workspace with blank pad

The Most Common RFP Mistakes (and How to Avoid Them)

Common RFP mistakes are easy to avoid if you know what to look for.

We’ve been responding to RFPs (request for proposals) issued by governments and private businesses for over 20 years. During that time, we’ve seen teams knock it out of the park - and make embarrassing mistakes.

This guide is intended to help you and your team knock it out of the park and avoid those embarrassing moments when you wish you’d never clicked ‘send.’

What Is an RFP?

Before I get started, let me define an RFP: a Request for Proposal.

An RFP or its cousins in the alphabet soup of procurement - RFI, RFQ, RFA - is a document issued by either a government entity or a private sector business. Procurement departments issue these documents to provide a common set of guidelines to companies. Companies use the guidelines to prepare bids. They submit the bids. Procurement evaluates the final proposals, which now provide an apples-to-apples comparison of responses and make it easier for them to determine the best fit for the project.

Why RFP Mistakes Happen

Responding to a Request for Proposal takes enormous effort. I won’t sugarcoat it for you. They aren’t easy to read, understand, or respond to. Plan on spending 10-20 hours on a simple RFP, more on a complex one.

There are requirements to understand, teams to coordinate, deadlines to meet, and a story to tell, all while your regular work still needs to get done. That’s why many companies outsource their RFP writing to firms like us. We take some of the heavy lifting off their shoulders.

However, whether you decide to respond on your own or work with the RFP professionals at Seven Oaks Consulting, one thing is certain: you’ll win some, and you’ll lose some.

In this article, I intend to help you avoid some of the most common mistakes I have seen RFP teams make. Some are subtle. Some aren’t. Regardless, the more I can help you sidestep the obvious and win more bids, the better.

Ready? Let’s get started. Here are the most common RFP mistakes I see - and how to avoid them.

Please note: I’ll use the term RFP throughout, but this also includes its cousins, the Request for Quote (RFQ), Request for Information (RFI), and Request for Application (RFA, use in grant proposals). 

 

Mistake #1: Bidding on Everything

It feels counterintuitive, but pursuing every RFP that lands in your inbox is one of the fastest ways to lower your win rate. When you treat every opportunity as a "must bid," you spread your team thin, rush your responses, and end up submitting proposals that feel generic because, under the time pressure, they are.

The organizations that win consistently aren't the ones that respond to the most RFPs—they're the ones that respond to the right ones.

A simple bid/no-bid decision framework can change everything. Before committing to a response, evaluate each opportunity against a consistent set of criteria:

  •  How well does this align with our core competencies? 
  • Do we have a realistic shot at winning? 
  • Is the contract size and scope worth the investment of time?
  •  Are there relationships or incumbency advantages working against us?

A scoring rubric doesn't have to be complicated. It can be a one-page template that your team fills out before any major decision to pursue is made. The goal is to give your team permission to say no, and to make that decision based on data rather than instinct or obligation.

Mistake #2: Not Reading the Entire RFP

This one sounds almost too obvious to mention, and yet it happens constantly. Teams skim the overview, jump to the questions, and start writing. They miss a mandatory certification requirement buried in Appendix C. They overlook the instruction that tables must be no wider than 6.5 inches. They don't notice that the evaluation criteria were updated in an amendment issued two weeks after the original release.

Any of those oversights can mean disqualification, lost points, or a proposal that simply doesn't answer what the client actually asked.

The fix is to assign a compliance lead, someone whose job, before a single word of the response is written, is to read every page of the RFP and build a compliance matrix. We do this automatically for our clients, but if you’re pursuing it on your own, select one team member whose job it is to understand and fix any formatting compliance issues. 

Mistake #3: Using Templates Without Customizing Them

Proposal templates help you respond faster, maintain consistency, and capture the best language your team has developed over time. Used well, they're a competitive asset.

Unfortunately, most companies don’t use them well. They get lazy. They pound out the template, update a few things, and send it off. 

You need to go through your response template and update it to match the bid opportunity. 

Think about it: evaluators read dozens, sometimes hundreds of proposals. Generic language doesn’t cut it. When they see it, it signals two things: low effort and low understanding. Neither is the impression you want to make.

Start with your template and then customize it to the bid language. Reference the specific challenges they described in the RFP. Tailor your case studies to the closest parallel in your portfolio. If they've mentioned a priority such as implementation speed, experience with a specific platform, etc., make sure your response addresses it directly, in the same terms they used. Don’t assume they will read your case studies and recognize your expertise; point it out. Remember, evaluators are staring at dozens of responses and perhaps hundreds of pages. Make it easy for them to see your competitive advantages.

Mistake #4: Failing to Research the Competitors or the Incumbent

This is a big mistake most companies make. They don’t take the time to research the competition or find the incumbent.

In most government contracting, prior contracts are published on a public-facing portal. This is a goldmine of information on your competition. If the RFP is new, you can see who has contracts in place already with the issuer and figure out how you stack up against them. If the RFP is a renewal, you can view the previous winning proposal and position your response accordingly.

If there's an incumbent, they do have advantages: established relationships, institutional knowledge, perhaps a proven history with the issuer. But incumbents also have weaknesses. The RFP may be issued because the issuer isn’t happy with the incumbent. Your proposal is an opportunity to speak to those realities without being negative or presumptuous.

