conversion rate Add-to-cart → purchase drop-offs Site speed and mobile experience If the funnel is clearly broken, you either need the current agency to help fix it, or you need a broader strategy/funnel owner , not just a different media vendor. Check 5: Have You Had One Blunt, Data-First Conversation? It sounds obvious, but many relationships die in a slow swirl of passive frustration. Schedule one meeting and be direct: Share concerns clearly, tied to data (“CAC has risen from X to Y; we don’t see a clear plan to address it.”) Ask them to walk you through: What they believe is happening What they’ve tried What they’d do with more freedom / budget / creative Ask what they  need from you to do better (access, approvals, assets, clarity). How they respond tells you a lot. Some agencies step up, reset the strategy, and improve. Others show you—in real time—why it’s time to move on. If You Do Part Ways: What to Have Ready If, after the checks above, you’re still convinced it’s time to move on, don’t just pull the plug and hope. Here’s what to get in place first. 1. Clean, Exported Data Before you end the contract: Get read-only access  to all ad accounts, analytics, and tools. Export: Campaign/ad performance for at least 6–12 months Any experiments or tests they ran (and the learnings) Historical reports and dashboards This becomes the foundation for whoever comes next. 2. Clear Goals and Guardrails Write down, in plain language: Revenue and margin targets CAC ceilings and MER floors Which products, markets, or segments are priority Any hard compliance or brand constraints (especially in healthcare/telehealth) This becomes your brief for the next chapter , whether that’s a new agency, a fractional CMO, or an in-house lead. 3. A Decision on Your Next Model: Agency, Fractional CMO, or In-House? Instead of “we’ll just find a better agency,” consider what you actually need: Another agency If your strategy is solid Your data is clean You just need better execution at the channel level Fractional CMO If you need someone to own: Strategy Channel mix Budget Agency oversight And to connect all of that to your P&L In-house hire If you have the volume and complexity to justify a full-time senior marketer And you’re ready to build out a team around them Many $5–$50M companies are actually in a fractional CMO + selected agencies  sweet spot: senior leadership and strategy at a lower cost than a full-time CMO, plus specialist agencies for execution. Not Sure If It’s Really the Agency? Get a Neutral Read If you’re staring at rising CAC, flat revenue, and thin reports, it’s very tempting to say “it must be the agency.” Sometimes it is. Other times, the real problem is: Broken tracking A fuzzy offer Unrealistic goals No one truly owning the growth strategy Before you fire anyone, it can help to have a neutral, data-driven look at: The accounts The funnel The numbers behind your expectations That’s exactly what I do as a fractional CMO. If you want a second opinion on whether you actually have an agency problem  or a strategy/data problem , we can start with a short Growth Diagnostic Call . I’ll review your numbers, accounts, and goals and give you an honest view of: What’s agency What’s upstream And what should change first

GLP-1 medications (Ozempic, Wegovy, Zepbound and others) have completely changed the weight-loss conversation—and they’ve also created a marketing mess. On one side: Sky-high demand New telehealth brands launching every month Investors expecting rapid growth On the other: Tight regulations and medical ethics Drug shortages and supply constraints Complex eligibility criteria and side-effect profiles Growing scrutiny from regulators and clinicians about “too good to be true” promises If you run or advise a GLP-1 or weight-loss telehealth brand, your marketing can’t just be “DTC weight-loss ads with a doctor logo slapped on.” You need to grow and  protect trust. This playbook lays out how to do both. The Core Tension: Demand vs. Duty of Care Most GLP-1 or weight-loss telehealth marketing sits in a tension between: Demand:  people want help losing weight now Duty of care:  safe prescribing, realistic expectations, and long-term health Unethical or sloppy marketing typically looks like: Before/after photos with unrealistic timelines “No diet, no exercise, just shots!” messaging Fine print that contradicts the headline promises Zero mention of side effects, contraindications, or medical oversight Responsible marketing accepts three truths: You’re not selling thinness ; you’re helping people manage a chronic metabolic disease. Medication is one tool in a broader care plan—not the whole plan. The most valuable asset your brand has is trust —with patients and  clinicians. Your marketing needs to reflect that from day one. Principle #1: Lead With Education, Not Hype People have heard of GLP-1s—but what they know  is usually a mix of: Headlines TikTok snippets Anecdotes from friends Your job is to turn confusion into clarity. Turn Confusion Into Clarity Create content that: Explains in plain language how GLP-1s work in the body Differentiates FDA-approved indications  (type 2 diabetes vs obesity treatment) Sets realistic timelines for weight loss and metabolic improvements Talks honestly about common side effects and when to seek care This isn’t just “nice to have.” It’s a filter : People who want a magic bullet will self-select out People who want a clinical, supported program  will lean in Practical assets to ship: “Is a GLP-1 Right for Me?” explainer page with clear eligibility factors “What to Expect in the First 12 Weeks” guide (dose titration, side effects, lifestyle changes) Short videos from clinicians walking through risks, benefits, and alternatives Every educational asset should end with a simple, low-pressure CTA: “If you’d like a clinician to review your situation, start with our brief intake questionnaire.” Principle #2: Sell the Program, Not the Drug If your entire value prop is “we can get you [drug name] fast,” you’re a commodity—and a risky one. Stronger brands position themselves around: Comprehensive care:  medication, nutrition guidance, behavior support, sometimes mental health support Monitoring & adjustments:  regular check-ins, labs where appropriate, dose changes when needed Long-term outcomes:  metabolic health, energy, mobility, comorbidities—not just a number on the scale Reframe Your Offers Instead of: “Get Ozempic Online in 24 Hours” Try: “Clinician-led weight-management programs that may  include GLP-1 medication” Your messaging should make it clear: The program  is the product Medication is a tool in that program, prescribed only when clinically appropriate Some patients won’t be candidates—and that’s part of responsible care, not a failure This framing helps with: Regulatory risk:  you’re not advertising a prescription drug as a consumer product Patient expectations:  they understand there’s a real clinical process, not a vending machine Business durability:  you’re building a program that can evolve as guidelines, supply, and coverage change Principle #3: Build Trust Through Process, Not Just Testimonials Testimonials are powerful—but in healthcare, they’re not enough on their own and can easily slide into inappropriate claims. Instead of leaning only on “I lost 40 pounds in 3 months” stories, show your process : How intake works How you screen for contraindications and red flags How often patients hear from the care team How you adjust treatment plans over time Make Your Safety Net Visible You likely already have guardrails: Standardized intake questionnaires Protocols for labs and monitoring Escalation paths for side effects Clear policies for discontinuing or switching therapies Turn those into marketing assets: “Here’s what we won’t do:– Prescribe without a full medical intake– Ignore contraindications or serious side effects– Promise specific weight-loss outcomes we can’t guarantee” That kind of transparency: De-risks your brand with regulators and clinicians Attracts patients who are serious about their health Differentiates you from “get-thin-quick” operators Principle #4: Design Funnels That Respect Clinical Judgment Most DTC funnels are designed to minimize friction : fewer questions, fewer steps, faster purchase. In GLP-1/weight-loss telehealth, your goal is different: maximize appropriate fit. Rethink the Classic DTC Funnel Instead of: Click ad Glam before/after landing page Pay for “doctor consult” Get pushed to prescription as fast as possible Try: Ad  focuses on “clinician-led support for metabolic health” Landing page  sets realistic expectations and outlines the process Pre-qualification quiz  screens out obviously ineligible or unsafe cases Intake  gathers detailed medical history Clinician consult  (async or live) Care plan options : may include GLP-1s, other medications, or non-pharmacologic paths Yes, this may reduce your raw conversion rate from click to paid consult. But it increases : Patient quality Clinical appropriateness Long-term retention and word-of-mouth In a regulated, high-scrutiny category, that’s the trade-off you actually want. Principle #5: Align Incentives Across Marketing, Clinical, and Operations If the only KPI that matters internally is new starts / first-month revenue , your incentives are misaligned. Instead, define success as: Retention  in care (e.g., 6+ months in-program where appropriate) Engagement  with counseling/nutrition and monitoring Clinical outcomes  (where you can measure them) Referrals and NPS  from satisfied patients Then build reporting  that: Gives marketing visibility into retention and churn by acquisition source Shows ops and clinical leaders how different channels produce different types of patients Informs creative and targeting (e.g., which messages bring patients who stay vs churn in 30 days) This is where a CMO with a data and research background  adds real value: not just driving “more leads,” but optimizing for sustainable , clinically sound growth. Creative Guardrails: What to Use and What to Avoid Generally Good Directions Human-centered storytelling:  patients talking about energy, mobility, daily life—not just the scale Clinician voices:  clear explanations from MDs/NPs/RDs about how the program works Small wins:  walking further, climbing stairs, better labs, improved confidence Realistic timelines:  “over months, not weeks” Generally Risky Directions “Drop 20 pounds fast” promises Over-reliance on dramatic, decontextualized before/afters Implying GLP-1s are for anyone who wants to lose a few vanity pounds Minimizing side effects (“no side effects,” “zero risk”) Framing medication as a way to avoid nutrition and movement changes As you develop campaigns, use a simple test: “Would our most conservative clinician and our most skeptical regulator both feel this is honest, fair, and not misleading?” If not, change it. The Role of a CMO in GLP-1 & Weight-Loss Telehealth In this space, a CMO or fractional CMO is not just a “growth driver.” They are: A translator  between marketing, clinical, legal, and operations A steward of brand trust , not just pipeline A designer of measurement , tying marketing inputs to outcomes that actually matter Typical responsibilities include: Positioning the program as long-term metabolic care , not a quick fix Building compliant funnels with clinical and legal input Setting creative guardrails and approval workflows Designing dashboards that include retention and clinical KPIs , not just CAC Navigating channel choices (how and where to safely use Meta/Google/YouTube, affiliates, influencers, etc.) Done well, marketing in GLP-1 telehealth becomes a force for better care : matching the right patients with the right programs, setting honest expectations, and supporting real change. Bringing It All Together Responsible GLP-1 and weight-loss telehealth marketing isn’t about being boring or timid. It’s about being: Clear  about what you offer Honest  about what medication can and can’t do Serious  about safety and long-term outcomes Creative  in how you tell real, human stories and educate patients If you get that right, you don’t just acquire more patients—you build a brand that clinicians respect, regulators can trust, and patients stay with for the long term. How I Can Help If you’re building or scaling a GLP-1 or weight-loss telehealth brand and want marketing that: Drives growth and  passes the “regulator and clinician” test Connects acquisition to retention and outcomes Aligns program design, messaging, and funnels I work as a fractional CMO  to: Clarify positioning and program design Build responsible, high-performing funnels Set up analytics so you can see what’s really working If that’s where you are, we can start with a short diagnostic call and map out what a responsible growth plan would look like for your brand.

