Demand had to serve the story.
A keyword needed to match the audience, the article's purpose and the publishing identity. Search volume alone could not determine the plan.
Content strategy · Anonymised client case
From keyword research to an approved content plan.
I evaluated search demand, intent and existing coverage, then translated the research into eight differentiated article briefs and a four-week editorial plan for two related publishing identities.
Client-approved deliverable · English content · US keyword database · Research and planning scope
The editorial challenge
Find useful new territory without repeating the archive.
The assignment connected a B2B technology business and a founder's thought-leadership presence. Each needed relevant content for business readers, with a clear identity and a reason for every proposed article.
A new phrase needed a new question.
Previously covered themes required an overlap check. A different keyword was insufficient if the article would repeat an existing argument.
Keep expert context credible.
The plan called for third-person, non-promotional journalism. Research findings, hypothetical examples and statements requiring client confirmation had to remain distinguishable.
My contribution
I connected the research, editorial decisions and production brief.
My work covered keyword screening, search-intent interpretation, comparison with prior content, topic selection, angle development and the structured planning handoff.
Build an auditable shortlist.
I organised Semrush US volume, keyword difficulty, intent and CPC alongside qualitative search-result observations. I recorded the source, keyword status, editorial rationale and relationship to proposed articles.
Define where each story belonged.
I compared proposed angles with supplied content history, separated company expertise from founder-led commentary and distinguished selected targets from supporting terms, reserves and topics held for overlap.
Make the editorial judgement usable.
I developed the reader, central question, title, outline, supporting keywords, meta description, internal-link suggestions, research references and questions needed to confirm the client's perspective.
Connect each slot to its evidence.
I arranged eight proposals across four relative weeks, with one article for each identity per week. Stable article references connected the calendar, briefs and research so the reasoning could be reviewed together.
Tools and materials: Semrush keyword data, Excel, qualitative search review, existing-content records and source research. The assignment was research and planning; article publication and subsequent performance measurement are outside this case.
Selection logic
Every keyword received an editorial role.
I considered demand and difficulty together with intent, audience fit, existing coverage and the strength of a differentiated story. The resulting decisions preserved useful research beyond the eight selected targets.
- 8
- Selected primary targets
- 22
- Supporting or branded terms
- 22
- Reserve candidates
- 7
- Held because of content overlap
| Research signal | My decision | Editorial consequence |
|---|---|---|
| Two phrases described the same measurement problem. The more specific phrase had stronger measured demand and lower difficulty in the source snapshot. | Select one primary target and retain the related phrase as support. | Develop one article around the evidence needed to judge marketing impact, rather than two competing treatments. |
| A broad educational phrase suggested learning or course intent. A narrower oversight concept better matched the proposed reader question. | Choose the closer intent match and keep the wider concept secondary. | Focus the brief on judgement and the ability to challenge an AI output, with explicit limits on unconfirmed personal claims. |
| Distributed-team themes already appeared in the archive. General coverage of remote operations would repeat prior work. | Reframe around whose expertise influences a decision, and flag the overlap for review. | Require a concrete, confirmed participation example before attributing a leadership practice to the subject. |
Keyword metrics describe the US tool snapshot used in the research, not achieved rankings or guaranteed demand. Unavailable volume was kept distinct from a measured zero. Search-result observations informed editorial fit without being presented as a fixed ranking or an independent difficulty score.
The handoff
Three connected views of one approved plan.
The workbook made the proposed schedule, article-level instructions and underlying keyword decisions inspectable in one place.
Eight proposals. Four relative weeks.
- Publishing identity and article reference
- Primary keyword, US volume, difficulty and intent
- Proposed title, distinct angle and category
- Status and connection to the matching brief
From topic to a clear writing direction.
- Reader, purpose and selection rationale
- Difference from prior coverage and overlap notes
- Outline, keywords and proposed metadata
- Own-site links, research and confirmation questions
The evidence behind the selection.
- 59 terms with role and keyword status
- Semrush metrics and source references
- Editorial rationale and qualitative search review
- Keyword tiers and related-article mapping
Inspect an anonymised brief example: data quality and market coverage
- Reader
- B2B decision-makers assessing whether a dataset adequately represents their target market.
- Primary target
- Data quality metrics. The research paired measured demand with a specific gap in the editorial treatment.
- Editorial question
- Can records be complete and accurate while important parts of the target market remain unobserved?
- Differentiation
- Examine population coverage rather than repeat a broad data-quality definition or an existing discussion of record cleaning.
- Outline direction
- Introduce the distinction between a complete record and a representative dataset.
- Define the population the business needs to understand.
- Inspect which channels, regions or business types the available evidence covers.
- Identify missing groups and the limits of the resulting conclusions.
- Evidence controls
- Use documented research and clearly labelled examples. Confirm the organisation's actual practices before attributing them to it.
- Production guidance
- The shared brief specified 800–1,200 words, third-person journalism, a meta description of up to 155 characters and two or three relevant own-site links.
This is an adapted portfolio summary of the brief structure. Original titles, identities, source-client links and internal references have been removed.
Outcome & demonstrated skills
An approved editorial roadmap with the reasoning attached.
The client approved the research and content-planning deliverable. The result was a documented set of eight article directions, supported by keyword screening, differentiated angles and actionable briefs.
A concrete basis for editorial production.
The handoff defined what to write, who it was for, why each topic was selected and which claims or examples needed confirmation. Supporting and reserve terms remained available for future decisions.
SEO research joined to editorial judgement.
This project demonstrates keyword prioritisation, intent interpretation, content-history review, topic differentiation, brief writing, source evaluation and planning across distinct publishing identities.
Evidence boundary: approval relates to the planning deliverable. This case does not claim published articles, ranking gains, traffic growth, leads or conversion uplift. Client identities are withheld; the original workbook is not distributed with this portfolio page.
Continue exploring
The research behind useful content.
I bring search evidence, source evaluation and editorial judgement together to build content plans that writers and stakeholders can use.