 

Mistake #5: Being Too Text-Heavy

Even a beautifully written proposal can lose points if evaluators can't get through it. Dense paragraphs, long blocks of unbroken text, and heavy jargon are exhausting to read and evaluators are often reading under time pressure, scoring multiple proposals at once.

Make your proposal scannable. Look for opportunities to present information visually: callouts, quotes, statistics, comparison tables, timelines, process diagrams, milestone charts. 

Use headings and subheadings to create a clear structure that lets reviewers navigate quickly. I like to set up the shell in Word or Google Docs, assigning the formatting to style shortcuts. This enables the response team to use preset styles when adding text. 

I keep a separate style sheet printed out since, inevitably, with a large response team, someone’s going to get creative and go off in their own direction. I always conduct a last proofread simply for visual style when we’re just about ready to submit the RFP response, so I can make sure it’s scannable and visually appealing. 

Break up long explanations with bullet points where appropriate. And keep an eye on sentence length. If you're routinely writing sentences that run past three lines, simplify them. Some of our clients in fields like technology and education tend to write complex sentences; that’s okay if it’s an industry norm. However, try to simplify very complex sentences to make them easier to read, if at all possible. 

I know this can feel like you’re dumbing things down, but it’s really about clarity. You want everything simple, clear, and easy to understand. 

Mistake #6: Being Too Promotional

An RFP response may be a selling opportunity, but it shouldn’t read that way. It must address the issuer’s requirements directly.

Evaluators don't want to read about how great you are. They want to see proof that you can solve their specific problem. Those are very different things.

Specificity can help you avoid the marketing-speak. Replace "we have extensive experience in this area" with "we've completed seventeen similar implementations in the past four years, with an average go-live time of eleven weeks." Replace "our team is highly qualified" with the credentials, certifications, and relevant project histories that demonstrate it.

Case studies are one of your most powerful tools here. A well-constructed case study describes a challenge similar to the client's, explains exactly what you did, and quantifies the outcome. A case study persuades better than marketing copy. It’s the old “the proof is in the doing” motto.

 

Mistake #7: Ignoring the Evaluation Criteria

Most public-sector RFP documents contain the evaluation or scoring criteria. Each is written differently, so you’ll have to decode it, but it’s there. The procurement team literally tells you exactly what they are looking for an how heavily they will weigh each section.

For example, you may see a scoring rubric that looks something like this:

 

  • Technical Response (50%)
  • Past Projects (20%)
  • References (20%)
  • Pricing (10%)

 

This scoring rubric informs bidders that the technical response carries the most weight, so they should put their efforts behind it. Pricing is the least important qualification.

 

Another rubric may assign points: 

  • Technical Response (50 points)
  • Past Projects (20 points))
  • References (10 points)
  • Pricing (10 points)

 

Points may not equal 100; each issuer has its own point system.

Typically, the issuer then tallies the points assigned by the evaluators. If there are several evaluators, the points each assigns to a response are averaged. The winning bidder has the highest point score.

I typically review my response based on the scoring criteria. I ask myself, “If I were the issuer, would I give a high mark to this? How well does it meet the information shared in the scope document?”

Mistake #8: Submitting Without Full Team Review

The thing everyone hates about RFPs is the deadlines. The pressure is real, and it can get intense.

However, rushing to submit a document without giving it a final read-through can be a disaster.

Typos sneak in. Reused text has a former client’s name in it. Someone’s comments are still in the margins. The formatting is off. You forgot to add form XYZ to the end of the packet and that’s an immediately disqualification.

Yup, it’s all happened to teams I have worked with. We caught them all. 

This is why it’s critical to have people assigned to read through the RFP with fresh eyes. Even if you don’t have a big team, leave enough time in the schedule to set the document aside, and go back to it the next day after a good night’s sleep. 

I like to have someone read through for factual errors, someone do a typo read-through, and someone else for compliance and formatting. My company has great proofreaders, but the client is always responsible for finding any factual errors. After all, it’s their product, service, and company.

Build your timeline backward from the submission deadline, and allow enough cushion to do a thorough proofread.

 

Mistake #9: Overlooking Formatting and Compliance Details

This is a stupid mistake I see all the time. Teams rush to respond and don’t bother reading through all the supporting documents. Hidden on page 99 of Appendix Q in the RFP  packet is something like, “All proposals must be submitted in PDF format. Use Times New Roman type, black, no smaller than 12 point, with one-inch margins all around.”

Federal RFPs are even stricter. I just wrapped up an RFP that required a header and footer with extensive information: the issuer’s name, the respondent’s name, the RFP number, and a bunch of procurement codes. Failure to include this lengthy text string would result in immediate disqualification.

Most of the time, I see these little mistakes trip up response teams more often than big errors. Page limits, font requirements, margin specifications, file naming conventions, submission portal instructions, required attachments and more are details you can’t ignore. They’re part of the evaluation, whether they're explicitly scored or not. A proposal that exceeds the page limit may get disqualified.. Missing a required attachment can mean automatic disqualification, too.

You’ve spent so much time writing your response. Surely, you can spend time reading the formatting requirements. And following them.

Winning Is a Discipline, Not a Stroke of Luck

Throughout my 20+ years of helping clients respond to RFPs, I can say for sure that winning is more than luck. The teams that have consistently high win rates take the time to evaluate which RFPs they’ll bid on. They craft the response with care, following guidelines. They leave enough time for a thorough review. And they take the time to consider who they’re up against, whether it’s the incumbent or general competition, and create their responses accordingly. 