When revenue is flat or CAC is creeping up, most teams say: “We need better creative.” “We should try TikTok.” “Maybe it’s time to fire the agency.” Sometimes that’s true. But a lot of the time, what looks like a marketing  problem is actually a data  problem. If you don’t trust your numbers, you can’t: Tell what’s working Make good bets Stay confident when you scale spend So you keep changing tactics, swapping agencies, and rewriting funnels—without ever fixing the thing underneath. Here are the clearest signs your “marketing problem” is really a data problem. 1. Every meeting turns into “which numbers are right?” If every marketing or growth meeting starts like this: “GA4 says one thing, Ads Manager says another.” “Shopify and our dashboards don’t match.” “Attribution is all over the place.” …you don’t have a strategy issue yet. You have a source-of-truth  issue. Normal, healthy variation: Platform-reported conversions vs GA4 vs backend will never match 100%. Different models (first/last click, data-driven, MMM) will give different angles on the truth. Unhealthy pattern: No one can agree on anything Half the time is spent debating whose report is “true” Decisions get made based on whoever spoke last, not on shared facts If your leadership team doesn’t trust the numbers, they won’t trust the marketing plan either. 2. You can’t answer basic questions without a long dig Here are questions a scale-ready company can answer quickly: What’s our CAC by major channel over the last 30/60/90 days? How does CAC compare to last year (or last quarter)? What’s our blended MER (marketing efficiency ratio)? What’s our AOV and contribution margin on the first order? Roughly, what’s our 6–12 month LTV by core product or segment? If answering any of those requires: Multiple tools A week of pulling CSVs “Let us get back to you” …you’re not ready to scale marketing. You’re flying blind. It’s not that the numbers have to be perfect. But they have to be: Good enough Available quickly Trusted by the people making decisions Without that, “spend more” or “cut spend” are just guesses. 3. Your “best” channels keep changing without a clear reason Another sign of a data problem: your “best” channel seems to change every month. In April, “Meta is crushing it.” In May, “Meta fell off a cliff; now Google is our hero.” In June, “Email’s doing surprisingly well, maybe we should focus there.” But when you look closer: Tracking changes (iOS updates, GA4 migration, tag issues) Attribution settings are different Someone changed how you count “conversions” So you react to noisy, inconsistent data instead of real trends. If your channel “winners” and “losers” swing wildly without obvious business reasons (seasonality, promos, inventory), chances are your measurement layer  is broken. 4. Experiments don’t really answer anything You try to be scientific: “Let’s A/B test the landing pages.” “Let’s experiment with a new offer.” “Let’s see what happens if we increase budget by 30%.” But at the end of the test period, you hear: “We think this one won, but the sample size was small.” “GA4 says version A won; Ads Manager says B.” “We can’t separate test impact from seasonality or other changes.” So you: Don’t feel confident enough to roll out the winner Or you roll something out on shaky evidence and get burned That’s not a creative problem, and it’s not a tactics problem. It’s a data design  problem: Wrong metrics chosen No power/sample calculations No way to isolate the variable you changed Reports that are too noisy to support a decision If every experiment ends in “it’s inconclusive,” your real bottleneck is data. 5. You can’t see what happens after  the first purchase or lead If your reporting stops at “we got a purchase” or “we got a lead,” you’re missing half the story. Healthy data lets you see, by channel or campaign: Repeat purchases / subscription retention Refunds, chargebacks, or high-support customers Long-term value differences by acquisition source If you can’t see that, you can’t answer: “Are we scaling the channels that produce the best  customers, or just the cheapest leads?” “Is this new lead gen channel filling the pipeline with people who never close?” “Are our GLP-1 or telehealth campaigns bringing in safe, appropriate patients who stay in the program?” If all the focus is on front-end CAC and no one can see what happens after, it’s a data problem masquerading as a marketing problem. 6. Budget conversations are based on feelings, not evidence Another give-away: your budget conversations sound like: “It feels like we’re overspending on ads.” “It feels like our agency isn’t performing.” “It feels like we should cut Google and move it to Meta.” “Feels like” is fine in early-stage chaos. But if you’re: At $5–$50M in revenue Spending real money on marketing Making hiring and agency decisions based on gut alone …you’re carrying more risk than you need to. You want a simple dashboard that lets you say: “Here’s what we spent by channel.” “Here’s what we got (revenue, profit, key health metrics).” “Here’s how that compares to last quarter/last year.” If you can’t see that, you will end up calling a marketing problem what is really a visibility  problem. 7. Everyone is arguing about tactics, but nobody owns the data Final sign: the loudest debates in the room are about tactics : “We should be on TikTok.” “Email is underused.” “We need more landing pages.” “We should try influencers.” But if you ask, “Who owns the tracking, the metrics, and the dashboards?” you get: Silence A vague “analytics person” A platform’s default reports, but no real owner That’s a data problem. Data doesn’t need a huge team, but it does need ownership : Someone accountable for making sure events are tracked correctly Someone who can explain what the numbers mean in plain language Someone who helps the team decide “this is real, this is noise” Without that, marketing will stay reactive and opinion-driven, no matter how smart the people are. What to Fix First When Data Is the Real Problem If you see yourself in several of these, don’t panic. You don’t need a perfect BI stack. You need a handful of very practical fixes. 1. Define your “good enough” source of truth Pick one place to be the main reference for: Revenue Orders/leads CAC / MER Basic channel performance For most companies, that’s: GA4 or another analytics tool Plus your commerce/CRM system Plus a simple spreadsheet or dashboard that pulls the pieces together Platform dashboards (Meta, Google Ads, etc.) become supporting views , not the “truth.” 2. Make sure key events are actually tracked You need clean, reliable tracking for: Pageviews / sessions Add to cart / lead form start Purchase / lead submission / booked appointment Any key product or funnel step No advanced analysis can fix missing or broken events. This is plumbing, but it matters more than a new campaign. 3. Standardize naming and UTMs Boring, but huge: A consistent UTM structure for campaigns Clear naming conventions in Meta and Google Ads Channel groupings that make sense for your business This is what lets you see “all paid social” vs “branded search” vs “non-brand” vs “affiliate” without three days of cleanup. 4. Build one simple performance view Even a Google Sheet or a basic Looker/Data Studio dashboard that shows: Spend by channel Revenue by channel (or contribution margin) CAC and MER New vs returning customer mix …will dramatically improve marketing decisions. It doesn’t have to be fancy. It just has to be: Updated regularly Shared Trusted 5. Then fix the marketing Once you can see: What’s working What’s not Where the real bottlenecks are …your marketing conversations get much better: Creative testing becomes more focused Channel mix decisions are calmer Scaling doesn’t feel so scary You still need good strategy and execution—but now you’re making those decisions with your eyes open. When It Makes Sense to Get Help If you read this and thought: “Yes, this is us. We keep trying to fix marketing but we can’t see what’s really happening.” …then your next step is not another tactic. It’s a data-focused reset . That’s the work I do as a fractional CMO with a heavy analytics bent: Audit how you’re tracking and reporting today Design a “good enough” measurement plan that fits your stage Build a clear 90-day roadmap that connects cleaner data → better decisions → smarter marketing bets If you want to stop treating a data problem like a marketing problem, we can start with a short diagnostic and see what’s actually going on. You can: Book a Growth Diagnostic Call , or Request an Analytics & Attribution Audit and we’ll walk through your numbers together.

If you lead a $5–$50M company, you’ve probably heard some version of: “Can we do our strategy using the McKinsey 7-S framework ?” “We really believe in Blue Ocean Strategy —can you build our plan around that?” “We just read [insert hot business book]  and want to roll out the framework.” I hear this all the time, especially from founders on Upwork: “We need a strategy… but can you do it using X’s  framework or Y’s  book?” There’s nothing wrong with these tools. McKinsey 7-S, Blue Ocean, OKRs, EOS/Traction, Rockfeller Habits, Lean Startup—they all contain useful ideas. The problem is when a $10M company treats them as gospel  instead of what they are: Opinionated tools created by smart people with good marketing. This post is about why big-consultant frameworks and best-selling strategy books often fail mid-market companies—and the simpler, more practical planning approach I use instead. What Strategy Frameworks and Books Are Actually Good For Let’s be fair first. Popular frameworks and books do some things well: Shared language: Everyone can talk about “blue oceans” vs “red oceans,” or “rocks” and “scorecards,” or “7-S” dimensions. Broader perspective: They remind you that growth isn’t just “more ads”—there’s structure, culture, systems, positioning. Inspiration: Done right, they spark ideas you might not have considered. Used lightly—like a lens or a checklist—they’re genuinely helpful. They become a problem when a founder says: “We want you to do our strategy, but you have  to use [Framework X] from [Book Y].” At that point, you’re no longer solving your  business problem. You’re trying to make your business fit someone else’s story. 5 Reasons Famous Frameworks Break in Real Companies 1. They’re written for a different scale and context McKinsey 7-S grew up in large enterprises. Blue Ocean was written using examples like Toyota, Cirque du Soleil, and Nintendo. EOS and Scaling Up assume a certain team size and leadership structure. If you’re a $5–$50M company, you’re in a weird middle: Too big for “wing it and hope” Too small for multi-year transformation programs and big consulting teams You don’t have five layers of management, a strategy office, and a dozen cross-functional project teams. You have: A handful of leaders wearing too many hats Limited budget and time A 12–18 month window to prove growth When you copy a framework designed for a very different scale, you inherit complexity you can’t support. 2. They’re high on concepts, low on trade-offs Most frameworks are intentionally abstract. That’s how they sell books and apply to any industry. Common result in a planning session: Lots of sticky notes under clever headings Diagrams everyone nods at Very little clarity on what you’re not going to do Strategy is mostly trade-offs: Which products aren’t going to get investment this year Which markets you’re not entering yet Which channels you’re consciously under-weighting Books and frameworks rarely force those calls. They give you boxes to fill out. They don’t make you pick . 3. They ignore your actual unit economics Most strategy books barely talk about: Your true margins  after returns, discounts, shipping, and service What CAC you can afford by channel How fast you need payback  for cash flow to work Which lines are vanity revenue vs real profit So you get: A beautiful “blue ocean” idea that only works at 70%+ gross margin A “go global” vision that ignores your inventory or clinician capacity A “double marketing” plan that would blow out your cash You can’t copy a framework out of a book and expect it to respect your P&L. You have to start with your numbers and then selectively borrow ideas. 4. They overcomplicate execution for lean teams Enterprise frameworks assume: You can dedicate people to “the initiative” for months You can spin up a project team for each pillar You can afford experimentation overhead In real life, you probably have: A marketing lead who is also doing execution A founder still involved in too many details Teams that already feel maxed out If your new strategy requires everyone to fill out 90-minute scorecards every week, build dashboards for 25 KPIs, and track progress on 12 “rocks” each quarter… you will get exactly three weeks of compliance and then quiet rebellion. Good strategy for mid-market companies has to be lightweight enough to live in the real calendar . 5. They become a religion instead of a tool The biggest red flag for me is language like: “We’re a Blue Ocean company.” “We run everything through EOS.” “We just need someone to implement [Book X] exactly.” When the framework becomes an identity, it’s hard to have honest conversations like: “This part of the model isn’t working for us.” “This exercise is overhead, not value.” “This year we need a different lens.” At that point, the framework is no longer helping you think. It’s telling you what  to think. Strategic Planning Best Practices That Do  Work for $5–$50M So what should planning look like if you’re not worshiping a single book or framework? Here’s the pattern I’ve seen work consistently. 1. Start with your numbers and constraints Before you talk about oceans, rocks, or 7-S, answer: What’s our revenue target range for the next 12–18 months? What contribution margin do we need? What can we realistically spend on marketing as a % of revenue? What CAC and payback period are acceptable? This doesn’t have to be perfect. It just has to be explicit. Then ask: “Given these numbers, what’s actually possible?” That simple step will kill a lot of book-inspired fantasies fast—and highlight the few moves that can actually create the outcomes you need. 2. Identify the real bottleneck Instead of filling every box of a famous framework, ask: “What is the single biggest constraint on growth right now?” It’s usually one of these: Offer & positioning  – People don’t clearly understand why you are the best choice. Operations & delivery  – You can’t deliver cleanly at higher volume. Data & measurement  – You can’t see what’s working well enough to double down. Demand & marketing  – Not enough right-fit people are hearing from you. Your strategy should be built to attack that bottleneck first, not spread effort evenly across a template from somebody’s book. 3. Choose 3–5 bets, not 20 initiatives From there, pick 3–5 bets  that: Attack the bottleneck Support your financial targets Are actually resourced For each bet, define: Owner Success metric(s) What you are not  going to do because this is more important If a framework encourages you to start 12 new priorities at once, it’s a bad fit for your stage. 4. Translate bets into a 90-day roadmap This is where most frameworks stop and real strategy starts. For each bet, map the next 90 days: What happens in Month 1, 2, and 3 Which dependencies must be cleared How progress will be tracked (simply) You’re not writing a 5-year vision. You’re committing to 90 days of focused work  that get you closer to your targets and teach you something. 5. Build a simple operating cadence Finally, make sure the plan can live in your actual calendar: Weekly:  topline performance + progress on a short list of priorities Monthly:  channel/cohort review and small adjustments Quarterly:  reset the 90-day roadmap Borrow whatever you like from EOS, OKRs, Scaling Up, etc.—but keep the minimum set of rituals your team can actually sustain. How I Use Frameworks (Without Becoming a Framework Person) When a client says: “We love Blue Ocean / EOS / OKRs. Can you work within that?” My answer is usually: “We’ll borrow the pieces that actually help your business—and ignore the rest.” Practically, my process as a fractional CMO looks like: Numbers & constraints Revenue, margin, CAC, payback, cash, capacity. Growth equation & bottleneck Where growth really comes from today (channels, segments, offers). What’s most constraining that equation. 90-day growth roadmap 3–5 bets tied to that bottleneck. Guardrails and simple KPIs. Lightweight operating system Enough structure to keep everyone aligned. As little overhead as possible. If a well-known framework or book has a tool that helps with one of those steps, great—we use it. But we never let the tool drive the plan. A Quick Example Say you’re: ~$12M in revenue Healthy but flat the last 18 months Spending on Meta/Google with murky attribution Reading Blue Ocean and 7-S and feeling like you “should” implement something big Instead of a year-long rollout of someone else’s system, a practical plan might be: Clarify the target: Grow from $12M → $16M while keeping contribution margin ≥ X%. Diagnose bottleneck: Data is unreliable; no one trusts CAC. Paid is stale; no creative testing discipline. Pick 3 bets for next 90 days: Clean up tracking and build a simple performance dashboard. Design and run a structured creative testing program. Tighten offer + landing page on top product line. Set guardrails: Blended CAC cap. MER floor. Ops signals (inventory, support tickets, refunds) monitored weekly. You might still use OKR language or a few EOS concepts—but the plan  is driven by your numbers and constraints, not by chapter headings from a book. If You’re Drowning in Frameworks and Still Don’t Have a Plan If you’ve read the books, admired the diagrams, and still don’t have a clear 90-day plan that the team can execute, it’s not because you’re missing the “right” framework. It’s because you need: A sober look at your numbers An honest call on the bottleneck A few focused bets A simple way to track and adjust That’s the work I do as a fractional CMO  for $5–$50M companies.

