Not Every Point of View Deserves a Platform
This workflow helps teams pressure-test ideas before they become public positions
This prompt is not part of The PMM’s Prompt Playbook which has 30 ready-to-use prompts. If you’re looking for more cut-and-paste prompts, join the Substack! Paid subscribers receive new cut-and-paste prompts every week.
Get the PMM’s Prompt Playbook and Modern B2B Marketing today!
Need help with product marketing or prompts? Let me know.
Workflow Name: Strategic POV Validation Workflow
Created by prompts.tinytechguides.com
What This Workflow Does
This workflow pressure-tests a thought leadership point of view before it is written or distributed.
Its job is to ensure a POV is:
Differentiated (not obvious or generic)
Defensible (you can stand behind it)
Useful (it changes how the reader thinks or acts)
This workflow does not improve writing.
It decides whether the idea deserves amplification at all.
This workflow answers:
“Is this POV strong enough to represent us publicly?”
Workflow Steps Summary
Step 0: Define Inputs
Step 1: Test for Differentiation
Step 2: Test for Defensibility
Step 3: Test for Usefulness
Step 4: Identify Risks & Weaknesses
Step 5: Decide: Advance, Revise, or Kill
Step 0: Define Inputs
{pov_statement} = the POV defined in the Insight → Thought Leadership Workflow
https://open.substack.com/pub/davidsweenor/p/thought-leadership-starts-with-a
{argument_outline} = supporting arguments and evidence
{audience} = intended reader
{business_context} = company positioning, strategy, and constraints
{publication_channel} = where this POV will be published
{risk_tolerance} = conservative, balanced, or bold
Step 1: Test for Differentiation
Goal:
Ensure the POV is not obvious, consensus-driven, or already saturated.
# Role
You are a critical editor evaluating market differentiation.
# Context
Thought leadership that restates common beliefs fails to create authority or memorability.
# Task
Evaluate whether {pov_statement} meaningfully differs from common market narratives aimed at {audience}.
# Format
- Common market belief
- How this POV differs
- Differentiation score (High / Medium / Low)
- Brief justification
# Tone
Skeptical, sharp, and market-aware.
Step 2: Test for Defensibility
Goal:
Confirm the POV can withstand scrutiny.
# Role
You are a strategist stress-testing an argument.
# Context
A POV that cannot be defended damages credibility, even if it attracts attention.
# Task
Assess whether the {argument_outline} sufficiently supports {pov_statement}, considering counterarguments and edge cases.
# Format
- Strongest supporting evidence
- Likely counterarguments
- How well the POV holds up (Strong / Moderate / Weak)
- Gaps that need reinforcement
# Tone
Rigorous, fair, and intellectually honest.
Step 3: Test for Usefulness
Goal:
Ensure the POV creates value for the reader.
# Role
You are evaluating reader impact.
# Context
Thought leadership should change how a reader thinks, decides, or acts — not just inform them.
# Task
Evaluate how {pov_statement} helps {audience} make better decisions or see a problem differently.
# Format
- What the reader likely believes today
- What they should believe after reading
- Practical implications for the reader
- Usefulness score (High / Medium / Low)
# Tone
Reader-centric, practical, and outcome-focused.