The organizations that consistently win RFPs have one thing in common: they treat the process as a discipline. They make deliberate decisions about which opportunities to pursue. They read thoroughly and plan carefully. They customize every response, use evidence instead of hype, and build in enough time to review and refine.

None of this is complicated, but it does require commitment. And if you look back at your recent proposals, you'll likely recognize at least a few of the patterns described here. 

And you know what? That’s good news. Everything I’ve shared here is fixable. We all make mistakes. The key to improvement is recognizing and fixing them.

Start by auditing your current approach. Which of these mistakes shows up most often? Where is your process breaking down? Even small improvements in bid selection, compliance mapping, or review structure can meaningfully improve your win rate over time.

Ready to Build a Stronger RFP Process?

At Seven Oaks Consulting, we've spent nearly two decades helping technology and education companies win the contracts they deserve. Our RFP Writing Services take the pressure off your team. We bring proven strategy, expert writing, and rigorous process to every proposal we touch.

We've also just launched our RFP Learning Center, a dedicated resource for teams who want to sharpen their in-house capabilities. Whether you're looking for templates, frameworks, or step-by-step guidance, the Learning Center is designed to help you respond smarter and win more.

Explore our RFP services and the Learning Center. Or get in touch directly. We love to talk through where your process stands and how we can help.

 


desk scene

How to Improve Your RFP Win Rate

If you’re wondering how to improve your RFP win rate, it’s likely that you’re on your fourth cup of coffee, staring at a 200-page RFP and wondering if it's too late to switch careers.

Sounds familiar?

You’ve probably responded to countless RFPs. Win some, lose some. But you’d like to reassure your team that you have a good chance of winning this one.

Right now, however, you’ve got 200 pages of mind-numbing legalese to read. Someone has already started their response shell, and they’ve mispelled the issuer’s name. Two people are complaining they don’t have time to work on their response sections, and your boss wants to know what potential profit margin you can expect if - when - you win it. 

Sound familiar? We've all been there.

Well, that frantic, reactive scramble is never how you win. If you really want to improve your RFP win rate, you need to take a breath and think strategically. Not just about the proposal you're writing right now, but about the whole pursuit from start to finish.

Grab a coffee or make a fresh pot (you'll need it). Let's walk through this together. I’ve been managing and writing RFPs for over 20 years. Here’s my experience to help you improve your win rate. 

Prepare Before You Begin the Response Document

One of the most common reasons organizations lose RFPs is that they respond to everything, regardless of whether they're a good fit for the work. They see dollar signs, get excited, hit submit, and then wonder why they keep losing. The reason they keep losing is that they weren’t a great fit for the work in the first place. 

Before you start your response document, the RFP team at your company should sit down and review the RFP together. Consider the following questions and compare them to the issuer’s document.

  • Can you do this work well? Not just  “can we do this,” but “can we do it well? Are we the best at this?”
  • Is this our ideal client? Industry, size, geography, contract type, and budget range. Ask yourself if the issuer would be a good fit with your organization. Do they match your ideal client profile? (Hint: If you don’t have an ideal client profile or persona, you need to take another step back. We can help you with this.)
  • What is the proof that you can do the work? Case studies, measurable outcomes, client testimonials, and references are important proof points in an RFP response. If you don't have these documented yet, building that library is job one. 
  • What makes you different? And no, "we're customer-focused and results-driven" does not count. Every company says that. Every single one. What actually sets you apart in a way that a buyer can verify and that a competitor can't easily copy?

Developing what’s called a rubric, or guidelines, for choosing your RFP is work you should do before responding to any RFP. You need to know what to consider and what to pass on. This step can improve your RFP win rate because you’ll stop chasing every opportunity and, instead, pursue the ones that you have a better chance of winning. 

Know When to Pass on Opportunities

Every time you bid on an RFP you shouldn't be bidding on, you’re wasting money.  Your team is spending hours on something that doesn’t pay off. That time could be going toward opportunities where you actually have a shot.

A solid go/no-go framework or RFP  rubric is one of the best investments you can make. Ask yourself:

  • Do we meet at least 90% of the mandatory requirements?
  • Do we have relevant, recent past performance?
  • Do we know this buyer, or have any relationship with them?
  • Can we realistically compete on price and value?
  • Do we have the bandwidth to write a genuinely competitive proposal?

If the answer is no to any of these, reconsider the bid. It’s better to bid on opportunities that are better aligned with your company’s core strengths than to go after ones that are a long shot. 

Where to Find RFP Opportunities

Now that you know what you're good at and what you're looking for, you can be much more intentional about where you look for opportunities.

Government procurement portals are the obvious starting point if you're in that space. Also check out industry-specific bid boards, private-sector procurement networks, and (this one is a pro tip) direct outreach to organizations you'd genuinely love to work with. Partner referrals are also great opportunities. Partnering with another company on a bid can be tricky, but it's well worth your time if they can introduce you to companies with which you’d like to work. (Partnership is another article for another day.

When you open an RFP announcement and get the feeling it was written for your company, you know you’ve got a hot opportunity. 

Read the Full RFP (Including all the Amendments and Forms)

Never skim RFPs. Find a quiet spot, sit down, and read it. Every. Single. Document.

Boring, I know. But hear me out: it's important.

