Turning Thought Leadership Into a Strategic Lever: Splunk
How a competitive maturity assessment and thought leadership playbook helped Splunk turn quality content into organizational influence.
TL;DR
- Client: Splunk - enterprise software leader in security and observability
- Problem: Thought leadership content was high quality but siloed, underleveraged, and not driving organizational impact. Assets got created, but not always activated. The team knew the work was good, but couldn't prove it or get the cross-functional support needed to amplify it.
- Solution: Competitive maturity assessment + strategic content and operations playbook
- Shift: Moved from content producers hoping for activation to strategic partners with data-backed recommendations and a clear roadmap for evolution.
- Impact: Third-party validation of content quality, benchmarked competitive positioning, tools to influence cross-functional teams, and a roadmap for content evolution without doubling headcount.
The Challenge
Splunk's thought leadership team was producing quality content. The reports were meaningful. The blog had a clear point of view. The ebooks were well-structured.
But here's what wasn't working:
Content was getting created, but not always used. Some assets were fully activated with PR support and multi-channel promotion. Others went dark immediately post-launch with no clear reason why.
Visibility was lopsided. Reports got PR love and executive attention. Ebooks got buried. The executive blog wasn't standing out in a crowded field of competitors saying similar things.
Ownership was scattered. The team owned content creation, but distribution, promotion, and measurement lived elsewhere. Cross-team alignment was more hope than reality. They'd pitch ideas to brand, PR, and integrated marketing teams but lacked the data to back up why their content deserved resources.
The symptoms showing up:
- High-quality content with inconsistent activation
- No clear view of how Splunk's content compared to competitors
- Difficulty getting buy-in from cross-functional teams
- Team spinning on whether they should focus on volume or quality
- Leadership asking "what's the ROI?" without clear frameworks to answer
- Political navigation required to get anything promoted
The team knew they were doing good work. But they also knew it could be doing more - if they could make the case clearly, with data and strategic direction to support it.
Ann SMith
Head of Content
Splunk
Working with Sunny gave us the strategic clarity and validation we needed to push content further. We were able to benchmark against top competitors, get an honest view of what’s working (and what’s not), and bring back evidence that helped us make the case for smarter formats, better targeting, and stronger integration across teams. It wasn’t just a diagnostic — it was a credibility boost that helped us influence internally and evolve the role content plays at Splunk.
The Shift
What made this work worth doing: Splunk's content team needed to stop being order-takers and start being strategic partners. But you can't influence cross-functional teams without ammunition - benchmarks, competitive intelligence, and clear recommendations grounded in data.
The belief that had to change: "If we just make better content, it'll get used" → "We need to prove our value and show teams exactly how to activate our work."
The barriers they faced: Internal politics around who owns content activation. No shared framework for what "great" looked like. Competitors potentially doing more with less. A team stretched thin that couldn't just "do more" without strategic focus.
The Work
- Competitive maturity benchmarking
Built a five-level content maturity framework and assessed Splunk's practices against five direct competitors. This wasn't subjective opinion - we analyzed content mix, distribution practices, promotion tactics, and asset discoverability. The framework revealed where Splunk excelled and where competitors were outpacing them, giving the team concrete data to anchor strategy conversations and priority setting. - Strategic content assessment
Analyzed Splunk's owned content properties - the Perspectives blog, research reports, and ebooks - to identify what was working and what needed evolution. This included competitive side-by-side comparisons showing how peer organizations were structuring similar assets, what hooks they were using, and how they were linking content across touchpoints. - Cross-functional influence strategy
Mapped how to work with brand, PR, integrated marketing, and campaign teams without stepping on toes or triggering turf wars. Gave the team language and frameworks to position content as a strategic lever, not just another deliverable competing for resources. - Tactical evolution roadmap
Built specific recommendations for format refinement, headline structure, distribution improvements, and workflow changes - all designed to increase impact without requiring new headcount. Included opportunities to better connect content across the funnel and integrate into nurture flows and sales enablement. - "Aha" moment: When the team saw the competitive benchmark showing where competitors were investing and how Splunk's approach compared, it clicked. They weren't losing because their content was bad - they were losing activation battles because they couldn't articulate why their approach mattered relative to what competitors were doing.
The Outcome
- What's different now:
The team has third-party validation showing where they stand and what "great" looks like benchmarked against competitors. They're not guessing whether they should focus on more volume or better activation - they have data showing which levers matter most.
More importantly, they have tools to reframe internal conversations. Instead of pitching "here's a new report we made," they can now say "here's how this content supports strategic priorities and here's how competitors are using similar assets to drive pipeline." - Decisions enabled:
The content team can now support headcount and budget requests with competitive intelligence and clear ROI frameworks. They're pitching new formats like video and multimedia with data showing how competitors are using these successfully. They can push for stronger alignment with demand gen and brand teams on their terms, not just hoping for scraps. - Internal wins:
Cross-functional teams stopped seeing thought leadership as "nice to have" content that competes for resources. The benchmarking data made it clear that content maturity directly correlates with competitive positioning. When you show teams where you stand relative to competitors who are winning, suddenly you're not fighting for attention - you're being asked how to help.
The team is using the maturity framework and strategic recommendations to guide quarterly planning, prioritize initiatives, and justify resource requests. Real customer language and competitive insights replaced internal assumptions about what content should be.
The Takeaway
For other organizations:
If your content team is producing quality work but struggling to get it activated, the problem probably isn't your content. It's that you can't prove your value relative to competitors, and you lack the frameworks to influence cross-functional teams who control distribution and promotion. Good content without an activation strategy is just expensive filing cabinet material.
Who's probably in the same stuck place:
Content teams in mid-to-large organizations where ownership is scattered across brand, PR, content, and integrated marketing. Teams producing thought leadership that leadership thinks is "nice to have" but won't fund properly. Organizations where content creators know they could drive more impact but can't get the cross-functional support needed to amplify their work.
What this case proves:
You can't evolve content in a silo, even when the work is good. Benchmarks beat opinions when you're trying to influence internal stakeholders. Thought leadership isn't just publishing - it's strategic positioning, and positioning requires data, competitive intelligence, and clear frameworks for cross-functional collaboration.