How to Decide What Content to Create (Without Guessing)

TL;DR

According to Orbit Media's 2025 blogging survey, the average blog post takes 4 hours and 10 minutes to write—yet 75% of posts receive fewer than 100 views. The gap isn't talent. It's process. This guide introduces a four-stage framework: Ideation → Shortlisting → Validation → Planning. Creators who validate before writing report 3.5x higher engagement rates.

---

47 Views

That's what most content gets. Not because it's poorly written—often it's excellent—but because nobody was looking for it in the first place.

I spent six months tracking our own content performance last year. We published 24 pieces. Twelve performed reasonably well. Twelve disappeared into the void. The difference wasn't quality. I'd argue some of our best writing was in that bottom twelve. The difference was whether we'd validated demand before committing hours to creation.

Content Marketing Institute's 2025 B2B report found that 63% of marketers describe their content strategy as "somewhat effective" or worse. That's a polite way of saying most content underperforms. But here's the curious part: when you dig into what separates the top performers, it's rarely production quality. It's selection quality. They're choosing better topics.

---

The Expensive Assumption

The default content workflow looks like this:

1. Have an idea
2. Write it
3. Publish it
4. Hope

Hope is not a strategy. And yet.

According to SEMrush's State of Content Marketing report, 91% of content gets zero organic traffic from Google. Zero. That's not a rounding error—that's a systemic failure in how content decisions get made.

The assumption embedded in "just publish more" advice is that volume eventually reveals winners. Technically true. But at what cost? If the average piece takes four hours and 91% will fail, you're looking at 36 hours of work to produce one piece that performs. That math only works if time is free.

---

A Framework That Actually Works

What if you could identify likely winners before investing those hours?

That's what this framework does. Four stages, each with a distinct purpose:

Stage 1: Ideation

This is divergent thinking. Generate volume. Capture everything. Don't judge yet.

Where ideas come from:

• Questions your audience actually asks (support tickets are gold)
• Gaps in competitor coverage
• Search data showing existing demand
• Industry developments worth explaining
• Your own contrarian takes

I keep a running document. Every question someone asks me, every topic I see covered poorly, every shower thought that seems promising—it goes in the doc. Right now there are 147 items in there. Most are garbage. That's fine. The point of ideation is raw material, not finished goods.

HubSpot's research suggests top-performing content teams maintain idea backlogs of 50+ topics at any given time. The teams struggling for content? They're starting from zero each week.

Stage 2: Shortlisting

Now you filter. Move from many to few.

Shortlisting criteria:

Question	What You're Assessing
Does this serve my actual audience?	Relevance
Can I say something the top results don't?	Differentiation
Do I have credible expertise here?	Authority
Does this connect to business outcomes?	Alignment

Be ruthless. An idea that fails two or more criteria gets cut. No exceptions, no "but I really like this one." Sentiment has no place in shortlisting.

From 147 ideas, maybe 20 survive this stage. That's appropriate.

Stage 3: Validation

Here's where most creators bail—and where differentiation happens.

Validation isn't research for research's sake. It's gathering evidence that people actually want what you're considering creating.

Search demand signals:

• Is anyone searching for this? (Check search volume)
• What's the trend direction? (Google Trends)
• What questions are people asking? (People Also Ask, forums)

Competition signals:

• Who ranks currently?
• What are they missing?
• Can you realistically compete?

Intent signals:

• What do searchers actually want when they type this query?
• Are they looking to learn, compare, or buy?
• Does your planned content match that intent?

A 2025 analysis by Ahrefs found that pages targeting keywords with validated search demand are 13x more likely to generate organic traffic than those targeting assumed demand. Thirteen times. That's not a marginal improvement—that's a different category of outcome.

Stage 4: Planning

Only now—after ideation, shortlisting, and validation—do you plan the content itself.

Planning elements:

• Format selection (blog, video, thread, newsletter)
• Angle definition (what's YOUR take?)
• Structure outline
• Asset requirements (images, data, examples)
• Distribution strategy

Planning before validation is premature optimization. You're detailing execution for something that might not deserve to exist.

---

What Changes When You Use This

The math shifts dramatically.

Without the framework: Create 10 pieces, 1 performs well. That's a 10% hit rate.

With the framework: Create 10 pieces, 4 perform well. That's 40%.

Same effort. Different selection process. Four times the results.

Orbit Media found that bloggers who spend more time on research and planning report "strong results" at nearly double the rate of those who don't. The investment in process pays compound returns.

Over a year, that's the difference between 5 pieces driving meaningful traffic and 20. Same total output. Radically different outcomes.

---

Objections I've Heard

"This takes too long for timely content."

The framework scales. For breaking news, you can run through all four stages in 30 minutes. Ideation: What angles exist? Shortlisting: Which fits us? Validation: Is there search/social demand? Planning: Quick outline. Done.

"I don't have enough audience data."

You have more than you think. Search data exists for any topic. Competitor engagement is visible. Forum discussions reveal questions. You're not starting from zero unless you choose to.

"Won't this kill creativity?"

Ideation is pure creativity. Nothing is off limits. Validation just ensures your creative energy goes toward topics that have audiences waiting. That's not a constraint on creativity—it's a filter for impact.

"What if I just want to write what interests me?"

Then find the overlap. Topics you find interesting AND that have validated demand. The intersection exists. It's usually larger than people assume.

---

Getting Started

Here's what to do this week:

1. Dump your ideas. Everything you've considered creating in the past month. All of it. Aim for 30+ items.

2. Apply the four criteria. Relevance, differentiation, authority, alignment. Cut anything failing two or more.

3. Validate your survivors. Search volume, competition depth, intent match. This is where hopes become plans or get discarded.

4. Plan your top picks. Format, angle, structure, distribution.

One cycle through this process will change how you think about content permanently. It did for me.

---

The Deeper Point

Content strategy isn't about creating more. It's about creating right.

The creators who build audiences, who drive traffic, who convert readers into customers—they're not working harder. They're choosing better.

This framework is how you choose better. Use it once. You won't go back.

---

Writesy AI was built to support exactly this workflow—from keyword-driven discovery through validation through planning. But the framework works regardless of tooling. The point is the process. Explore how it works →