The complete RFP package is a roadmap. Every section, even the boring administrative stuff, provides valuable information. The evaluation criteria tell you what the buyer actually cares about (hint: weigh these sections heavily). The questions help reveal differentiators and information to highlight in your response.

Formatting Requirements

The formatting requirements are essential because if you don’t follow these, your bid can get tossed out before it’s even looked at. I know it sounds picky to write your response in 12-point Times New Roman, but I have seen bids tossed out on a technicality - and it’s painful.

One team I knew many years ago experienced this. They spent a week, almost around the clock, writing a heavy technical RFP and forgot to check the formatting. They knew they had a page limit, so they reduced the font size and narrowed the margins to fit more words on the page just before submitting it. It was heartbreaking to see so much hard work tossed out because someone forgot to check the requirements!

Mirror the RFP Language

When you write your proposal, mirror the language of the RFP. Use their terminology, not yours. Structure your response the way they asked you to. Address every requirement explicitly—don't make them guess whether you can do something. The evaluator reading your proposal probably has a checklist. Make it easy for them to check every box.

A winning proposal feels like it was written for this buyer, not repurposed from last month's submission. Buyers can tell the difference, even if they can't quite articulate why one proposal feels more relevant than another. It's because it actually is.

Do Your Homework on the Incumbent

Here's a question people don't ask enough: who has the contract right now?

Some RFPs are actually written for the incumbent. The issuer wants to continue the contract, but they are required to issue an RFP. If an RFP sounds like it was written for your competitor, chances are good it was. That’s why reading it from start to finish is vital. And so is researching the incumbent.

How do you find out who has the existing contract? For private RFPs, conversations with the issuer can help. If you have a good relationship with the client, you can ask.

Federal and state procurement portals typically publish the name of the current contract holder. Some government portals publish previous RFP responses, and you can download them to see how your competitors responded. 

Build Relationships and Reputation Before the RFP Drops

Relationships. Brand reputation.

Both are hidden factors in improving RFP win rates.

Relationships with the issuer should start well before the RFP drops. This means things like getting to know them in person (at events and trade shows, for example); following them on LinkedIn; and genuinely showing an interest in their needs.

Your own brand reputation is also important. Procurement officers may search online for more information about your company if they aren’t familiar with it. What they find - your website, press release, social media profiles, Google reviews, directory listings - paints a bigger picture.

Online brand reputation management is also a vital component of winning RFPs.

Get Your Internal Process Together

Having a logical internal process for responding to RFP is essential to improving your win rate. If every response is a fire drill, you’re going to make mistakes. Someone’s going to drop the ball. Someone’s going to refuse to stay up until 4 a.m. writing the proposal. (Yes, I’ve been there, done that, and I won’t do it again. I learn from my mistakes.

What does a good RFP process look like? 

  1. Choose the RFP response team well before the RFP drops.
  2. Once the RFP has been issued, evaluate it according to your internal rubric. Is it a bid or no bid?
  3. If a bid, schedule a kickoff meeting. Circulate the full RFP bid package. Note the due date and how to submit the response: via the online portal, email, or in person.
  4. Ask the team to pre-read the RFP. The kickoff meeting should discuss:
    1. Strategy
    2. Win themes - how can you differentiate yourself to win this RFP?
    3. Products or services to highlight
    4. Case studies to share
    5. Other requirements, such as forms, insurance certificates, etc. 
  5. Make sure the RFP writer has the required information by the due date.
  6. Start discussing pricing now, too. Don’t wait until the last minute.
  7. Assign proofreaders and people to check the final bid against the scope.
    1. Some companies call this a red/blue team review.
    2. Decide how you want to handle it, but you do need checks for scope (did you address all the needs?) and formatting (does the format match the requirements), as well as for random typos.
  8. Prepare the response.
    1. Submit well before the deadline. Don’t leave the submission until the 9th hour. Procurement portals can crash, as can your own internet. Give yourself time to upload the documents.
  9. Confirm submission and follow the RFP until the winners are announced.
  10. Hold a debrief session after submission.
    1. What worked well?
    2. What can be improved?

If this sounds like a lot of work, guess what? It is. That’s why it’s important to be choosy about which RFPs you respond to. And it’s also why having a company like Seven Oaks Consulting by your side can help. We take the heavy work of writing the RFP draft off your team so you can focus on pricing, win themes, checking the draft, and submitting the final draft.

Price to Win, Not Just to Compete

"Price to win" doesn't mean "be the cheapest." It means understanding what the buyer is willing to pay, knowing roughly what the incumbent charges, and positioning your price so it makes sense in context. Sometimes that means coming in lower. Sometimes it means coming in higher but demonstrating why your value justifies the premium.

Do the research. Understand the market. Know your costs. And when the format allows, consider offering options or tiers that give the buyer flexibility. Sometimes that flexibility is exactly what tips the decision in your favor.

Measure Everything and Use the Data

Here's a habit that separates organizations with improving win rates from those who stay stuck: they track their outcomes and actually learn from them.

You should track and measure:

  1. Win rate by opportunity type. 
  2. Win rate by client industry. 
  3. Common reasons for loss. 
  4. Pricing feedback when you can get it. 
  5. Compliance gaps that keep showing up.
  6. Proposal quality issues that reviewers flagged.
  7. Feedback from the procurement team, if any, is provided.

