Content strategy
Deciding what to publish, and in what order.
Most content programmes fail at the planning stage rather than the writing stage. Deciding what to publish, in what order, and how the pages relate to each other matters more than how well any single article is written.
How do you decide what content to write for SEO?
You start from the questions your customers actually ask, not from a keyword tool's volume column. Those questions get grouped into clusters, each with one hub page that owns the topic and several supporting pages that answer a single question each, all linked to one another.
Order is decided by commercial value and by how hard each cluster is to win, so the pages closest to a buying decision get built first and the broader educational pages come after.
The most important discipline is restraint. A site with twenty genuinely useful pages outperforms one with two hundred thin ones, and thin pages actively harm the rest of the site by competing with it.
Topics, not keywords
The old approach was one page per keyword. It produced sites with forty near-identical pages that competed with each other, and search engines got good at ignoring them. The approach that works now is one page per genuine question or decision, organised into topics.
A cluster is a hub page that covers a subject properly, plus supporting pages that each answer one specific question within it, all linked together. The hub demonstrates that you cover the subject. The supporting pages capture the specific searches and give the hub something to link to.
This matters more now than it did, because a page that only half answers something is unlikely to be used by anything. Search engines have plenty of alternatives, and AI systems assembling an answer will use the source that actually resolves the question.
The corollary is uncomfortable for anyone selling volume: publishing more is often worse. Google's spam policies specifically name generating many pages primarily to manipulate rankings, and thin pages dilute a site regardless of how they were produced.
How a content plan is actually built
The research stage is where the value is. The writing is the easy part once the plan is right.
Collect the real questions
From the people who answer your phone, from your sales conversations, from your review replies, from what people type into your site search, and from the questions search engines surface alongside your category. The best sources are internal and free, and almost nobody uses them.
Group them into topics
Questions that a single page could answer well belong together. Questions that pull in different directions need separate pages. This grouping decides the site structure, so it is worth doing carefully rather than deriving it from a spreadsheet of keywords.
Check what already ranks, and why
Looking at what currently appears for a query tells you what kind of page is wanted: a definition, a comparison, a price guide, a local list. Writing a different kind of page than the query wants is the most common reason good content does not rank.
See the remaining steps: How a content plan is actually builtHide the remaining steps: How a content plan is actually built
Order by value, not by volume
A page that captures fifty searches a month from people ready to buy is worth more than one capturing five thousand from people doing homework. Commercial pages first, broad educational pages later, and the sequencing said out loud so expectations are right.
Brief properly before writing
A brief states the question the page answers, who it is for, what it must cover, what it must link to and from, what evidence it needs, and what the reader should do next. Content written without one is where thin pages come from.
- One primary question, stated as a question
- The specific facts and sources the page needs
- The internal links in and out, decided in advance
Write it so a person would finish it
Short sentences, the answer near the top, subheadings that are real questions, and specifics rather than adjectives. This also happens to be what makes a page easy for a machine to lift an answer from, which is convenient rather than coincidental.
Update rather than accumulate
An existing page that ranks on page two is almost always a better investment than a new one. The most productive month in a content programme is usually the one spent improving what already exists.
A realistic pace for most local businesses is two to four genuinely useful pages a month, not twenty.
What a topic cluster looks like
The structure is the strategy. Individually good pages with no relationship to each other do not add up to topical depth.
Links between the pages matter as much as the pages. They tell a search engine which pages belong together, they give a reader a path through a subject, and they distribute authority from the pages that have it to the ones that need it.
It also produces a practical benefit: every new supporting page has somewhere obvious to link from, which means it gets crawled rather than orphaned.
Why generic content no longer works
Google's guidance on helpful content is explicit that pages should be written for people rather than for search engines, and that content should demonstrate genuine experience and expertise. That is not a slogan. It changes what a useful page looks like.
The practical consequence for a local business is that your advantage is not writing ability. It is knowing things nobody else can write: what actually happens at the appointment, what it typically costs in your market, what goes wrong, which option you would recommend and why, and what the local constraints are.
A page that says what your competitor's page says, slightly better, is a weak position. A page that says something only you could say is a strong one.
This is also the argument against fully automated content. A machine can produce a competent page about anything. It cannot produce the specific, checkable detail that makes a page worth reading, and it cannot take responsibility for whether the facts are right.
Signs a content programme is not working
The failure mode here is expensive because it is slow: it takes months to notice that nothing is compounding.
- A monthly quota with no plan behind it. Four blog posts a month is a delivery schedule, not a strategy.
- Nobody can say what question each page answers, or which cluster it belongs to.
- Pages published with no internal links pointing at them, which means nothing on the site considers them important.
- Multiple pages targeting the same query, competing with each other. This is extremely common on sites that have published steadily for years.
- Content that could appear on a competitor's site with the name changed, because it contains nothing specific to you.
See the full checklist: Signs a content programme is not workingHide the full checklist: Signs a content programme is not working
- No one updating anything. A programme that only adds is accumulating liabilities as well as assets.