Before we dive in, it's important to note that while McKinsey offers various frameworks, the 7-S model is by far the most widely recognized. However, all McKinsey frameworks share similar drawbacks: they're essentially just theoretical structures—visually appealing PowerPoint diagrams—that lack robust analytics, deep dives into your organization's unique identity, creative positioning, and practical implementation strategies. In other words, they provide structure without delivering real insight or actionable guidance tailored specifically to who you are and what you need. If you’re a founder or CMO at a $5–$50M company, you’ve probably had someone suggest using the McKinsey 7-S framework at your next offsite. This article isn’t a homework summary; it’s a warning about how the model breaks in the real world—and what I use instead when I’m responsible for actually hitting revenue and margin target. Now let's dive in further: Understanding the McKinsey Strategic Planning Framework (7-S Model) In the world of business strategy, few frameworks are as renowned as McKinsey & Company’s 7-S Framework . Developed in the late 1970s by consultants at McKinsey, the 7-S model provides a structured way to analyze and align seven critical internal elements of an organization for effective strategy execution. These seven elements are Strategy, Structure, Systems, Shared Values, Skills, Style, and Staff . In essence, the model urges leaders to ensure that their company’s strategy and all supporting components (from organizational chart to company culture and people’s skills) are in harmony and reinforcing one another. This holistic approach helps organizations identify gaps or misalignments that could hinder implementation of a strategic plan. Each “S” represents a key area of the business: Strategy:  The plan or course of action for gaining competitive advantage. Structure:  The organizational setup—how teams are organized and who reports to whom. Systems:  The everyday processes and workflows that drive operations. Shared Values:  The core values and culture that define what the company stands for. Skills:  The competencies and capabilities the organization and its employees excel at. Style:  The leadership and management style, including how leaders interact with teams. Staff:  The people in the organization and their general capabilities (hiring, training, talent management). By examining each of these areas, McKinsey’s framework provides a diagnostic overview  of organizational effectiveness. It helps pinpoint where misalignments exist – for example, a cutting-edge Strategy might fail if the Structure  (organizational hierarchy) and Skills  of the team are not suited to execute it. The 7-S framework is often used during major transformations or strategic shifts to ensure all parts of the business are prepared and aligned for change. In practice, a McKinsey strategic planning engagement would use tools like the 7-S model to holistically assess a client organization, then develop an action plan to realign any elements that are out of sync. Strengths and Advantages of McKinsey’s Strategic Framework Why do so many leaders gravitate towards McKinsey’s strategic planning framework?  The answer lies in its strengths. First and foremost, the McKinsey 7-S model offers a holistic, structured approach  to implementing strategy. It forces decision-makers to look beyond just formulating strategy on paper, and instead consider all factors needed to execute that strategy successfully – from the hard systems to the soft culture elements. This comprehensive lens reduces the risk of overlooking critical issues. As Prosci notes, the 7-S framework acts as a powerful diagnostic tool during transformations, helping leaders plan, execute, and manage changes more effectively  by covering both tangible and intangible drivers of performance. In other words, it embeds structured implementation into the strategic plan – every change initiative is evaluated against all seven dimensions, creating a thorough roadmap rather than a piecemeal plan. Another major advantage is the framework’s emphasis on alignment . The 7-S model makes it easier to ensure that all parts of the organization are “pulling in the same direction.” For example, if a company’s strategy calls for innovation and agility, the model prompts leaders to ask whether the Staff  have the right innovation skills, whether the Systems  (processes) encourage speed, and whether the corporate Values  support experimentation. By revealing such misalignments, the McKinsey approach helps organizations proactively realign their structure, processes, and people with their strategic goals. This organizational alignment  can lead to more coherent execution and better performance outcomes, as every part of the company is synchronized around the strategy. McKinsey’s framework also carries global credibility and proven success . Since its introduction decades ago, the 7-S model has been applied by countless organizations worldwide, making it a longstanding, trusted theory  in strategic management. Many business leaders and consultants are familiar with it, which means using this framework can lend credibility when communicating a strategic plan to stakeholders. The widespread adoption of McKinsey’s methods signals that they have been battle-tested across industries and regions. In practical terms, a strategic plan grounded in a well-known framework like McKinsey’s may inspire confidence among investors, board members, and employees, because it follows a methodology associated with one of the top consulting firms in the world. The McKinsey name itself – synonymous with rigorous analysis and high-profile corporate strategy – can reassure stakeholders that the plan has been developed with a high level of professionalism and insight. Additionally, the McKinsey approach is comprehensive yet adaptable across industries . The 7-S framework is not limited to a particular sector; its mix of hard and soft factors makes it relevant whether you run a hospital, a manufacturing company, or a tech startup. This universality is a strength: it provides a common language for strategic planning that cross-functional teams can understand. The structured nature of McKinsey’s frameworks (often breaking problems into logical components and using data-driven analysis) means that implementation plans are typically very methodical. Leaders appreciate having a clear playbook to follow, and McKinsey’s approach delivers exactly that – a step-by-step structured methodology for moving from strategy formulation to execution. The result is a strategic plan that is both structured and systematic , leaving little to chance in implementation. Finally, McKinsey’s strategic planning framework benefits from the firm’s extensive experience and resources . McKinsey consultants are known for bringing deep research, benchmarks, and analytics into planning. The frameworks are often backed by quantitative analysis and case studies from McKinsey’s global practice, giving them a rich foundation. For a client, this means the strategic recommendations are supported by data and best practices gleaned from similar situations around the world. The structured nature of the 7-S (and other McKinsey frameworks) encourages a fact-based, analytical culture in planning – something many business owners find valuable in reducing uncertainty. In summary, the strengths of McKinsey’s approach include its holistic coverage of the organization, its alignment-driven discipline, its reputable and globally vetted methodology, and its structured, analytic rigor in planning and execution. Downsides and Limitations of the McKinsey Strategic Framework No framework is perfect, and McKinsey’s 7-S model and general approach come with notable downsides . Business leaders must be aware of these potential pitfalls: what works on paper or in theory can present challenges in practice. One commonly cited issue is the framework’s rigidity  and static nature  in today’s fast-changing environment. The 7-S model assumes a relatively stable context where you can methodically realign internal elements. In reality, industries can shift rapidly, and companies often need to pivot quickly  – something a rigid, all-encompassing framework doesn’t easily accommodate. As one analysis points out, the McKinsey 7-S model is best suited for stable or gradually changing environments and “may lack flexibility in rapidly shifting industries”. It focuses primarily on internal factors and does not explicitly incorporate sudden external changes like disruptive technologies, market upheavals, or crises. This can make the framework feel too slow or cumbersome  when an organization is facing volatile conditions. In fast-paced sectors, following the step-by-step alignment of all seven elements could be overtaken by events, leaving the company a step behind more agile competitors. In short, critics argue that McKinsey’s structured approach can become too rigid and time-consuming  when quick adaptation is needed. Another downside is the added complexity and lack of clear prioritization  inherent in the 7-S framework. Because all seven elements are interdependent, attempting to change one often means examining them all , which can be a complex and resource-intensive endeavor. For a business owner, this might translate to drawn-out consulting projects with many workstreams analyzing culture, systems, structure, etc., when perhaps only a few key changes are really critical. The model itself does not tell you which of the seven factors to tackle first – there’s no built-in prioritization or roadmap  for action. Without experienced guidance, organizations might struggle with where to begin, potentially diffusing their efforts. This complexity can also hinder decision-making: if every proposed change triggers a cascade of considerations across seven dimensions, teams might find it overwhelming to make swift decisions. In practice, some executives feel that frameworks like 7-S, while thorough, can become theoretical exercises  that slow down execution with analysis paralysis. Cost is another significant concern – not of the 7-S model itself, but of using McKinsey’s approach via McKinsey’s services . There’s no denying that hiring a top-tier firm like McKinsey comes with a premium price tag . Their structured strategic planning projects often involve large teams of consultants and extensive research, which can be prohibitively expensive for many organizations. For instance, public data from government contracts has shown McKinsey charging rates that translate to over $50,000 per week for a single junior consultant , far higher than competitors. One analysis noted a McKinsey business analyst (essentially an entry-level consultant) billed at approximately $56,700 per week (around $2.9 million per year)  to a client. These high fees reflect McKinsey’s brand and resources, but they put the firm’s services out of reach for smaller companies and even strain big corporate budgets. Even if one only uses McKinsey’s framework without hiring the firm, there can be implicit costs: the extensive data gathering and analysis the framework encourages might require significant internal effort or external expertise. Thus, high cost and resource intensity  are real downsides – a McKinsey-style strategic planning process can demand significant time, money, and personnel. Moreover, some critics argue that McKinsey’s frameworks risk a lack of customization or a “one-size-fits-all” approach  if applied without careful tailoring. The 7-S model is generic by design – it’s meant to apply to any organization. But every business has unique nuances, and strategy is as much art as science. A rigid framework might encourage consultants to fit your company into a template, rather than crafting a solution truly bespoke to your situation. Business leaders have sometimes felt that big consulting firms re-use similar playbooks or recommendations across clients. In fact, when dealing with larger consultancies, clients “can sometimes feel lost in the shuffle” , and firms may take a one-size-fits-all approach that doesn’t perfectly fit specific needs. This lack of deep customization can result in strategic plans that look good in theory but miss the mark in practice because they weren’t fully adapted to the client’s culture, market, or operational reality. In contrast, a more tailored approach might forego certain framework elements if they’re not relevant, whereas McKinsey’s method tends to be thorough but somewhat uniform. It’s also worth noting that McKinsey’s 7-S framework has a long-term, internally focused bias  that might underplay short-term wins and external dynamics. The model was conceived in an era when internal alignment was the main challenge, but today, businesses must be extremely responsive to external forces too. The framework “relies on internal factors and processes”  and can be disadvantageous if external circumstances (like competitive moves or regulatory shifts) are the bigger issue. Additionally, the 7-S model, while including ‘Staff’ as one element, has been critiqued for not being truly people-centric . It considers employees as part of the system but doesn’t delve into individual change adoption or morale deeply. Modern change management emphasizes engaging and equipping people through change, something a rigid structural model might not fully address. If employees feel like cogs in a grand strategy machine, resistance can rise – and McKinsey’s framework alone might not surface those human factors until they become a problem. Thinking of using 7-S in your next planning cycle? I build practical, data-driven strategy frameworks for $5–$50M companies who are tired of “consultant decks” that never get implemented. → Book a Growth Diagnostic Call  or request a 90-day Growth Roadmap. ⚠️ Warning: Limitations of Using the McKinsey 7-S Framework for Strategic Implementation While the McKinsey 7-S Framework is renowned for its structured and comprehensive approach, it has notable drawbacks. Rigid Structure:  May slow down decision-making and limit your agility. High Costs:  Extensive analysis and consulting fees can quickly become expensive. Complex yet Generic:  Risks becoming overly complicated without prioritizing your real needs. Let's be clear that it is VERY generic. The "strategy" is something you might find in any marketing/management 101 textbook and is not actionable. Internally Focused:  Often overlooks critical external market changes and competitive pressures. In summary, McKinsey’s strategic planning framework is powerful but not without trade-offs . It offers structure, thoroughness, and credibility, yet can be rigid, costly, and generic  if not carefully managed. Quite frankly, any competent can use the framework, but most won't due to its disadvantages. Business owners considering this approach should weigh these downsides against the benefits and ensure they have the capacity to tailor and execute the framework in a way that fits their unique situation. Comparing McKinsey’s Approach to Other Strategic Frameworks It’s helpful to put McKinsey’s strategy framework in context by comparing it to other popular strategic planning models. Different frameworks serve different purposes; whereas McKinsey’s 7-S focuses on internal alignment for executing strategy, others address portfolio decisions, performance measurement, or goal setting. Below is a brief comparison of McKinsey’s approach with three other well-known frameworks. BCG’s Growth-Share Matrix , the Balanced Scorecard , and OKRs (Objectives and Key Results) . BCG Matrix (Growth-Share Matrix):  Developed by Boston Consulting Group, the BCG Matrix is a portfolio planning tool  rather than an organizational alignment tool. It categorizes a company’s business units or products into four types – Stars, Cash Cows, Question Marks, and Dogs  – based on market growth rate and relative market share. The BCG framework’s strength lies in its simplicity and focus on resource allocation : it helps leaders quickly visualize where to invest, develop, or divest, prioritizing businesses that can drive growth or profit. Compared to McKinsey’s 7-S, which examines internal capabilities and structure, the BCG Matrix is externally focused on market positioning of products. It’s very useful for strategic portfolio decisions  (e.g. deciding which product lines to fund for growth), but it doesn’t address how to align an organization internally. One could say BCG’s matrix is narrower in scope – excellent for prioritizing investments , but not a holistic guide to implementation. Its downside is that it can oversimplify complex businesses; real portfolios may not fit neatly into four boxes, and using only market share/growth as criteria can be limiting (especially in dynamic markets). In contrast, McKinsey’s approach would dive into the