This data is genuinely valuable, but only if you use it. Build it into a regular review process. Let it inform your go/no-go criteria, messaging, pricing strategy, and team training. The teams that measure their performance improve it. The ones that don't tend to repeat the same mistakes bid after bid.

The Bigger Picture

Here's what I want to leave you with: improving your RFP win rate isn't just about writing better proposals. It's about pursuing the right opportunities, understanding the competitive landscape before you bid, aligning your strategy to what the buyer actually cares about, and building the kind of relationships and internal discipline that compound over time.

None of this is magic. None of it is complicated, really. But it does require intention and a willingness to let go of the frantic energy of any individual bid and think strategically about your pursuit process as a whole.

So yes, go write a great proposal. But first, know your strengths, choose bids that are a good fit, build relationships, build your online brand, understand the incumbent, price intelligently, and measure what's working.

Do all of that consistently, and the win rate takes care of itself.

Now go make a fresh pot of coffee. You've got work to do.

RFP Writing Services from Experienced Proposal Writers

Seven Oaks Consulting helps companies find, manage, and write proposals to respond to RFP opportunities. If you lack a dedicated RFP writer or proposal manager, we can easily fill that gap with experienced RFP writing and proposal management services. We’ve crafted response templates for companies, written winning bids, and found new opportunities. Contact us to learn more if you want to expand your RFP team without incurring costly overhead. 

 


Desk with keyboard

Google AI Search Takes the Fun Out of Surfing the Web

Google AI search just made finding things online faster, smoother, and more intelligent. I should be thrilled. Instead, I'm sad, as yet another fun chapter of the web fades away.

Google AI Search Announcement - Another Huge Shift in Discovery

Yesterday afternoon, I sat down to research new sprinklers for my garden.

Forty-five minutes later, I had seventeen browser tabs open, a half-formed opinion about the decline of community forums, and a deep familiarity with a Blogspot page last updated in 2013 by someone who really, really loved restoring radios.

Sprinklers? What sprinklers? I looked up and realized I'd dropped down the search rabbit hole again.

And it sure was fun.

Which made Google's announcement yesterday land with a particular kind of thud.

What Google AI Search Changes

The short version: Google has rebuilt its search experience around AI, and this time it isn't a half-measure. The search box now expands as you type long questions in plain language. You can drag in images, videos, files, or open browser tabs and use them as context. The wall between "search results" and "AI chat" has been torn down entirely. Now, it's one experience.

And for subscribers to the premium tiers, persistent AI agents will monitor the web on your behalf around the clock, pinging you when something relevant changes.

Boosting Efficiency at the Expense of Discovery

Objectively, this is a remarkable piece of engineering. It's amazing how Google's search has changed over the years. I still miss old-style search discovery.

Every defense of old-school search I've seen frames it as nostalgia, or stubbornness, or an irrational attachment to typing keywords. What gets missed is that the wandering wasn't annoying to most people. It was just plain fun.

RIP Discovery, Hello Efficiency

When you hit that 'enter' key after typing in your question, you braced for impact. Sometimes your answer was at the top. Sometimes you had to hunt through website after website to find what you were after.

But that was the fun of the whole thing. Finding the quirky personal site, the obsessive hobby forum, the essay someone posted in 2007 and forgot about. This is the joy of discovery, the quick little dopamine hit.

Google has once more smoothed that out. Made the net more efficient. And it makes me sad.

An AI that hands you a synthesized answer at the top of the page doesn't just change how you get information. It changes what information gets made. If the synthesis is good enough that nobody clicks through to the source, the sources lose their reason for existing.

The Old Discovery Search Still Exists!

The good news is that the human-curated web is still out there. You have to know where to look.

Ironically, Google's new AI search helped me curate the following list.

A few places worth bookmarking:

  • Marginalia Search — Built specifically to surface text-heavy personal sites and weird blogs that algorithmic search has quietly buried.
  • Neocities — A revival of the personal homepage. People building their own little corners of the web, GeoCities-style.
  • Ooh.directory — A hand-maintained index of thousands of independent blogs, organized by actual humans into actual topics.
  • Tildes — A non-profit, invite-only forum built deliberately around long-form discussion, without ads or engagement bait.
  • Lemmy & Kbin — Decentralized, self-governed communities that exist entirely outside the attention economy.
  • Substack Reader — Independent newsletters by people who actually have something to say, written directly for their readers.

My Take: Efficiency Is Good, But I Miss the Fun of Discovery

I don't think Google's new search is bad. For a lot of queries like directions, business hours, quick factual lookups, anything where you just need the answer, and you need it now, Google's changes do make it better.

I'll use it. So will you, probably. You can see that I used it to help me write this article. It was able to answer the questions I asked it: where can I still find the old-fashioned search engines?

But "better at getting answers" and "better for discovery" are two different things, and I think we're allowed to hold both thoughts at once. The version of search that made us click through, scroll past, and occasionally fall sideways into someone's vintage radio restoration blog — that version was doing something for the ecosystem that the new version isn't.

Maybe I'm wrong about this. Maybe AI summaries will send more targeted traffic to better sources, and everything will be fine. I'm open to that.

In the meantime, I've got seventeen tabs to close.

 


The SEO Golden Ticket

The world lost its collective mind over six golden tickets. 

