3 Content Types Crushing Blog Posts Right Now

_{Day 232/100 How do I keep forgetting to update this???}

Hey—It's Tim. 

I spent three hours yesterday watching someone try to build an outline.
They had all the right pieces.

Good research.
Solid examples.
Clear takeaways.

But the order was chaos.

They started with benefits. Then jumped to objections. Then back to problem. Then suddenly a case study. Then features. Then more benefits.

It was like watching someone pack a suitcase by throwing things at it from across the room.

The content wasn't bad. The sequence was broken.

Here's what I told them

Content structure isn't creative. It's mechanical.
You're building a ladder. Each rung has to hold weight and lead somewhere specific.

Most people randomize the rungs and then wonder why readers fall off halfway through.

Stop randomizing. Use a sequence that's already proven to work.

The order that works

1. Name the problem in their exact words

Not "businesses struggle with inefficient processes."

Try "You're spending four hours every Friday manually pulling data from three different tools into one spreadsheet."

If they don't nod at the first sentence, you lost them.

2. Show them why their current solution is failing

They're not idiots. They've already tried something.

So acknowledge it:

"You set up a Zapier chain. It worked for three weeks. Now it fails every Saturday at 2am and you're getting Slack messages all weekend."

This proves you understand their actual situation, not just the textbook version of their problem.

3. Explain why the old way doesn't work anymore

Something changed. A new tool launched. A process broke. A regulation shifted. AI ate their lunch.

"Zapier chains break because they're linear. One failure kills the whole sequence. You need parallel processing with fallbacks."

This is where you earn authority. You're not just describing the problem - you need to diagnose why the obvious solutions fail.

4. Introduce the better framework

Not your product yet. The mental model.

"Instead of chaining actions, you need an a-sync architecture. Central data store, multiple sync paths, automatic retry logic."

You're teaching them how to think about the problem differently.

5. Show proof it works

Case study. Before/after metrics. Screenshots. Anything real.

"We moved a RevOps team from 4-hour Friday reports to 20-minute automated dashboards. Here's the exact setup."

Proof makes everything before it believable.

6. Give them the next step

One clear action. Not five. One.

"Download this sync architecture template and map your current tools. Takes 15 minutes."

Make it small enough they'll actually do it.

Why this order matters

Each section earns permission for the next one.

You can't explain the framework until they believe their current solution is broken.
You can't show proof until they understand the new framework.
You can't ask for action until they've seen proof.

It's a ladder. You climb it in order.

The mistake everyone makes

They bury the problem.

They open with three paragraphs of industry context. Or a story about themselves. Or a metaphor about sailing.

Your reader doesn't care about context. They care about their problem.

Don’t get me wrong, these story led-intros work wonders on certain article types. But not when you need to relate to a problem you’re solving.

Start with the problem. In their language. First sentence.

See you tomorrow.

✌️ Tim "Ladders > Chaos" Hanson
CMO @Penfriend.ai

Same brain, different platforms: X, Threads, LinkedIn.

P.S. Your first sentence should make someone think "how did they know?" not "let me think about this." Specificity wins every time.

Penfriend.ai
Made by content marketers. Used by better ones.