organizational  changes needed to support whichever portfolio choices are made. Balanced Scorecard (BSC):  The Balanced Scorecard, created by Kaplan and Norton in the 1990s, is a strategic management system for translating strategy into measurable objectives . It breaks strategic goals into four perspectives: Financial, Customer, Internal Processes, and Learning & Growth . Managers then set specific objectives and KPIs for each perspective, creating a “strategy map” that links initiatives across these dimensions. The strength of BSC is its comprehensive performance tracking  – it ensures that beyond just financial outcomes, factors like customer satisfaction, operational excellence, and innovation (learning and growth) are tracked and aligned with the strategy. In practice, the Balanced Scorecard is great for strategic implementation and monitoring ; it helps organizations turn high-level strategy into concrete metrics and targets at various levels. Compared to McKinsey’s 7-S, which is more qualitative in assessing alignment, BSC is more quantitative and metric-driven, asking “how will we know if we achieve our strategy?” One could even use them together: McKinsey’s framework to organize internally, and Balanced Scorecard to measure progress. However, the Balanced Scorecard can be complex to develop and maintain , requiring good data systems and regular reviews. It is somewhat rigid in structure  – every objective must fit into one of the four predefined perspectives – which might not capture every nuance of a particular strategy. McKinsey’s approach, while structured, is a bit more flexible in what you choose to emphasize (7-S doesn’t dictate specific metrics, for instance). BSC also tends to be top-down  and long-term in orientation, reviewed perhaps quarterly or annually, whereas today’s businesses may seek more agile methods for course correction. OKRs (Objectives and Key Results):  OKR is a more agile goal-setting framework  popularized by Intel and Google. It encourages organizations to set short-term Objectives (what you want to achieve) and 3-5 Key Results (measurable outcomes) per objective, typically reviewed quarterly. The philosophy of OKRs is to drive focus, alignment, and engagement through transparent and ambitious goals. Unlike the Balanced Scorecard, OKRs are often bottom-up as well as top-down  – teams and individuals set their own OKRs in alignment with company objectives, which can foster innovation and ownership. In comparison to McKinsey’s 7-S, which is a strategic planning framework, OKRs are an execution and tracking tool . OKRs shine in ensuring everyone knows the current priorities and can see measurable progress in the short term. They introduce a cadence of frequent check-ins and adaptations (often monthly or quarterly), which addresses the need for agility that the McKinsey framework might lack. However, OKRs by themselves do not provide a comprehensive strategy – they assume you have  a strategy and are a way to implement it. In fact, many companies use OKRs to push forward initiatives that might have been conceived using other frameworks. The downside of OKRs is that if they are not well-aligned to a broader strategy, an organization can end up chasing metrics that don’t add up to a coherent vision . Also, setting good OKRs requires discipline; too many objectives or poorly defined key results can lead to confusion. Where McKinsey’s framework gives you a high-level blueprint of the organization to execute strategy, OKRs give you a tactical tool to drive accountability and adaptability  in execution. They are highly complementary if used together: one provides structure, the other provides agility. To summarize the comparison, McKinsey’s 7-S framework is about ensuring internal readiness and alignment  for strategy, the BCG Matrix is about choosing the right strategic bets  in a portfolio, the Balanced Scorecard is about measuring and executing strategy across multiple performance dimensions , and OKRs are about setting and iterating on goals quickly to drive strategy forward . Each has its place, and often companies will use pieces of several frameworks. The key for business leaders is to choose the model or combination of models that best fit their organization’s needs and culture. McKinsey’s approach is comprehensive and high-credibility, but as noted, it can be rigid – which is why some firms look to more flexible frameworks like OKRs or more focused ones like BCG’s for specific purposes. (See comparison table below for an overview of these frameworks.) Framework Primary Focus Strengths Limitations McKinsey 7-S (Strategy) Holistic internal alignment for executing strategy across seven organizational elements. Comprehensive view (hard & soft factors), ensures all parts of organization support strategy, widely recognized methodology. Can be rigid and slow in dynamic environments; internally focused (ignores external factors); complex with no clear prioritization of elements. BCG Matrix Portfolio strategy – prioritizing businesses/products (market share vs. growth). Simple, visual tool for resource allocation; highlights where to invest or divest (e.g. build Stars, milk Cash Cows). Narrow scope (only considers market share & growth); may oversimplify multi-factor decisions; not an implementation guide. Balanced Scorecard Strategy implementation via performance metrics in four perspectives (Financial, Customer, Internal, Learning). Balanced view beyond financials; links strategy to specific objectives & KPIs; improves strategic alignment and monitoring across the organization. Can be complex to set up; requires cultural buy-in and data tracking; somewhat rigid structure (must fit objectives into four categories); typically top-down and less agile for rapid change. OKRs Goal-setting framework for agile execution and alignment (Objectives and Key Results). Highly flexible and adaptive; promotes focus on key priorities; transparent and engaging for teams; frequent check-ins drive agility. Not a full strategy by itself (needs overarching vision); if misaligned, teams can pursue conflicting goals; requires discipline to avoid too many or trivial OKRs. Note:  Frameworks can complement each other. For example, an organization might use McKinsey’s 7-S to restructure internally, the BCG Matrix to decide which products to invest in, the Balanced Scorecard to track strategic performance, and OKRs to drive quarterly execution. The best approach is often tailored to the organization’s specific context  rather than one-size-fits-all. The Orr Consulting Difference: A Better Alternative for Your Business Given the strengths and weaknesses of these traditional approaches, you might be thinking, Is there a better way to do strategic planning and execution?  At Orr Consulting, we believe the answer is yes. Orr Consulting offers an alternative that retains the rigor and holistic thinking of top-tier frameworks while addressing their shortcomings with greater adaptability, cost-effectiveness, and client-focused service. Our approach is intentionally designed to overcome the rigidity and impersonal nature of big consulting frameworks, providing a fresh, customized experience  for our clients – particularly those in the healthcare industry, where our specialization gives us an extra edge. Let’s examine how we differentiate ourselves and why our approach can drive superior results for your organization: Adaptability and Customization One size rarely fits all in strategic planning.  Orr Consulting prides itself on a highly adaptable methodology, tailoring every strategic plan to the unique circumstances and culture of the client. Unlike the McKinsey 7-S model which is generic and can feel formulaic, our consultants start with frameworks as guides , not gospel. We understand that every organization has its own DNA, and effective strategy must flex to fit that reality. Orr’s approach is to co-create the plan with you , adjusting tools and frameworks as needed so that the outcome is practical and feels yours , not a consultant’s template. This adaptability means we can respond to changes or new insights on the fly – we are not wedded to a rigid playbook. In fact, as a boutique consulting firm, we are inherently more agile: we can make quick adjustments without bureaucratic delays, ensuring the strategy remains relevant if conditions change mid-project. Our flexibility  in methodology stands in contrast to the “do it by the book” approach of some larger firms. The result is a strategic plan that is fully customized – addressing the nuances of your market, your organizational quirks, and the challenges that keep you up at night. This customized touch vastly improves the likelihood of successful implementation, because the plan is grounded in the real world of your business. Cost-Effectiveness and Value Engaging Orr Consulting is cost-effective , especially when compared to the astronomical fees of mega-firms like McKinsey. We offer top-tier strategic planning expertise without the overhead of a massive global organization. Yet, you get a consultant with a PhD & MBA who has been in the industry for 25+ years instead of just an MBA with little work experience. This means you invest in results , not in paying for a big firm’s "prestige." For many clients, the value equation with ORR is compelling: you receive hands-on attention from seasoned strategists at a fraction of the cost. Our lean operating model translates to competitive pricing and efficient use of resources , as there’s less bureaucracy and bloated staffing on projects. Every dollar of your budget goes further toward actual problem-solving and implementation. Moreover, because we tailor our approach, you’re not buying some elaborate analysis you don’t need – we right-size the effort to your context, which controls costs. The high costs of a McKinsey engagement can put strategic consulting out of reach for mid-sized companies or non-profits; Orr aims to democratize access to high-quality strategic planning by being budget-conscious and outcome-focused. We measure our success not by how many consultants we deploy, but by the value we create for you. By partnering with us, business leaders can achieve robust strategic plans and implementation support with a far better return on investment  than the traditional big-firm route. Client Intimacy and Personalization One of Orr Consulting’s core values is client intimacy  – we build deep, trust-based relationships with our clients. In practice, this means you get personalized attention  and a true partner in navigating your strategic challenges. Unlike large consultancies where a senior partner sells the work and a junior team delivers it, our senior experts are hands-on from start to finish. Our clients often work directly with our most experienced consultants, ensuring expert oversight and guidance  at every step. As a result, we develop a nuanced understanding of your business and stakeholders. We listen first, then advise – crafting solutions that genuinely fit your organization’s ethos and people. This level of personalization is hard to come by with bigger firms, where clients can sometimes feel like just another account. As highlighted in industry discussions, a boutique firm’s smaller client base allows for more dedicated attention and a deeper understanding of each client’s needs. We live by that principle. We don’t believe in one-size-fits-all, and we certainly won’t let you “get lost in the shuffle.” On the contrary, your priorities become our priorities . We walk alongside you in implementing changes, adapting as needed, and ensuring your team is comfortable and confident throughout the journey. This client-centric approach fosters trust and leads to strategies that are not only smart on paper, but also enthusiastically adopted by your organization. Healthcare Industry Specialization While McKinsey and other big firms spread their expertise across all industries, Orr Consulting has chosen to develop deep specialization in the healthcare sector  (along with select related industries). This focus is a game-changer for healthcare clients. The healthcare industry has its own complexities – regulatory requirements, patient-centric service models, rapidly evolving technologies, and high stakes for quality and compliance. By working extensively in this domain, our team has developed insider industry knowledge  that generalist consultants simply can’t match. We understand the subtleties of healthcare delivery, insurance systems, hospital operations, and life sciences innovation. Therefore, when we craft a strategic plan for a healthcare organization, it’s grounded in real-world insight about what works in that environment. We can anticipate challenges and opportunities unique to healthcare – from managing physician stakeholders to complying with healthcare laws – and incorporate those into the strategy seamlessly. This specialized expertise leads to more relevant and actionable strategies . A generic framework might recommend changes that look good in theory but falter in a hospital setting; our recommendations are tuned to the realities of healthcare. Even outside of healthcare, our approach is to ensure the team working with you has relevant domain experience , so they bring credibility and context to the table. Clients don’t have to spend weeks educating us on industry basics – we can dive right into higher-level strategic issues, accelerating the process and delivering value faster. In short, Orr's industry specialization, particularly in healthcare, means you get a strategy that’s not only well-crafted, but also deeply informed by what truly drives success in your field. Modern Data-Driven Techniques and Innovation Orr Consulting is a 21st-century firm  that embraces modern, data-driven techniques and innovative tools to inform strategy (not frameworks built in the 1970's). We don’t just rely on static models from decades past; we complement classic strategic frameworks with cutting-edge analytics, technology, and real-time data insights. For example, when helping a client develop a strategic plan, we might use advanced data modeling to forecast outcomes of strategic choices, or leverage big data to understand customer behavior trends. We are also adept with modern strategy execution tools – whether it’s software for tracking OKRs and KPIs, or agile project management methodologies to implement changes rapidly. Our belief is that strategy should be a living process, supported by dynamic data  and technology, not a binder on a shelf. This is a key differentiator from traditional approaches that might lean heavily on static analysis and past benchmarks. ORR’s data-driven mindset ensures that our recommendations are grounded in evidence and that we can measure impact along the way. We bring in innovative problem-solving  methods too – design thinking workshops, scenario simulation, AI-driven insights – whatever best fits the client’s context. The result for our clients is a strategic plan that is not only insightful, but also actionable and measurable. We help install the dashboards or feedback mechanisms so you can see progress in real time, a practice aligned with modern management philosophies. By harnessing new technologies and data science, we give you a strategy that’s forward-looking and resilient amid change. We essentially marry the art of strategy with the science of analytics, providing a smarter path forward. In sum, Orr Consulting offers a flexible, client-centric, and expertise-driven alternative to McKinsey’s traditional framework.  We maintain a rigorous approach to strategic planning, but we do so with greater adaptability, personalized service, deep industry insight, and cost-efficiency . Our aim is not just to produce a report, but to partner with you from strategy through execution, ensuring that the plan delivers real results. We’ve built our practice around addressing the very downsides that often frustrate leaders about big consulting engagements: we’re more agile, more affordable, and more attentive to your unique needs. For business owners and organizational leaders – especially in healthcare – who are seeking structured strategic planning without the rigidity and expense , Orr Consulting stands out as a compelling choice. We bring the best of both worlds: the structured, holistic thinking  that frameworks like McKinsey’s provide, combined with the bespoke, innovative, and intimate approach  of a boutique consultancy. The case is clear. While McKinsey’s 7-S and similar frameworks have their merits, the future belongs to strategies that are as dynamic and personalized  as the environments we operate in. Orr Consulting is ready to deliver exactly that, helping your organization craft and execute a strategic plan that achieves lasting success in today’s fast-moving world. Let’s shape a better future for your business, together.