Do you remember Charlie and the Chocolate Factory? The world goes crazy in search of the golden ticket hidden inside six Wonka chocolate bars. It’s the passport into the land of dreams, the mysterious chocolate factory where no one has been allowed to go for many years. At the end, however, it is poor, honest, hard-working Charlie Bucket who finds a golden ticket and ends up not just seeing the magical factory, but becoming Wonka’s heir.

 

Charlie craved the golden ticket - who wouldn’t? But he didn’t stoop to tricks or gaming the system to get it like the rich kid, Veruca Salt, or the German kid, Augustus Gloop.  

 

Marketers all wish for the golden ticket. We chase it every day: we read countless “this is what you do to woo an AI search engine” articles. We seek the right tool, the best platform, the secret sauce that will get us the website traffic.

 

Unfortunately, it doesn’t exist.

 

I’ve been in business for 19 years. From 2008 to 2011, I wrote for content mills and the websites that churned out hundreds of articles a month on everything from art to zoology. After the Google updates of late 2011, many of those websites that had been making lots of money went out of business. 

 

Then the model changed, and instead of chasing the right keywords used a certain amount of time in an article, SEO experts chased authority. They wanted credentials. That faded, too.

 

Now we have AI-everything. AI has made it easy to generate mass content at scale. It reads well, it sounds good. But is it saying anything unique and interesting?

 

The tools have changed, but the problem remains the same.  What will drive traffic to my website?  Google remains the inscrutable oracle, dispensing graces and favors seemingly at random, and we, the content marketers, continue to seek the magic golden ticket to Google’s favors.

 

 If we only had the right prompt. If we only buy a subscription to the right tool. If we only fire all our writers and use our AI platforms, we can generate mass content at scale that Google will love…

 

There is no golden ticket. There is no magic. There is only work, good work, honest work, the ethical work of human-created, audience-centered content that has something unique, original, and important to share.

 

Let me give you an example. My media business, Home Garden Joy, celebrates its 19th anniversary this year. Our best traffic article was published in 2018. It offers insight into growing peach trees from cuttings, which I have done on our farm. It took me a full day to write and photograph the article, taking original pictures of each step in the process as my husband demonstrated them.


This content consistently ranks number one, generates thousands of views per month, and has ranked well for us despite many Google core updates since it was published in 2018. It generates search traffic because it does not chase the latest SEO trend. It is human-created content, written for a specific audience of DIY homesteaders and backyard farmers. 

 

Over the years, I have published several of these articles. Each one successfully builds my website traffic. None of them is a blockbuster, but taken together, they generate steady traffic. Not everything I publish ranks well, but the more I publish and study the analytics, the more I learn, and the better I get.

 

However, it takes time and effort to use this approach. Each one of us harbors the wish, deep inside, that a golden ticket exists. The key to FutureProof SEO isn't a golden ticket, but following evergreen best practices. 


AI Content Doesn't Work: What the Data Shows

AI content doesn't work. It's something I've felt in my bones since I first noticed people casually saying, "Just use AI to write it." I couldn't say why; I just felt it deep in my gut. This stuff isn't good, I'd think, but the subject matter experts reviewing it would shrug and say, "Well, it's accurate."

Here's the thing: accuracy matters, but if you're going for long-term organic search traffic to your website, what matters even more is creativity. Usefulness. Human point of view. Sure, the content must be accurate. After all, nobody wants to read an inaccurate how-to article. But at the end of the day, content must be engaging. It must offer us a new viewpoint or expand into new areas of thought. If you're just regurgitating the same old, same old, your content has little value.

Google Ranks Original Content More Favorably

Google has always looked for certain quality signals when choosing which web pages to display first in search results. SEO experts refer to these signals by the acronym: E-E-A-T. These letters stand for Experience, Expertise, Authoritativeness, and Trustworthiness.

Does the author have the experience? The expert, hands-on knowledge needed to write about the topic? What about authority - what authority signals does the author have online? How can we trust the author's knowledge?

This is why websites shifted to 'expert author' bios several years ago. I used to write extensively for some of the larger websites that have categories for every topic under the sun. Today, the content they continue to publish with my byline is business and gardening, and they love sticking my Master Gardener credentials after my name. It's the little signals that they're going for, and for good reason: Google pays attention to them.

AI-Generated Content Doesn't Produce Results, and the Data Shows It

Search Engine Land published a study by Bogdan Bobiak and SE Ranking that found that AI-generated content does not support an effective, long-term SEO strategy. The big question: Can generative AI produce large volumes of content that rank and perform well in search?

SE Ranking purchased 20 new domain names in unique industries. They then fed 100 long-tail keywords into an AI content platform to produce 100 articles per domain, for a total of 2,000 AI-generated articles. They published them and examined the results.

Here are the numbers:

Initial Results (Month 1)

  • 71% of articles indexed — surprisingly high for zero‑authority domains.
  • ~120,000 impressions
  • 244 clicks

Six‑Month Results

  • 706,328 impressions
  • 1,062 clicks total
  • Performance plateaued early and stayed flat.
  • Roughly 1 click for every 2 articles.

Sixteen‑Month Results

  • An additional 300,000 impressions and ~381 clicks.
  • Total after 16 months:
  • 1,092,079 impressions
  • 1,381 clicks

AI Content Fails the Google Quality Test

According to the study's author, as quoted in his Search Engine Land article previously cited,

"Google indexed most pages quickly, but without authority, unique insight, or trust signals, rankings collapsed within months."

