Are Your Ideas Worth Developing Further? A 6-Point System for Measuring Resonance

The woman marched across the beige hotel carpet straight to me. I could see her coming from across the conference room.

"I just have to tell you," she said before I could get a word in, "the entire time you were talking about making espresso, I was thinking about washing my car."

It wasn't an insult. It wasn't a bizarre way to let me know she was ignoring me. No, this was the good stuff. This was gold. THIS ... was the highest of compliments.

In fact, this was worth six points. Six!

But I'll get there.

* * *

I'd just finished my speech. I was the opening keynote to 320 marketers at an event in Boston. Partway through my talk, I tell a short story to illustrate how, without needing to find resources or experience something newsworthy, you can increase the impact of your content. We often think about volume. We rarely think about power. That's a big problem.

This is my espresso story, in brief…

Pretend I want to inspire others to try new things. That's the goal of my content. That's my message.

The commodity, forgettable way to say it might sound like this:

• In general, studies show that people aren't scared of the task at hand. They're scared of the unknown. So stop agonizing over that new thing you're thinking of trying and [here, I become the Nike slogan] just do it.

Forgettable. Ineffectual. Worse, anyone could say it like that.

But what if I said it like this?

• I used to be scared to make espresso in my own kitchen, which is embarrassing. I'm Italian! (Can you not tell by the EVERYTHING of me?) Instead, I'd ask my wife (not Italian) to make one for me. I'd follow espresso influencers. I debated taking a course. But today, I make espresso every day. So what changed? I made it once.

• Which made me realize, oh, wow, I wasted a lot of time agonizing over this, doing the research, outsourcing to my wife, following those experts. Turns out it’s not so scary to make espresso, and even if I messed up, I could fix it myself, or else my research would become much more focused and less wasteful.

• That's the thing about trying new things. As studies suggest, we're not really afraid of the task itself but the unknown, so instead of going through all that agony or deciding to outsource it or even not do it, we should move quicker to make the unknown KNOWN. Try the thing. Once. Just do it.

I hope you can agree (I say on stages and to you now) the second version is a higher-impact way of saying the exact same thing. I didn't need to secure extra budget, do something worthy of primetime coverage, or even change my message, really. I needed to add more POWER to that message, and I did so by telling a small story with big meaning.

The woman who approached me after my talk referenced that espresso story. She signaled that the story resonated deeply. (I mean, six points! But I'm getting there.) In walking over to talk to me, she provided my favorite form of measurement to judge whether something resonates:

URR. Unsolicited Response Rate.

(See, I have to use an acronym to be taken seriously. Because we are Very Important Busy-ness People.)

The question to consider:

Do your ideas compel a response?

Do your words inspire others to act, or does it feel like you always have to demand it, to hype harder or shout louder to see a result? What if the very notion of "call to action" reveals the problem? You have to call, instead of whisper.

What if your content could impart the urge to act in others? You could stop demanding it. Instead, you’ve inspired it.

This isn't about “getting in front of” the right people, that ubiquitous phrase we hear when discussing seemingly any marketing related problem. Marketing isn’t about getting in front of people. Marketing is about ensuring they care.

Can you write and speak in ways that make them care?

Do your ideas compel a response? That’s strong signal they do.

* * *

Here are some guiding heuristics to evaluate whether or not others care about your ideas -- including a scoring system you can try. (Six!)

1. NO GAMING OR PROMPTING TO JUICE REPLIES

We want to develop stronger stories and IP. We want to become known for our ideas, synonymous with the things we say, referred around our ideal audience by our fans who use our words. To build our way towards that, we first need good data to evaluate how our ideas are performing, which then helps us extract useful insights informing our work from the data.

This means the process is a constant interplay between (1) aerating our thinking in front of others to sharpen it, and (2) reflecting on what we just learned from the audience's response, so we can improve that one idea or develop new things we need — what I call “amassing IP” around your core premise.

Most people don’t treat the work this way. Most try to game or prompt responses:

• (As with a LinkedIn post): "Reply with 'show me' in the comments, and I'll send you the full thing!"

• (As with the ending of lots of content): "But what do YOU think will be the next big trend in the creator ecosystem?"

But this only serves to muddy the data. You’ve messed up the entire process, and you learn very little. I’d argue the only thing you learn is what incentives will successfully prompt responses. You’ve learned nothing about your ideas and their worthiness. Do you invest more in them? Do you create content around them to further amass IP? Do you take this one insight or story with you, like a back pocket resource you can pull out whenever you need it, wherever you go?

No idea. Because you’ve tried to juice replies by asking for it. The trick is to simply present an idea and judge whether it was powerful enough to compel a response.