If you are spending real money on Meta or Google, you already know the pattern. You finally get a few campaigns working CAC looks reasonable Someone says, “Great, now let’s double the budget” You increase spend, and within a few weeks: CAC climbs ROAS drops Your “hero” creative stops working Everyone starts arguing about attribution It is not that paid media cannot scale. It is that most brands try to scale the budget before they scale the system. This article walks through how I think about scaling paid media for DTC and ecommerce brands, with one goal: grow aggressively without destroying CAC. First, Be Clear: What Are You Scaling? “Scale” sounds simple, but people mean very different things when they say it. Usually it is one of these: More revenue at the same or better CAC More revenue even if CAC rises a bit, as long as profit is acceptable Faster top-line growth to hit a funding or valuation goal You should know, in numbers: Your acceptable CAC ceiling Your blended MER (marketing efficiency ratio) target How fast you are actually able to grow without breaking operations If leadership cannot answer questions like “What is our CAC ceiling by channel?” or “What MER do we need to stay healthy?”, you are not ready to scale. You are ready to clarify targets. Why “Just Double the Budget” Usually Fails Doubling spend often breaks because of a few simple forces: Auction pressure: When you spend more, you often enter more expensive auctions or push harder into weaker inventory. CPM rises and CAC follows. Audience saturation: You run out of “easy” buyers at your current targeting and creative. The next layer of customers needs more touches or different angles. Creative fatigue: The one or two winning ads get over-served. Performance drops, and you do not have a bench of tested creative ready. Measurement noise: If tracking is messy, you cannot tell if rising CAC is real, seasonal, or an attribution artifact. People panic or overreact. Scaling is not about big jumps in budget. It is about designing a system that can absorb more spend without losing discipline. Step 0: Pre-Conditions Before You Scale Before you add a single dollar, get a few basics in place. 1. Reasonable baseline performance You do not need perfect, but you need: Campaigns that are stable for at least a few weeks CAC that sits at or below your target most days A landing experience that is not obviously broken If your funnel is not working at 5,000 dollars a month, it will not magically work at 50,000. 2. Defined guardrails Write these down: Target CAC by channel Absolute CAC ceiling (the “stop” line) Target MER or ROAS range Payback period you can accept These numbers do not need to be final forever. They must exist so that “scale” has a shared definition. 3. “Good enough” tracking and reporting You do not need a perfect data warehouse. You do need: Events that fire correctly for add to cart, initiate checkout, purchase Clean naming and UTM structure A simple source-of-truth view that shows spend, revenue, CAC and MER by channel If you cannot see problems within a few days of a change, you are flying blind. Lever 1: Fix the Economics Before the Budget Most brands go straight to “spend more.” It is often smarter to make each customer more valuable first. Improve AOV (average order value) Simple tactics that often work: Bundles that make sense for how people actually use the product Tiered discounts that reward higher carts (for example: free shipping at 75 dollars, small bonus at 120 dollars) Relevant add-ons at checkout AOV is a quiet hero. If you raise AOV by 15 to 20 percent, you can often afford a higher CAC and still hit your profit goals. Lift your conversion rate You do not need a full CRO program to get basic wins. Check: Page speed, broken elements, confusing layouts Clarity of the offer and headline Trust elements above the fold (social proof, guarantees, clear returns policy) Small lifts in conversion rate have a direct impact on CAC because more of the traffic you are already paying for converts. Strengthen LTV and retention Scaling paid is much easier when you have: A post-purchase email and SMS sequence that encourages second purchases Clear paths for refills, reorders, or cross-sells Simple winback flows for lapsed customers If you know that a customer you acquire at 90 dollars CAC will generate 300 dollars of contribution margin over 12 months, your scaling decisions are very different than if they only buy once. Lever 2: Build a Creative and Testing System Budget without creative is just gasoline on a wet log. Think in angles, not just assets High-performing accounts usually have multiple angles, for example: Problem and relief Social proof and “people like me” Founder story Product tech or quality Cost or time savings Within each angle, you can have: Short video UGC style talking head Static image Product demo Carousel The goal is not dozens of random ads. It is a small number of angles that are tested and intentionally expanded. Set a basic testing cadence Even a simple rhythm helps: Each week: introduce 2 to 4 new creatives into testing Each week: retire clear losers and promote clear winners into scale campaigns Each month: review which angles actually drive revenue, not just cheap clicks This gives you a bench of creative you can lean on as you increase spend, instead of crushing the same two winners into the ground. Lever 3: Increase Budget Gradually and Watch the Right Signals Now you are ready to scale budgets. The method is not complicated, but it does require discipline. Grow in controlled steps Instead of doubling, try: Increase by 20 to 30 percent at a time Hold for 3 to 7 days Watch CAC, MER, and volume Only increase again if performance is within your guardrails On Meta, aggressive changes can reset learning. Smaller, frequent increments often work better than huge jumps. On Google, watch how changes alter your search terms and placements. Extra budget can send your ads into lower quality queries if you are not careful. Monitor a small set of core metrics Avoid dashboard overload. Focus on: CAC by channel and by key campaign Blended MER Revenue and orders per day or per week Returning customer percentage Inventory and operations signals If CAC rises but MER holds and you have strong inventory and retention, the change might be acceptable. If CAC rises and MER drops and your ops team is already strained, pull back. Channel Notes: Meta and Google Each channel has its own scaling quirks. Meta (Facebook and Instagram) Very sensitive to creative fatigue Responds well to new angles and fresh hooks Works best when you feed it broad audiences with good creative and let the system find buyers Needs clean account structure, not 40 tiny campaigns fighting each other Scaling here is often about increasing budgets on proven structures and constantly feeding them better creative. Google (search and shopping) More intent driven Performance Max is significantly outperforming search in the age of AI Incremental volume depends on how much search demand exists Scaling can mean taking more impression share on profitable keywords, adding new relevant terms, or improving Shopping feed quality Be careful not to expand into irrelevant terms just to spend more. You want more of the right searches, not more of everything. Common Scaling Traps A few patterns that hurt brands again and again. Adding new channels too fast Going from “Meta and Google are working” to “let’s add TikTok, Pinterest, YouTube, affiliates, and influencers at once” usually creates noise, not scale. Expand into new channels like this: Prove a strong base on one or two Add one new channel at a time with specific goals and a clear owner Ignoring inventory and operations Scaling paid while: Inventory is tight Fulfillment is slow Support is overwhelmed simply accelerates negative reviews and churn. Paid media can only scale what the business can actually deliver. Chasing vanity metrics High click through rates, low CPC, or a pretty ROAS screenshot are not the goal. Profit and healthy cash flow are. Tie your scaling decisions to: Contribution margin Cash needs Inventory realities Not just “what the platform dashboard says”. A Simple Example Imagine a brand that: Spends 25,000 dollars a month on Meta and Google Averages CAC of 80 dollars Has AOV around 140 dollars Has decent retention but no structured post-purchase program Instead of jumping straight to 50,000 dollars a month, a healthier plan might be: Lift AOV to 160 dollars with a few smart bundles and thresholds Clean up tracking so CAC and MER numbers are trustworthy Build a basic creative testing rhythm, 3 new ads per week Add post-purchase email and SMS to improve second purchase rate Over 6 to 8 weeks, walk media spend up by 20 to 30 percent at a time when CAC and MER are on target By the time you are at 50,000 dollars a month, you have: Better unit economics A functioning creative engine A funnel that can handle the volume That is how you scale without feeling like everything is on fire. Where a Fractional CMO Fits In Most brands do not fail to scale because they cannot push buttons in Ads Manager. They fail because no one is responsible for tying together: Strategy and revenue goals Channel mix and budgets Creative, funnel, and retention Measurement and reporting That is the role I play as a fractional CMO. A typical engagement looks like: Growth Diagnostic Call: We walk through your numbers, channels, and constraints. 90 Day Growth Roadmap: A clear plan for how to scale, in what order, with what guardrails. This includes budget ranges, creative priorities, funnel fixes, and KPI targets. Ongoing fractional CMO support: I work with your team and agencies to execute, adjust, and keep CAC and MER sane as you grow. If you are at the point where you know you want to scale, but you do not want to set your CAC on fire in the process, that is exactly the problem I help solve. Let's talk today.