Why Human-Created Content Succeeds While AI-Generated Content Fails

Here's what my gut recognized long ago when I read AI-generated content, and why I believe human-created content succeeds for long-term SEO success:

  • People add creative insights to existing topics. That's why we can have hundreds of new gardening articles published each year. It's not that the authors invent new gardening techniques; the way I grow lettuce is pretty much how lettuce has been grown for the past hundred years. What human garden writers add to the topic is their unique expertise, their creative expression. This is not something AI can do. It can tell you how much sunlight and water lettuce needs, but not why you love growing it.
  • Human expression is valuable. AI degrades that value.  Decades ago, when I began my writing career, I read a book by Brenda Ueland, a noted writing instructor. She said, "Everyone is valuable and has something interesting to say," and I believe this statement with my whole heart. No two people express the same thing in the same way. Two people can stand in front of a Monet painting and see something different; two people can sit next to one another at a concert and hear something completely unique to them. This is what makes artistic expression so powerful. It is what makes us human. AI strips this out. It cannot feel or express; it can only iterate. AI produces smooth, grammatically correct copy that includes many ideas, but it has no way to make us feel, to see through its eyes, because it has none. The content falls flat. It adds nothing of value. People recognize it first and don't click through to read the articles; Google eventually catches on.
  • AI has its place, but not as a creator - as an efficiency partner. I am not anti-AI. I am pro-efficiency. Using AI judiciously - to research, outline, or reword a bumpy sentence - is the same as using a power drill to screw pieces of wood together. Sure, you can use a hand-crank drill and laboriously screw the same two planks together. The tool doesn't make the final work good or bad. It speeds it along. The same goes for AI platforms. They can help the work of creativity go faster, but they cannot and should not replace creativity.

Of course, you may say that as a writer, which I am, and a content marketer and marketing consultant, which I am also, I have a vested interest in stating that human-written content is superior to AI-generated content. I suppose I do, but I do not see it that way. AI use is not all or nothing, use it or don't touch it with a ten-foot pole topic. I see it as another tool, the way the IBM Selectric typewriter replaced my mom's manual Royal typewriter on my desk, and eventually a PC replaced a typewriter. I'm still writing; only the tools have changed, each one making my ability to write faster and easier.

I do believe that more studies will demonstrate what this single study shows us: that AI-generated content does not produce good search engine traffic. It makes us feel we are efficient and doing all the right things, but it is not getting the right results.

 

 

 

 


SEO Structural Fixes: Five High‑Impact Improvements for Stronger Organic Performance

Search engine optimization isn’t just about keywords, backlinks, or publishing more content. The underlying structure of your website—how pages relate, how information is organized, and how clearly you answer search intent—plays a major role in whether your content ranks or gets buried. Structural SEO fixes often deliver faster, more reliable gains than publishing new articles because they improve clarity, reduce confusion for search engines, and strengthen topical authority.

Below are five essential structural fixes that every website should review regularly. Each one helps search engines understand your content more effectively, improves user experience, and supports long‑term organic growth.

1. Rewrite Page Intros for AI and Include a Short Answer

AI‑powered search features—Google’s AI Overviews, Bing’s AI answers, and other generative systems—pull concise, authoritative summaries from webpages. If your content doesn’t provide a clear, direct answer at the top, you risk being excluded from these summaries.

Why This Matters

Search engines increasingly rely on structured, scannable information. A strong intro signals relevance immediately and increases your chances of being featured in AI‑generated results, featured snippets, and “People Also Ask” boxes.

How to Fix It

  • Start each page with a 60‑word, plain‑language answer to the main query.
  • Follow with a brief explanation of what the page covers.
  • Avoid fluff, storytelling, or long lead‑ins before addressing the topic.
  • Use the primary keyword naturally in the first sentence.

 

2. Merge Overlapping Pages Targeting the Same Intent

Most websites accumulate content over time—blogs, landing pages, product descriptions, FAQs—and eventually multiple pages begin targeting the same keyword or intent. This creates keyword cannibalization, where your own pages compete against each other.

Why This Matters

When search engines see several pages covering the same topic, they struggle to determine which one is the authoritative source. As a result, all pages may rank poorly.

How to Fix It

  • Audit your content for overlapping topics or similar keywords.
  • Identify which page has the strongest performance or most comprehensive content.
  • Merge the weaker or redundant pages into a single master page.
  • Consolidate the best content from each page into the final version.
  • Redirect the merged pages to the master page using 301 redirects.

Benefits

  • Stronger rankings for the consolidated page.
  • Clearer topical authority.
  • Reduced crawl waste.
  • Better user experience with one definitive resource.

This is one of the highest‑ROI structural fixes for sites with large content libraries.

3. Redirect One of the Merged Pages to the Final Master Page

Merging content is only half the job. The redirect is what signals to search engines that the old page’s authority, backlinks, and relevance should transfer to the new master page.

Why This Matters

Without a redirect:

  • Search engines may continue indexing the outdated page.
  • Link equity remains split.
  • Users may land on outdated or incomplete content.
  • Cannibalization persists.

How to Fix It

  • After merging content, set up a 301 redirect from the old URL to the new master page.
  • Update your sitemap to reflect the change.
  • Remove the old URL from internal links (more on that in the next section).
  • Monitor Google Search Console for crawl errors or redirect loops.

Pro Tip

If multiple pages are being merged, redirect each one individually to the master page—not to the homepage or a category page. This preserves topical relevance and ranking signals.