- Reporting on published count and word count rather than on what the pages did.
- Statistics cited with no source, or with a source that is another agency's blog post citing a third. If a number cannot be traced to a named publisher with a date, it should not be on your site.
The last one matters more than it used to. Unsourced claims are increasingly what separates a page a machine will use as a source from one it will not.
How content is measured
Pages published is an activity measure and tells you nothing. Word count is worse. Traffic alone is only slightly better, because traffic from the wrong intent costs you staff time and produces nothing.
The measures that matter are: how many pages are ranking at all, which tells you whether the site is being taken seriously; the share of pages that produce at least one enquiry, which tells you whether the topics were chosen well; assisted conversions, because educational pages frequently contribute to a decision without being the last click; and branded search over time.
Read the full breakdown: How content is measuredHide the full breakdown: How content is measured
Timeframe honesty matters here. A new page in a competitive space commonly takes three to six months to settle into a position. Judging content at six weeks produces the wrong decision almost every time, and it is the single most common reason a programme is abandoned just before it would have worked.
With AI answers, an additional measure is becoming relevant: whether your pages are being cited when an assistant answers a question in your category. It is harder to track and it is worth watching.
What varies by industry
Regulated categories change what may be said, and the constraint often improves the content. A healthcare page that cannot promise outcomes has to explain the process instead, which is what readers actually want. Legal content sits under state bar advertising rules covering how services and results may be described.
High consideration purchases justify depth. Someone choosing orthodontic treatment, a roof replacement or a law firm reads extensively before contacting anyone, and long, specific, honest pages pay for themselves.
Emergency categories do not. Somebody whose basement is flooding is not reading a guide. In those categories the content budget belongs in service and location pages that convert, not in an article programme.
Business to business firms usually need fewer pages and better ones, because the audience is small, informed, and unimpressed by volume.
What we need from you
Access to the people who know things. Thirty minutes with whoever actually does the work produces more usable material than a week of desk research, and it is the difference between a page only you could have written and a page anyone could.
Facts, prices where you are willing to publish them, and real examples. Specifics are what make a page credible.
Review inside a window. Content waiting for approval is the most common cause of a stalled programme.
Patience measured in quarters. This is the slowest part of a search program and the one that compounds most.
We do not publish a price for this piece of work on its own, because the right scope depends on what already exists. What is published is the bundle pricing: 2,400, 3,600 or 4,800 dollars a month depending on which channels are running. You can read the full breakdown on the pricing page, and you will get an exact number in writing before anything starts.
How this connects to the rest
Content strategy sits on top of technical SEO. Publishing into a site with unresolved crawling, indexing or duplication problems is the most reliable way to waste a content budget, which is why the technical stage comes first.
It feeds answer engine optimisation and GEO directly. The structure that makes a page easy for a reader to scan is the same structure that lets a search feature or an assistant lift a clean answer from it.
Paid advertising is the best available input into what to write. Search term reports show you exactly which queries produce enquiries and which waste money, which is better data than any keyword tool.
Link building works on the back of content worth linking to. Ordering it the other way round rarely works.
Start from the questions you already get asked.
Bring the five questions your team answers on the phone every week. That is usually a better starting point than any keyword export, and it is where we would begin anyway.
Straight answers.
Do I need a blog?
You need pages that answer the questions your customers ask. Whether they sit under a blog is a navigation decision, not a strategy.
For many local businesses, better service and location pages produce more than a blog does. We would rather tell you that than sell you a posting schedule.
How much should we publish?
Two to four genuinely useful pages a month is a realistic and effective pace for most local businesses. More than that usually means the quality is dropping or nobody inside the business is being consulted.
Publishing less and updating more is often the better trade, particularly on a site that has been running for years.
How long before content ranks?
Commonly three to six months for a new page in a competitive space, sometimes faster on a site with existing authority, sometimes longer.
Judging a page at six weeks and concluding content does not work is the most common and most expensive mistake in this discipline.
Can you just use AI to write it?
We use tools in research and drafting. Nothing is published without a person editing it and a named person standing behind the facts.
Google's spam policies target scaled content abuse, meaning pages produced primarily to manipulate rankings rather than help anyone, regardless of how they were made. More to the point, generic content does not work, and generic is what unsupervised generation produces.
What happens to our old content?
It gets audited. Some of it is improved, some is merged into a stronger page with a redirect, and some is removed. On an established site this is usually where the fastest gains are.
Removing pages feels wrong and is frequently the single most effective thing available.
Where this comes from.
Primary documentation and published research behind the guidance on this page.
- Creating helpful, reliable, people-first content, Google Search Central (opens in a new tab)
- Google Search Essentials (opens in a new tab)What Google requires, recommends and forbids.
- Google spam policies for web search (opens in a new tab)Link spam, scaled content abuse and site reputation abuse.
- Google Search Console Help (opens in a new tab)
- Structured data general guidelines (opens in a new tab)
Talk to the team
A short call, a look at how the business currently shows up, and a straight answer on what we would do first.