If you’re in the $5–$20M revenue range, you probably don’t lack “marketing activity.” You’ve likely: Hired at least one agency (maybe several) Tried a few in-house marketers Had a founder or COO playing part-time CMO But you still have questions like: “Do we just need a better agency?” “Is it finally time to hire a full-time CMO?” “Should we bring in a fractional CMO to clean this up?” This post breaks down fractional CMO vs agency vs in-house  from the point of view of a company in that $5–$20M band—not a startup and not a big enterprise. You’ll see where each model shines, where it breaks, and what usually works best at your stage. Short Answer: Who Wins When? If you don’t want the whole breakdown, here’s the quick version: Under ~$5M: A good specialist agency  + one strong generalist in-house is usually enough. $5–$15M: A fractional CMO  directing 1–2 agencies and a small in-house team is often the sweet spot. $15–$20M and up: Either: Full-time CMO + select agencies, or A higher-commitment fractional CMO (2–3 days/week) acting as CMO while you prove the case for a full-time hire. The “wrong” setup usually shows up as one of these: Agencies doing “activities” without a real strategy A burned-out internal marketer trying to manage everything Founders stuck in the weeds of Google Ads and creative approvals Let’s break each model down. Option 1: Marketing Agency What a Good Agency Is Actually Built to Do Agencies are optimized to: Execute channels and tactics  (Ads, SEO, email, creative, social) Bring specialist skills  you won’t hire full-time yet Provide capacity : media buyers, designers, copywriters, editors, etc. They are not  usually built to: Own your P&L or margin targets Decide what markets to enter, what products to prioritize, or how to price Fix your internal data/measurement mess  end-to-end When Agencies Work Best Agencies work well when: You already have a clear positioning and strategy Your internal team can give direction and guardrails You know what success looks like and can hold them accountable In the $5–$20M range, that often looks like: A good performance agency running Meta/Google/retargeting A lifecycle or email agency owning flows and campaigns A content/SEO partner supporting you on the organic side Signal it’s working:  your agencies can point to clear performance metrics, and you can map those back to business outcomes , not just “impressions and clicks.” When Agencies Don’t Work Agencies are a poor fit when: You ask them to “own growth” without giving them control over pricing, product, or budget trade-offs You don’t have a single person internally who can synthesize  the advice from multiple agencies and say, “Here’s the plan” You’re changing direction every month—new offers, new audiences, new “urgent ideas” from the leadership team In other words, agencies struggle when there is no CMO-level owner  they can plug into. Option 2: In-House CMO or VP of Marketing What You Get With a Full-Time CMO A true CMO or senior VP of Marketing is designed to: Own strategy, budget, and team Report directly to the CEO and sit on the leadership team Make trade-offs  across brand, performance, product marketing, and sales enablement Hire and manage agencies and internal staff Done well, your CMO becomes the “single owner” of: “What are our growth targets this year?” “What’s the plan to hit them?” “Who is doing what, and how will we measure it?” When a Full-Time CMO Makes Sense For most $5–$20M companies, a full-time CMO usually makes sense when: You are committed to multi-year growth  and already investing heavily in marketing You’re ready to build an internal team  (not just one or two hires) You can afford a CMO-level salary, bonus, and equity—and you have the scope of work  to keep them engaged If you’re at the higher end of this band (say $15–$20M+), or you’re planning aggressive expansion (new markets, new product lines), this can be a good move. Where In-House Can Go Wrong Common issues: You hire too junior  (“Head of Marketing” who’s really a senior manager) and expect them to act as CMO You hire someone strong in one area  (e.g., brand or performance) and expect them to be great at everything You don’t give them the budget or authority  to change things, but still hold them responsible for revenue Result: your CMO feels like a “powerful intern” and eventually you’re both frustrated. In many $5–$10M firms, it’s simply too early  for a full-time CMO, and what you really need is fractional strategic leadership  plus execution support. Option 3: Fractional CMO What a Fractional CMO Actually Does A fractional CMO (done well) gives you: Senior-level strategy and leadership Budget planning  and channel mix decisions Oversight of agencies and internal team KPIs, dashboards, and decision frameworks … without the full-time cost of a C-suite hire. Practically, that can look like: Weekly or bi-weekly strategy sessions Quarterly planning and 90-day roadmaps Leadership on campaign priorities, testing plans, and resourcing Coordination between your agencies, in-house people, and leadership team Most importantly, a fractional CMO is accountable for making everything add up : “Here’s your revenue target, here’s what we’re spending, and here’s the mix we’re using to get there.” When a Fractional CMO Works Best Fractional CMO is usually the best fit when: You’re in that $5–$20M  band with real revenue and real complexity You have some mix of agencies and internal staff , but no one truly leading them The CEO or founder is still making a lot of marketing calls but doesn’t want to live in Google Ads or approvals forever You know something is off—CAC too high, tracking broken, lots of activity but unclear ROI—and you need a grown-up, data-driven view This model is especially strong if: You sell DTC/ecommerce and/or healthcare / tech services Channels are already in motion (Meta, Google, email, content) but feel fragmented You want decision support , not just more tactics Where Fractional CMOs Are Not a Fit A fractional CMO is not ideal if: You’re looking for a do-everything execution arm  (they should lead, not be your only implementer) You’re pre-product-market-fit and still changing the core offer every few weeks You have zero internal or external marketing resources—no agency, no marketer, no coordinator In those cases, you probably need either: A specialist agency  first, or A strong marketing manager  plus freelancers—then a fractional CMO once there’s more to orchestrate. How to Choose: A Simple Decision Framework Here’s a practical way to think about it if you’re in the $5–$20M range. Question 1: Who owns the growth number? “No one really does” →  You likely need a fractional CMO  or CMO-level leader. “Our agency kind of does” →  You probably need someone internal (fractional or full-time) to own the strategy and hold agencies accountable. “A senior marketing leader already does, and it’s working” →  You’re closer to a full-time CMO / VP model. Question 2: What’s broken right now? “We don’t have a strategy, everything is reactive” → Start with fractional CMO  to build a strategy and 90-day roadmap. “We have a strategy but poor execution” → You may need better agencies or in-house talent , under the guidance of a fractional or full-time CMO. “The data is a mess; we don’t trust our numbers” → You need CMO-level thinking plus analytics cleanup —often a project-based engagement leading into fractional. Question 3: What can you realistically invest? Quick rule of thumb for many companies in this band: Specialist agencies:  5–15% of revenue (depending on growth goals) Fractional CMO:  typically a few days per month or per week, often less than  the fully loaded cost of a full-time senior hire Full-time CMO:  salary + bonus + benefits + equity; think in the high five or low six figures  annually plus team and agency costs Ask yourself: “Would I rather spend this full-time CMO budget on a fractional CMO + 1–2 excellent agencies + 1–2 focused internal hires?” In many $5–$15M businesses, the answer is yes—at least for the next 1–3 years. Example: A $10M Brand With “Too Many Pieces” Here’s a typical pattern I see: Revenue: ~$10M Channels: Meta, Google, email, some SEO content, maybe affiliates Team: One internal “Head of Marketing” who’s actually doing execution 1–2 agencies (media + email, maybe PR) Problems: CAC creeping up Inconsistent creative testing Messy tracking (GA4 doesn’t match Ads Manager, attribution fights) Leadership unsure where to invest the next $500K In that situation, the best path is usually: Bring in a fractional CMO Run a fast diagnostic : what’s working, what’s broken, what are the margins? Build a 90-day growth roadmap : channel mix, budgets, KPI targets Clean up measurement and reporting  so the CEO can see what’s happening Keep agencies that are performing, replace or refocus the rest Clarify the internal role(s): who does what, and what will we hire next? Only after that foundation is in place does a full-time CMO hire make sense—and at that point, you’re hiring into a much cleaner, more attractive environment. So… Which Should You Choose? If you’re a $5–$20M company wondering where to go next: If you have no strategy , just “random acts of marketing,” and everyone is guessing:→ Start with a fractional CMO  to set the strategy and fix the foundation. If you have a solid CMO/VP already  but struggle with execution bandwidth:→ Keep them, and invest in specialist agencies  and better internal talent. If you’re at the top end of this range  and already see the need for a full marketing org:→ A fractional CMO can bridge  you into a full-time CMO hire and help you define the role, team, and budget. How I Work With $5–$20M Brands This is exactly the space I live in: companies that are beyond startup mode, but not yet big enough to justify a full marketing department and C-suite stack. Typically, an engagement looks like: Growth Diagnostic Call We walk through your current numbers, channels, and goals. 90-Day Growth Roadmap A clear, prioritized plan: what to do first, where to invest, what to pause. Fractional CMO Support Ongoing leadership to align your team, agencies, and budget around the plan. If you’re trying to decide between agency, fractional CMO, and in-house , we can talk it through with your actual numbers and constraints. Let's talk today.

Every marketing conversation eventually hits the same question: “Which social channels should we actually be on?” Underneath that is the real question: “Where are our people spending time, given their age, role, and industry?” Platform choice is not random, and it is not about whatever is trending this week. In 2026, the right social mix usually comes down to three things: Age and life stage Role and income Industry norms and expectations Once you understand those three, the social landscape starts to make a lot more sense. The big picture: how to think about the major platforms You can think of the main social platforms as different rooms in the same house. YouTube and Facebook  are the big common areas. Almost everyone walks through them at some point, across age groups and industries. Instagram and TikTok  are the stylish, high-energy rooms where Gen Z and younger Millennials hang out and discover what is new. LinkedIn  is the boardroom. If there are B2B decision-makers involved, they are there. Pinterest, Snapchat, and Reddit  are more like specialty rooms. People do not live there all day, but for certain interests and subcultures they are exactly where you need to be. Once you know who you are targeting and what job your content needs to do, you can line that up against the strengths of each platform. Channel snapshot: who belongs where Here is a high level map you can drop straight into your planning. Channel Strongest demographics Best-fit industries / verticals When to prioritize it Facebook Adults 25 to 64, with strong usage into 50 plus and seniors. Heavy female lean. Local services, multi-location healthcare, senior living, community organizations, retail, education, nonprofits. When you need wide age coverage, local reach, and family or community decision-making. Very good for appointment-driven businesses. Instagram Primarily under 45, especially 18 to 34. Consumer products, wellness, beauty, fitness, travel, hospitality, lifestyle healthcare, employer branding. When your offer is highly visual and you need discovery, social proof, and younger to mid-career buyers. TikTok Heavily Gen Z and young Millennials. Youth and trend-driven brands, fashion, beauty, quick-service restaurants, CPG, entertainment, higher-ed, some mental health and wellness. When you need fast awareness with under-35 audiences and can produce native, short-form video that feels organic. LinkedIn Working-age professionals, especially higher earners, managers, executives, and business decision-makers. B2B SaaS, professional services, healthcare B2B, MedTech, staffing, financial services, professional education. When you sell into organizations or licensed professionals and need to reach buying committees and leadership. YouTube Truly cross-generational; widely used from teens through seniors. Largest streaming platform. Almost every industry: B2B, healthcare, education, consumer, complex products that need explanation. Always. Youtube is a non-negotiable now. Use especially when you need searchable, durable video content and deeper education, not just quick hits. Pinterest Strong with women 25 to 44 and planners of all ages. Home, decor, DIY, parenting, weddings, events, recipes, wellness, fashion, some elective healthcare. When your buyer is planning a project or life moment and wants to save ideas, not just scroll. Snapchat Gen Z and younger Millennials. Youth brands, events, campus campaigns, entertainment, quick-service restaurants. As a supplement when 13 to 29 year olds are core and you want frequency and playful creative. Reddit Primarily 18 to 34, very interest-based. Tech, gaming, finance, health niches, DTC brands with strong communities. When your audience gathers in specific subcultures and you can speak the language of that community. Use this as your mental map. Then refine by age group and industry. Gen Z and young Millennials: roughly 13 to 29 For younger audiences, social is not just media. It is culture, search, and entertainment in one feed. Their attention stacks heavily in short-form video and visual platforms. For consumer and e-commerce brands  that sell fashion, beauty, food, gadgets, accessories or lifestyle products, TikTok and Instagram sit at the front of the line. This is where new products, aesthetics and micro-trends break first. In practice, a lot of brands win by using TikTok and Instagram Reels to generate demand and social proof, then capturing buyers who are ready to act through search, Shopping campaigns and retargeting. For education and higher-ed , the same platforms matter, but the story changes a bit. TikTok, Instagram and YouTube become your core mix for campus life, outcomes and student stories. Short vertical videos showcase real students and “day in the life” content, while longer info sessions, program overviews and Q and A recordings live on YouTube and show up in search. For youth-focused healthcare and wellness , TikTok, Instagram and YouTube are especially important. Young adults are constantly asking “Is this normal?” in their heads and often in the comments. Content that normalizes care, demystifies processes and introduces approachable providers travels well. Around certain conditions, there is also meaningful conversation on Reddit which can be valuable for both listening and very targeted campaigns. When you are recruiting for jobs and early-career roles , do not assume LinkedIn alone will carry the load. Young candidates often meet employers first on TikTok, Instagram, YouTube