I understand why people try to game it. They want to grow their reach more quickly. They think they have a reach problem. Really, it’s far more likely they’re not seeing results because of a resonance problem. In your case, I believe you’re smart enough and expert enough, but maybe your IP isn’t strong enough to differentiate and resonate. Do others care about you and your thinking, or are they just responding because you promised free snacks?

I don't ask for replies because I don’t learn enough. In my work, the point of a single piece (whether in my newsletter or on social media) isn't merely to distribute my thinking more broadly. It’s to understand the idea and my audience more deeply. I want to improve and to amass IP around my premise (resonance over reach) so I become synonymous with these ideas and so people come inbound to me and/or refer me to others. The reach parts get easier when you resonate deeper, because when you matter more, you need to hustle for attention less. To figure out the ideas and the words powerful enough to do that work, I need good data.

A comedian wouldn't incentivize laughter. They simply share their jokes and evaluate whether it sparked a response. I'm the same way.

Heuristic #1 in measuring resonance: no gaming or prompting to juice responses. We first need purity of data.

Then we need to evaluate the data. That's why we need to embrace:

2. NOT ALL RESPONSES ARE CREATED EQUAL

No triggering haters. No sensationalizing. No bullsh*t hooks ("99% of people do this wrong. Here's how..." / "I did the work so you don't have to. Here are...") In other words, no rage- or engagement-baiting others. This is even worse than gaming or prompting people to juice replies. At least when people do that, they've first shared their ideas with integrity above that call-to-action. But when you bait people into replying, you warp the content itself. Some people seem open to saying literally anything it takes to trigger a reaction. They’ve decoupled their thinking and their content as they chase quick dopamine hits for their ego.

You learn even less about your thinking doing that.

That kind of content tells you nothing about your ideas but tells others everything about your integrity and trustworthiness and respect for their time and attention. (Unfortunately, having large amounts of those things is a positive differentiator on the internet lately.)

No, we need a more nuanced understanding: We don’t need ANY response. We need the right kinds of responses -- like the kind my beige-booted friend shared with me. (I think the carpet and her shoes have melted together in my mind as that moment becomes a distant memory.)

(Fun fact: It was yesterday.)

(Look, I haven't slept well, the Knicks are in the playoffs, the toddler is sick. It's been a whole thing. Leave me alone. But like, you know ... stick around.)

As I told you earlier, that woman paid me the highest of compliments.

As I also told you earlier, that compliment sounded almost like an insult: "Yeah I didn't care about what you said because I was thinking about my own crap."

But it wasn't an insult.

It was six points.

As you and I learned while getting our formal degrees in the jobs we now have (right?), six is the most amount points you can possibly score when measuring resonance.

(I might have slacked off when they taught that in school. Look, I wasn't sleeping, the Knicks kept missing the playoffs. It was a whole thing...)

Not every response is created equal. Below is the list we can use to rank our responses. Score yourself and see how deeply you're resonating with your own URR.

Scoring Your Resonance

NO RESPONSE: 0 POINTS

They didn't respond to your idea. Don't abandon it! Too many people are “outside-in” thinkers right now. "Whatever the market wants from me, I will say. Whatever works! Whatever the algorithm rewards!"

We need more inside-out thinkers. We need people who start with conviction and develop ideas from their unique perspectives. They feel frustrated by something, curious about something, and they’re hellbent on solving a problem or creating a positive change. We need more people who do that kind of work instead of merely arbitraging trends and algorithm hacks for attention.

That’s why you and I develop our ideas inside-out.

When you're outside-in, you become a commodity. You say or do whatever you think others want you to say or do, and then the hard part is trying to shout louder and hustle harder than the other million people saying what you say, sounding like you sound. But when you operate inside-out and you maintain conviction that your ideas matter, you have an easier time standing out and connecting with the right people. You care. Your ideas matter. You’re convinced. Now the hard work is to find the right way to show others why they should care too — the right phrasing and key terms, frameworks and visuals, stories and statistics.

Both approaches are hard, but one leads to differentiation and thought leadership, the other to the hamster wheel.

No response? No worries. Keep your conviction. Your ideas matter. Find other ways to show people why they'd think so too.

DISAGREEMENT: 1 POINT

When I post something I believe in and others tell me they don't agree, I get more useful data than when I get no response because I can ask a few pointed questions to improve the next time out:

• Is this the wrong audience? Maybe I am sharing in the wrong place, at the wrong time, to the wrong people. (This applies to No Response too.)

• Are there any commonalities among those who disagree? Maybe the same industry or job title or type of person? What does that tell me about my ideal audience and how to find and serve them? Or maybe, these dissenters are the people who surround my ideal audience, making their lives harder. That's useful to know too. Knowing the objections my audience will face from others will help me help them better.