and sometimes Snapchat. They form an emotional impression there. LinkedIn then becomes the place they go when they are ready to formalize the process and click Apply. Millennials and Gen X: roughly 30 to 49 This group is juggling careers, kids, mortgages, aging parents and major purchases. They are very active online, but more selective about where they spend real attention. For general consumer and DTC  brands selling into this age band, Facebook, Instagram and YouTube are usually the workhorses. Facebook remains a core daily habit for many people in their thirties and forties, especially parents and community-minded users. Instagram brings the aspirational, lifestyle-driven discovery piece. YouTube quietly does the heavy lifting for researching bigger purchases, from fitness equipment and furniture to financial products and home services. For healthcare providers and systems , Facebook and YouTube are almost always non-negotiable. Facebook is ideal for promoting screenings, primary care, pediatrics, women’s health, and specialty services, because it reaches both patients and the family members who often make decisions. YouTube is where you win trust with explainer videos, procedure walk-throughs, doctor introductions and patient stories that people can watch on their own schedule before they ever call. In professional services and B2B , LinkedIn plus search usually form the backbone for this age group. Decision-makers in their thirties and forties are comfortable across multiple platforms, but they treat LinkedIn as the professional layer where industry content, hiring and buying decisions live. Once that layer is in place, YouTube and even Instagram can support thought leadership, employer branding and behind-the-scenes culture. For parents and planners  in this band, Facebook, Instagram and Pinterest often work together. Parents go to Facebook for school and community groups, Instagram for quick ideas and creator content, and Pinterest when they are actively planning a birthday party, kitchen update, holiday season or family trip and want to save and organize ideas. Fifty plus and seniors Older adults are much more active on social than most marketers assume. They use it to stay connected to family, follow interests and research health and financial decisions. For healthcare, senior living and financial services , Facebook and YouTube are the most important platforms. Facebook is where they see updates from children and grandchildren, join interest and support groups, and notice local events and services. It is a very natural place to introduce campaigns about screenings, chronic disease management, retirement planning and living options. YouTube then serves as the deeper research layer for learning about diagnoses, treatments, investment strategies and community tours. Caregivers are an important part of this picture. Adult children in their thirties, forties and fifties will often encounter the same campaigns on Facebook, YouTube and in search, then do the work of scheduling or moving the process forward for a parent. For travel, hobbies and lifestyle  brands serving active older adults, Facebook, YouTube and sometimes Pinterest make a strong mix. Long-form YouTube videos about RV life, long cruises, national parks or specific hobbies often perform better here than trying to force a TikTok presence if it does not naturally fit the brand or audience. B2B and professional audiences Buying committees do not behave like individual retail customers, even when the same people have both roles. When the purchase involves a company budget, compliance and risk, the social mix shifts. In most B2B scenarios, the center of gravity is LinkedIn, search and email, with YouTube playing a key supporting role. LinkedIn is where you can target by industry, company size, job title and seniority, and where people expect to see professional content. Search is how they find you when a specific problem or project is active. YouTube is where you can host demos, webinars, product tours and conference talks that live for a long time and keep working. The rest of the ecosystem depends on the category: In SaaS and tech , use LinkedIn for leads and Reddits matter for developers, engineers and early adopters. They use those communities to talk about tools, best practices and frustrations in a candid way. In healthcare B2B and MedTech , LinkedIn and YouTube are usually more valuable than consumer social for reaching administrators, clinicians and practice owners. Long-form educational content and case studies matter more than short viral clips. In professional education and certificates , LinkedIn and YouTube are key for older learners, while Instagram and TikTok matter more when you are targeting students and early-career professionals. Across all of these, the key is to respect the professional context. The same person may watch funny content on TikTok at night and still expect a very different tone from you on LinkedIn during work hours. Turning the map into a real strategy Once you have this fit map in your head, choosing channels becomes less about “being everywhere” and more about sequencing. For any campaign, ask yourself three simple questions: Who is the primary decision-maker by age and role? Which two or three platforms are a normal, daily habit for that person? What job do you need your content to do there: discovery, education, urgency, trust, or community? Lead with the one or two platforms that best match that audience and job combination, then let the others play supporting roles. That is how you keep social focused, measurable and aligned with how people actually live online in 2026. Want a channel map built around your  customers? If you’re staring at a long list of channels and wondering where to place real bets, Orr Consulting can help you turn this fit map into a concrete plan: which platforms to prioritize, how much to invest, and what content belongs where for your specific audience and industry. From healthcare and professional services to DTC and digital-first brands, we build social and paid strategies that line up with real business goals—not just impressions and likes. If you’re ready to tighten up your 2026 channel mix, reach out to Orr Consulting to start the conversation.

Last reviewed:  October 31, 2025 Maintainer: Orr Consulting TL;DR -One page = one literal buyer question. -Write concrete, citable sentences and include one piece of proof (tiny table, simple calculation, or recognized standard). -Show freshness (“Last reviewed” + mini update log) and link to the next best question. Search behavior is shifting from scrolling links to accepting synthesized answers. Nearly 60% of Google searches end without a click to any website , and when AI Overviews  appear, clicks to top results drop ~35%  on average. At the same time, AI chat/search tools already capture ~5–6% of U.S. desktop search traffic  and rising. If pages aren’t written to be answer-ready (AEO) , they’re invisible on the growing share of queries where users get the answer without ever visiting a site. AI summaries also appear most frequently on longer, many-word queries—the very queries that represent serious intent. In this environment, being the answer  often matters more than being the link . That being said, how do you stay visible to consumers now? Answer Engine Optimization (AEO)  focuses on making pages safe for models to quote and easy for humans to trust. The priority isn’t volume; it’s clarity, evidence, and visible maintenance . If you optimize your site for AI, you will be seen. This blog is written for AI/AEO best practices. It does seem robotic because although helpful for you, AEO assumes the robot is the primary reader and you are reading the answer on through AI. It may hurt you to write this way if you value good writing, but ignore these steps and you will be ignored. Why do AI answers change what should be published? Traditional SEO rewarded breadth and a steady publishing cadence. AEO rewards tight intent focus  and low-ambiguity language  because answer engines assemble responses from sources that make them least likely to be wrong. In practice, that means: One page that resolves one question —phrased exactly as a buyer would ask it. Concrete, bounded sentences  that can be lifted without re-interpreting. Portable proof —small tables, simple math with inputs/units, or recognized expectations. Freshness signals —a visible review date and a short change log. The outcome is paradoxical: drier pages often convert better, because they address what people actually asked and give them enough confidence to act. How should D2C and B2B pages differ? D2C  questions are fast and tactile— “Do these run true to size?” “How do I clean this?” “What’s the return window?”  Pages should be short, visual, and concrete: sizing tables, 3-step care, return timelines in days. B2B  questions are procedural and risk-weighted— “What’s the fastest pilot that won’t disrupt the team?” “What metrics define success?”  Pages should be structured and defensible: definitions, staged timelines, role expectations, and a small time/cost calculation. Both benefit from the same core: answer-shaped content that is specific, defensible, and easy to quote. What does an Answer Page look like? An Answer Page  is the post that deserves to exist even if nothing else is published. It remains narrative—not a chore list—but it’s formatted so models can reuse lines safely. Workhorse structure H1 = the exact question. Opening paragraph (60–120 words)  that gives the answer first, plainly. “What’s really going on”  to clear up the main trade-off or misconception. A short, narrative walkthrough  of what to do and what to avoid (use subheads instead of long bullet chains). One piece of proof  that travels (tiny table, calculation with units, or recognized expectation). A gentle CTA  that points to the next step. What sentences do answer engines actually reuse? Answer engines prefer specific, falsifiable, bounded  lines. A reliable pattern is: Rule-of-thumb  (generally true) Constraint  (where it doesn’t apply) Next action  (what to do now) D2C example (apparel sizing): “Choose your usual size when waist and hip land in the same chart column (rule-of-thumb). If hip measures one size higher, select that size (constraint) and use the corset seams or belt to cinch the waist (next action).” B2B example (software pilot): “Scope a 2-week pilot for one team (rule-of-thumb). If data models are shared across departments, keep the pilot read-only (constraint) and evaluate on two metrics: time-to-first insight and tickets per user (next action).” Short, literal lines are safer to quote and faster to understand. What proof do AI answers prefer? Evidence doesn’t need to be elaborate; it needs to be portable . External expectation/standard  (e.g., shipping SLAs, onboarding stages many buyers recognize). Calculation  with inputs and units. Observed data  (anonymized before/after or a tiny table). Expert procedure  (a recommended sequence with rationale). B2B pilot cost (tiny table) Role Hours/Week Weeks Rate Cost Analyst 6 2 $95/h $1,140 Champion 3 2 $130/h $780 Subtotal — — — $1,920 Ad-hoc support est. — — — ≈ $550 Estimated pilot labor — — — ≈ $2,470 D2C sizing logic (2-row table) Measurements align? Choice Why Waist & hip in same column Usual size Patterned for shape; 4-way stretch adds comfort Hip one size higher Size up Cinch waist with corset seams/belt One clean calc or tiny table usually outperforms paragraphs of marketing language. How to format for parsing without sounding robotic Use literal subheads  that mirror real questions: “What’s the timeline?” “What if I’m between sizes?” Keep sentences short  (roughly 14–18 words) with one idea each. Write numbers with units  (“7–10 days,” not “about a week”). Define terms where they appear. End with three specific FAQs  that support or constrain the main answer. This isn’t keyword stuffing. It’s risk reduction for readers and answer engines alike. How should freshness be shown without a content treadmill? AEO rewards visible maintenance , not constant publishing: Place a “Last reviewed”  line near the top (included above). Maintain a mini update log  at the bottom (“Oct 2025 — added pilot table; clarified sizing logic”). Time-bound statements that may change: “As of October 2025…” Rotate one proof every 60–90 days (swap a table, refresh a calc, update a stat). Freshness is about traceability, not word count. How should internal links be used? Respect the next best question —not a generic page. From a sizing page: link to “How to measure at home in 60 seconds” and “What’s the return policy if it doesn’t fit?” From a pilot page: link to “Pilot success metrics” and “Post-pilot implementation timeline.” This forms a quotable cluster —a small set of pages that reinforce each other’s clarity. How is success measured when “AI citations” aren’t visible? There’s no perfect AEO metric; use directional signals that stack: Branded search trend  after publication (4-week moving average). Query matches  that mirror subheads (especially many-word queries). Assisted conversions  where an Answer Page appears in the path. Support deflection  (fewer repetitive tickets, faster time-to-answer). Session quality  (scroll depth, time on page). Sales call quality  for B2B (less time spent on basics; faster alignment). Return/exchange mix  for D2C (better first-try fit after sizing content updates). Example: D2C narrative (sizing) Do these run true to size? Most shoppers should order their usual size. When the hip and waist measurements land in different chart columns, choose the larger size and use the built-in corset seams or belt to shape the waist. The fabric flexes in four directions for comfort, while the patterning is cut for a defined silhouette—measuring at the fullest hip and narrowest waist prevents guesswork. Exchanges are straightforward: 30 days from delivery; most sizes restock within 7–10 days. A two-row logic table below turns the process into “Measure → Compare → Choose,” making the decision quick and predictable. Example: B2B narrative (pilot) What’s the fastest way to pilot without disrupting the team? A solid pilot proves value in two weeks without touching production systems. Start with one willing team, read-only data access, and two success signals: time-to-first insight and tickets per user. When data models are shared across departments, keep tests in a sandbox and export results as CSV. Plan for about six analyst hours and three champion hours per week; typical rates place labor near $2,470 for the pilot window. If both success signals clear the bar, schedule a 30-minute go/no-go and expand to two teams for another two weeks. FAQs Is AEO replacing SEO or complementing it? AEO complements SEO. It prioritizes answer-shaped pages that win longer, many-word queries where AI summaries frequently appear, while standard SEO hygiene (technical health, speed, crawlability) still matters. How many Answer Pages are enough to see impact? Start with 3–6  high-intent pages. Expect directional signals—query matches, assisted conversions, support deflection—within 2–6 weeks , then strengthen the proof on the page drawing the most engagement. Should schema be added? Use FAQ schema only if the on-page FAQs are real and specific. How To schema fits only when a discrete process section exists. Accuracy and alignment with visible text matter more than adding every possible tag. Related Blogs Optimize for visual search behaviors How to Avoid Wasting $50,000+ on Inefficient Marketing: Why You Need Traditional Marketing Research Beyond Pretty Charts: Why Most Marketing Teams Are Missing the Analytics Edge Update log Oct 31, 2025 —  Added pilot cost table and D2C sizing logic; tightened subheads to literal questions; expanded FAQs.

I was recently cited in Forbes  about the Cracker Barrel logo debacle. an episode that, to me, wasn’t really about typography at all, but a misread of consumer psychology. If you’d like the context, here’s the piece: . Zooming out, I think one of the many headwinds for heritage brands like Cracker Barrel is the behavior shift of the Ozempic generation: impulse is falling. And when impulse falls, demand doesn’t disappear, it reallocates. Crucially, this stretches far beyond food. You can see it in nightlife, beauty, fitness, travel, streaming, and even the software people keep (or cancel). There’s a quiet change happening in how people want  things. GLP-1 drugs like Ozempic, Wegovy, and Zepbound are turning down the volume on cravings, and the ripple is not confined to the grocery aisle. It touches the kinds of experiences people choose, the rituals they keep, and the purchases they justify. This isn’t a diet story. It’s a reallocation of desire. I call the shift the Desire Dividend  and the Desire Tax . The Dividend is the time, money, and mental energy people get back when reflex buying fades—and they redirect it toward things that make life feel better on purpose. The Tax is the drag on categories built on reflex and excess. Both forces are already in motion, and they will shape your plan whether you’re in CPG, hospitality, apparel, wellness, entertainment, or SaaS. In this article, I’ll map what that means for positioning and for your funnel in a low-impulse world—how to prove outcomes faster, lower setup effort, and win deliberate decisions without shouting. Beyond Food: Desire Is Reallocating Here is the big unlock. When cravings and impulse quiet, people do not just buy fewer snacks. They redesign their days. Late nights give way to early mornings, volume gives way to ritual, and the purchases that used to prop up impulse now migrate to things that make life feel better on purpose. Think of this as a portfolio shift in how consumers create reward and identity. You can already see it outside the pantry. Bars are filling more seats with zero-proof programs and early evening socials. Beauty shoppers are channeling the same “treat myself” energy into skin barrier care and hair health because progress they can see in the mirror beats empty calories at midnight. Strength training and recovery routines edge out late takeout. Sleep moves from an afterthought to a goal you can measure, which pulls in wearables, light alarms, magnesium, weighted blankets, and calmer mornings. Even travel gets re-edited. People trade club crawls for wellness weekends and sunrise hiking itineraries, then justify a premium hotel with gym and spa access because the spend supports how they want to feel, not how late they stayed out. Entertainment and software shift too. The endless scroll feels less rewarding when your mornings matter, so short formats with purpose win. Apps that help you keep a streak, summarize progress, or make value visible each week earn their subscription. The question consumers ask becomes simple. Does this help me feel better or do better today? If yes, keep it. If not, cancel or downshift. The strategic “aha” is to stop optimizing for impulse and start designing for rituals. Mornings are the new prime time. The first four hours after waking have become the most defensible real estate in a person’s day. Brands that anchor themselves there grow while others fight for whatever is left at 11 p.m. If you sell food, that means portion-smart products that feel satisfying, not smaller. If you sell hospitality, it looks like early check-in, sunlight, steps, and social experiences that do not require alcohol to feel special. If you sell beauty, you win by bundling realistic AM/PM routines and celebrating maintenance as a milestone, not perfection. If you sell fitness or apparel, you sell the system, not the single item: plan, gear, coach, recovery, repeat. If you sell software, you earn the home screen by turning daily effort into a simple progress receipt. This perspective changes creative and offer design. Show mornings people are proud of. Show energy they can feel by lunch. Show smaller portions that look intentional and satisfying, not apologetic. Replace “one more round” with rituals that are social and sensory without hinging on alcohol. Move your launches and your messages earlier in the day, then watch engagement rise before 9 a.m. Treat portion pride, sleep consistency, and habit streaks as outcomes worth talking about. In other words, speak to the new source of status: consistency over excess. Measurement follows naturally. Instead of chasing last-click sales from late-night ads, track basket mix, portion satisfaction after the first week, non-alcohol attach rates to social experiences, morning session usage for apps, and repeat behavior at 30 and 90 days. Build your lightweight mix model to see how these new rituals displace old ones. When you see substitution, lean in. When you do not, adjust the ritual you are selling, not just the media that promotes it. If you remember only one line, make it this. When desire becomes quieter, ritual becomes the product. Design for the first four hours, package maintenance as progress, make value visible every week, and your brand will collect the Desire Dividend while others keep paying the Tax. When Impulse Falls: A Theory of Quiet Choice (and a New Funnel) Think of impulse as the “amplifier” in your market. When the amplifier is loud, scarcity banners, surprise drops, sugar-high promos, and last-click nudges work. When the amplifier turns down across the board, the whole decision process reorganizes. People don’t stop buying; they buy more deliberately . That single shift breaks the traditional funnel and demands a different one. Here’s the model. The three gates of a quieter buyer When impulsivity drops, every purchase travels through three cognitive gates—often in minutes, sometimes over days: Relevance Gate (Do I even need this?) Interruption loses power. Discovery shifts toward intent and utility. Content, tools, and comparisons outperform hype because buyers start by filtering, not chasing. Proof Gate (Will it do what it says?) With less appetite for risk, buyers demand outcome evidence, not adjectives. Reviews still matter, but quantified before/after, transparent comparisons, and clear guarantees matter more. Setup Gate (What will it cost me to start?) When impulse is low, micro-frictions feel bigger. Anything that looks like effort—confusing pricing, hidden fees, long onboarding—stops momentum. “Set-up cost” is now part of price. If you can’t pass all three gates, urgency won’t save you. You need a funnel built to earn  the decision, not rush it. The new funnel: Signal → Proof → Setup → Receipt → Renewal Replace the old Awareness → Consideration → Conversion ladder with a loop that makes sense for quieter choice: Signal (be findable, not shouty): Lead with useful signals buyers are already seeking—explainers, calculators, checklists, side-by-side comparisons. Your ad’s job is to route to usefulness, not adrenaline. Proof (make outcomes obvious): Swap claims for receipts. Show the result your product creates and the conditions under which it works. Name what’s not  included. Confidence rises when ambiguity falls. Setup (remove the drag): Collapse the first mile: guided onboarding, plain-English pricing, starter bundles that solve the whole job, not just sell an item. The first use should feel inevitable. Receipt (show the win quickly): Within days, feed back an outcome receipt —a simple, credible proof the choice paid off (time saved, waste reduced, progress made). When people can see value, they keep going. Renewal (earn the next quiet yes): Renewal should not require fireworks. It should feel like continuing a good decision: predictable value, transparent options, and a path to “enough,” not endless upsell. What stops working—and what replaces it Loses power:  flash sales, countdown timers, bait-and-switch bundles, surprise fees, maximalist feature lists. Gains power:  transparent comparisons, risk reversals, first-use concierge, smaller “right-size” packages, clear end-states (“this is what good looks like”). Strategy “aha”: Optimize for deliberation , not dopamine Your competitive advantage becomes credibility per second —how quickly a prospect can verify that you’re relevant, reliable, and easy to start with. That reframes core decisions: Messaging:  from “why we’re exciting” to “how we reduce your total cost to succeed.” Pricing:  from tricks and tiers to price logic  that maps clearly to outcomes and setup effort. Product:  from feature velocity to first-mile excellence  (the shortest path to a visible win). Creative:  from high-arousal hooks to clarity anchors  (one job, one payoff, one proof). Media:  from interruption-heavy blitzes to intent capture + proof distribution  (search, comparison, credible creators, owned tools). Metrics for a low-impulse world If you change the funnel but measure the old game, you’ll think it failed. Track: Proof Consumption Rate:  % of prospects who view a comparison/receipt asset before purchase. First-Mile Time:  minutes from signup to first verified win. Shorten it, win more. Friction Abandonment:  drop-offs tied to price opacity, forms, or onboarding steps. Renewal Without Incentive:  continuation at standard pricing—true loyalty, not bribed loyalty. Outcome NPS:  satisfaction tied to the specific outcome promised (not a generic “would you recommend”). The bottom line When impulse recedes, trust and effort  dominate the buying equation. Funnels designed to spike emotion will underperform; funnels designed to lower uncertainty and setup cost  will compound. Build for the three gates, ship receipts early, and you won’t need to shout. Quiet confidence will convert. The Deliberation Advantage: A Simple Model to Re-Engineer Your Funnel When impulse drops, the winners aren’t the loudest—they’re the brands that make deliberation  painless. You can quantify that edge with one practical idea: Deliberation Advantage Index (DAI) = (Proof Density × Outcome Velocity) ÷ Setup Friction Proof Density (PD):  How much credible, decision-ready evidence a prospect encounters in the first 90 seconds. Think side-by-sides, outcome receipts, clear price logic, approvals. Score 0–5. Outcome Velocity (OV):  How fast a new customer experiences a visible win. Measure in days or minutes, then normalize 0–5 (faster = higher). Setup Friction (SFI):  The cognitive + operational effort to start (forms, pricing opacity, integration, shipping, social anxiety). Score 1–5 (lower friction = lower divisor). Read it at a glance: DAI < 1.0 → You’re impulse-dependent DAI 1.0–2.0 → Transitional; some proof, some drag. DAI > 2.0 → Quiet-market advantaged; your funnel earns the yes without theatrics. How to use DAI in practice (21-day sprint) Week 1 — Measure the quiet truth Run a 10-lead “ Silence Test ”: no countdown timers, no discounts—just your current funnel. Time the first visible win  for each user (OV) and tally how many decision assets they naturally consume (PD). Map every pause or backtrack (SFI). You’ll see where deliberation stalls. Week 2 — Double proof, halve friction Replace adjectives with receipts: publish one side-by-side with trade-offs, one outcome timeline, and a 3-line price-logic note. In parallel, collapse the first mile: prefilled forms, starter bundles that complete the job, one scheduling step instead of three. Week 3 — Make value visible Ship a first-week outcome receipt  (email or in-app card) that quantifies the win—minutes saved, waste reduced, progress made—and sets “what good looks like next.” Re-score PD, OV, and SFI. Your DAI should climb. Why this is different from “optimize the funnel” Traditional optimization chases micro-conversions inside a hype loop. DAI reframes the job : increase proof per second, accelerate the first real win, and delete avoidable effort. In a low-impulse world, those three moves compound. Discounts become optional; trust does the heavy lifting. Budget math (the strategic aha) Reallocate from Adrenaline Spend  (urgency promos, blitzes) to Assurance Spend  (decision assets, first-mile ops, outcome telemetry). A common first shift is 60/40 toward Assurance  for a quarter. Most brands see CAC stabilize while retention and referral lift, because a higher DAI produces quieter but stronger yeses. If Impulse Blips Back: Build a Dual-Speed Funnel One gap to close before we wrap: resilience. Impulse will ebb and flow with seasons, headlines, and paychecks. Your funnel should run in two speeds without reinventing itself. In quiet periods, you lead with deliberation assets that pass the three gates: relevance, proof, setup. When impulse ticks up, you don’t swap strategy, you wrap  those same assets with time-bound reasons to act. The product remains a clear choice with visible outcomes; the wrapper adds timing. This keeps you conversion-ready in spikes without training your audience to wait for fireworks. When impulse falls, buyers don’t stop buying; they buy with intention. Funnels built for adrenaline stall because countdowns and hype no longer carry weak value across the line. The winners make deliberation  easy: they surface relevance fast, prove outcomes plainly, and remove setup effort so the first win arrives quickly. That is the new ladder: Signal, Proof, Setup, Receipt, Renewal. Use the Deliberation Advantage Index to score where you stand, then reallocate budget from noise to assets that raise proof density, increase outcome velocity, and cut friction. It applies far beyond food. You will see it in alcohol and nightlife, beauty, fitness, travel, software, and services—anywhere people replace reflex with ritual. Build for quiet choice now and you will still be strong when the market gets loud again. Work with Orr Consulting Ready to rebuild your funnel for quiet choice? I lead fractional CMO sprints that replace hype with proof, speed the first win, and remove setup friction. In 30 days you get a decision path audit, two proof assets, a first mile fix, an outcome receipt that makes value visible, and a 90-day test plan your team can run. Let’s map your before and after.  Book a 30-minute working session with Orr Consulting.