• How else might I say this same thing so these people don't disagree? What do they need to hear? Am I too close to my ideas and need to go further out from where I’ve landed to meet them where they're at in their journey to understand? Do they need a different starting point to access my idea or maybe a different style content, like a story, a framework, some statistics, a reference to something outside their echo chamber to break their routines, or a reference to someone they love and trust already?

Disagreement is often flippantly dismissed by experts online today. “Don’t worry about those who disagree. Your work isn’t for them.” But I wouldn't dismiss those people so quickly. There’s much to be learned. Your work might not be for them, or your ideas might serve them quite well -- if only you could figure out a different way to show them what you see.

GENERAL QUESTIONS: 2 POINTS

They're leaning in! They want to know more, even if they're asking from a place of skepticism. Regardless, your thinking has compelled them to respond, and their response was to think, "More, please. Continue. I'll spend the time."

There are actually two types of questions we can get in response, and the second is more valuable to our cause. I'll get there further down the list, but for now, consider some examples of general questions:

• "So what should marketers do if..."

• "But aren't podcasters who X often doing that because Y?"

• "Just to clarify, are you saying XYZ?"

Again, these questions remain in the land of the general, the land of theory. They are asking about "one" or "others" or "us all." They are asking about your ideas directly, as theory. They are not yet speaking in first-person terms. Not yet.

But before we get to that sort of question, here’s the next type of response we can receive — worth 1 more point than general questions:

PASSIONATE AGREEMENT: 3 POINTS

Resonance is literally an energy transfer in the sciences. When two frequencies are aligned, they’re considered resonant, and when the first gets applied to the second, the second becomes amplified.

Away from ideas like sound or motion, back in our world of content and story, I believe it’s still a literal energy transfer, just through thoughts and feelings instead of frequencies. We’ve all felt a surge of energy when we encounter something that resonates. It’s undeniable to experience.

Just look at moments where others respond with passionate agreement. Rather than say, “Thanks! Helpful,” rather than say, “Nice post,” you get people saying their version of HOLY FORKING SHIRTBALLS I AM GOING TO RUN THROUGH A WALL RIGHT NOW ARE YOU KIDDING ME WITH THIS RIGHT NOW GET OUT OF MY HEAD I ADORE THIS.

Now that’s passion.

Swish.

3 points.

Thus far in the list, however, something has been missing in the types of responses I've mentioned: them.

The rest of these types of responses are much more personal. To respond in the following ways, someone has to decide to spend more of their precious time responding, even staking part of their reputation on what they're saying. It's one thing for your audience to ask you general questions or share words of passionate support. It’s an entirely different and more profound thing for them to do any of the following…

Building On Your Ideas: 4 points

When someone starts adding new ideas to yours (“Right! And maybe that means…”) or citing other sources related to what you're saying ("That reminds me of..."), it's a sign you've resonated deeply. They care about your ideas enough to essentially become a collaborator in developing them.

To do so, they have to invest much more time to think and to craft a thoughtful response, and they also stake a part of their reputation to those thoughts. By building on your ideas privately (e.g. an email reply), they are exposed to your judgment of them. By building on your ideas publicly (e.g. a social media comment), they are exposed to everyone's. That’s a high-friction action for them to take. You’ve earned it.

Because you’ve resonated in a big way.

RELATED EMERGENCY ADDITION TO THE POINT SCALE:

For every response you get, regardless of type, which happens on a project you own, apply a 1.5x multiplier to your points.

So if someone builds on your ideas in a social media comment, give yourself 4 points. But if they build on your ideas in an email reply to your newsletter, or contact you about your podcast, or say something meaningful inside your membership, those are all worth 4 * 1.5 = 6 points.

Why? Two reasons:

1. These are your most valued connections. They have already leaned further forward in the relationship by opting onto a relationship-building project you own, not simply following you in a feed somewhere. They’re worth more.
2. Social media has also ruined our ability to judge the intentions of someone else commenting on our work. Are they doing so because they genuinely loved your ideas and want to build on them, or did they take a course from some stoic-looking business bro who taught them to comment on other people’s posts with “thoughtful replies” to grow their followers?

It’s hard to judge and not worth the time, so let’s just apply a positive multiplier to the types of responses we know represent stronger signal: responses to our owned projects give us 1.5x the points as responses on social media. And while we’re here, thank you for subscribing to my newsletter, podcast, and membership. Social media sucks.

Now back to the point scale.

4 points: others build on your thinking.

When people do that, man, you're like a toddler wearing a kangaroo's shoes. You stumbled on something in a big way. That's an idea worth pursuing, because it's resonating SO deeply.

But there are two forms of even stronger signal…

PERSONAL QUESTIONS: 5 POINTS

Told you I'd return to the second type of question. I wouldn't lie to you.

Okay, so I lied to you.

I don't really value the personal questions so much as what comes with them for the questions to make any sense: personal context.

When someone asks a personal question, they're not asking what "one" should do, nor are they asking about your ideas directly, in theory. Instead, they're asking for your take on something they are going through in their situation. They want personalized advice. They are essentially saying, “I’m eager to move this conversation beyond something generalized and theoretical. Please apply your thinking to THIS situation facing ME.”

The context that comes with a personal question isn't easy for others to share. It’s incredibly high-friction — even more than building on your audiences. You’d have to impart a lot of energy, i.e. resonate very deeply, for others to volunteer information about what they’re going through. In my work, for instance, personal questions let me know an essay could be a pillar of my entire platform, so I use the ideas elsewhere and further develop them, maybe even adding them to higher-stakes projects like books, speeches, or client consulting interactions. When someone replies to my newsletter to share a brief bit about what they do and where they’re struggling, then ask a question about today’s edition, that idea resonated beyond most of my ideas.

THAT kind of response is huge because it starts a relationship based on trust. I've learned a lot more about someone else. What's a relationship if not that? You're able to converse, not just broadcast. You’re even able to help them in some small way. You're like a parent whose toddler starts screaming in bed at 4am: I really need more info about WTF is happening with you, but I'm ready to solve this fast.

(Please can it be fast? Can it please be fast? Please? Fast? Can it be? It's 4am.)

(Thank God the Knicks are in the playoffs...)

(Oh hey: Knicks rhymes with six!)

REFLECTING BACK THEIR OWN STORY: 6 POINTS

The woman marched across the beige hotel carpet straight to me. I could see her coming from across the conference room, boots and all.

"I just have to tell you," she said before I could get a word in, "the entire time you were talking about making espresso, I was thinking about washing my car."

With that, she paid me the highest of compliments. She wasn't ignoring my espresso story to daydream about her life. She was responding to it. The story was working as intended. She was latching onto the thing that causes any story to resonate — which is NOT the topic or action of a story (in my case, making espresso) but the emotional stakes.

There's an old adage about storytelling: "In the specific, we find the universal." It’s a paradox every storyteller faces. If you want to connect deeper externally, you have to turn deeper internally. You have to get beyond the basic, superficial details of what happened and who was involved to arrive at how it made you FEEL. Share the emotions. Extract the lesson. (This plagues business storytellers in particular. We think the job title of the person in our stories must reflect the job title of our buyer. You don’t need to tell a story about business or even the buyer’s industry to resonate. You merely need a story they can understand, arriving at an insight they can use.)

It wasn't the fact that I talked about espresso that compelled a response from that woman. In fact, it wasn't a fact at all. It was a feeling. In the story, I agonized over something I wanted to do, then did silly amounts of research before ultimately asking someone else to do it — or maybe not doing it at all. Others in the room felt those same things, those same emotional stakes, despite their experiencing being different. Maybe they wanted to go for that promotion or pitch that podcaster or launch that project or shift their business or take up that new hobby — and THAT was the cause of the very same feelings I conveyed through the story.

In the case of this woman, she didn't think about espresso. She thought about her car.

"I was laughing to myself and going, 'oh gosh, it's me,' because the other day I was joking with my family about how I've never taken my car into a car wash! It's like I'm scared of that the way you were scared of espresso. And instead of your wife, I'm always asking my husband. When really I should just try it once!"

We connected.

And that's the entire point.

Ultimately, the only metric that matters is trust.

When our work compels a response from others, it's a sign that we might develop that trust. Responses are signals that a relationship could form. After all, trust takes time. When someone asks a question, supports your idea with passion, builds on your thinking, asks for personal advice, or reflects back their own experiences and stories, that’s like them saying, "I'll invest some time right now."

That's rare.

Rare and wonderful.

Like a toddler wearing a kangaroo's shoes. Or the Knicks being in the playoffs.

You invited them to open the door to your world by sharing your thinking. How did they respond?

Maybe they walked right by, unflinching. Maybe they stubbornly refused to walk in. Maybe they went, "LOVE that door. SUCH a great color!" but ultimately kept right on moving. You can learn from all of these.

Or maybe they peeked through the door once presented with it. Or carefully cracked it open. Or maybe, if you're lucky, you get that passionate response. You get some people bursting through the door.

You get the Kool-Aid Man.

They wander in, brush some drywall off their shoulder, and they plop down on the couch. “Whew, what you said reminds me of that time in my life when…”

Huge.

Like any metric, URR is a signal, not a stopping point, not a final grade. You received some form of permission from others to continue developing a relationship because what you said (and how you said it) showed them why they’d care. You didn't just get in front of them. You showed them why they should care. Every response is a sign that you might be able to earn their trust.

For as much as we overcomplicate everything we do, that's really the entire job.

Do your ideas compel a response?

Forget reach.

Do you resonate?