4. Fix Internal Links Pointing to Outdated URLs

Internal links are one of the strongest structural signals you control. When they point to outdated, redirected, or irrelevant pages, they dilute authority and confuse search engines.

Why This Matters

Search engines use internal links to:

  • Understand which pages are most important.
  • Map your site’s hierarchy.
  • Determine topical clusters.

If outdated URLs remain in your internal linking structure, search engines may continue crawling them unnecessarily or misinterpret your content priorities.

How to Fix It

  • Run a crawl using tools like Screaming Frog, Sitebulb, or Ahrefs.
  • Identify internal links pointing to:
    • Redirected URLs
    • 404 pages
    • Outdated content
    • Pages you’ve merged or removed
  • Replace those links with updated URLs.
  • Ensure anchor text remains relevant and descriptive.

Benefits

  • Cleaner crawl paths.
  • Stronger authority flow to priority pages.
  • Reduced index bloat.
  • Better user experience.

This fix is often overlooked, but it can dramatically improve how search engines interpret your site.

5. Review Pillar Pages and Add or Remove as Needed

Pillar pages are the backbone of a strong content architecture. They serve as comprehensive hubs that link to related subtopics, forming a clear topical cluster.

Why This Matters

Search engines reward sites that demonstrate depth and organization within a topic. Pillar pages help you:

  • Establish topical authority.
  • Improve internal linking.
  • Support long‑tail keyword rankings.
  • Provide a better user journey.

How to Fix It

  • Review your existing pillar pages to ensure they still reflect your content strategy.
  • Add new pillar pages when:
    • You’ve expanded into a new topic area.
    • You have multiple supporting articles that need a central hub.
  • Remove or merge pillar pages when:
    • They overlap with other pillars.
    • They no longer align with your business goals.
    • They are too thin to serve as true hubs.
  • Ensure each pillar page links to all relevant cluster pages—and vice versa.

Pro Tip

A strong pillar page should be:

  • Comprehensive but scannable.
  • Updated regularly.
  • Supported by at least 5–10 high‑quality cluster pages.

Make SEO Structural Fixes Part of a Regular Workflow

SEO structural fixes are some of the most powerful improvements you can make to your website. By rewriting intros for AI, merging overlapping pages, redirecting outdated URLs, cleaning up internal links, and optimizing your pillar structure, you create a site that search engines can understand and reward. These changes not only improve rankings—they also enhance user experience and strengthen your long‑term content strategy.

Seven Oaks Consulting’s FutureProof SEO is a strategic, forward‑looking approach designed to keep your website competitive as search evolves. It blends structural optimization, AI‑ready content, and long‑term authority building so your site stays visible no matter how algorithms change. If you want an SEO program built for tomorrow—not just today—contact us to get started with FutureProof SEO.


What Is SEO?

Search engine optimization (SEO) is the practice of improving a website so it appears more prominently in search engine results, especially for the keywords and questions your audience is actively typing into Google, Bing, and other search tools. At its core, SEO helps search engines understand your content and helps people find it.

What SEO Actually Means

SEO is about increasing visibility, relevance, and trust. When someone searches for information, search engines evaluate millions of pages and choose the ones most likely to satisfy the query. SEO aligns your website with those expectations by improving both the content itself and the technical foundation that supports it.

SEO isn’t a single tactic—it’s a collection of practices that work together to make your site more discoverable and more useful.

Why SEO Matters for Businesses and Creators

SEO is one of the most effective long‑term growth channels because:

  • People trust organic search results more than ads.
  • Search traffic is consistent and intent‑driven—people are actively looking for solutions.
  • High‑ranking pages can generate traffic for months or years without additional cost.
  • SEO supports every stage of the customer journey, from awareness to conversion.

A strong SEO strategy helps you reach the right audience at the exact moment they need what you offer.

The Core Components of SEO

SEO is typically divided into three major pillars, each addressing a different part of how search engines evaluate a site.

On‑Page SEO

Seven Oaks Consulting offers on-page SEO consulting. We help make your website more visible to search engines. When it's visible to search engines, it reaches more people, increasing the opportunity for leads and sales.

This approach focuses on the content and structure of individual pages.

  • Keyword research — Understanding what your audience searches for.
  • Content quality — Creating helpful, accurate, and engaging information.
  • Page structure — Using headings, internal links, and clear formatting.
  • Metadata — Titles and descriptions that help search engines interpret your page.
  • User experience — Readability, clarity, and relevance.

It ensures your content matches search intent and is easy for both humans and algorithms to understand.

Technical SEO

This ensures your site is accessible, fast, and easy for search engines to crawl.

  • Site speed — Faster pages improve rankings and user satisfaction.
  • Mobile optimization — Most searches happen on phones.
  • Crawlability — Search engines must be able to access your pages.
  • Indexing — Ensuring the right pages appear in search results.
  • Site architecture — Logical navigation and clean URL structures.
  • Security — HTTPS is a ranking factor and a trust signal.

Technical SEO is the foundation that allows your content to perform well.

Off‑Page SEO

This focuses on signals outside your website that influence credibility.

  • Backlinks — Links from other reputable sites act as endorsements.
  • Brand mentions — Even unlinked references can build authority.
  • Social signals — Engagement can indirectly support visibility.
  • Reputation — Reviews and public perception matter.

Off‑page SEO builds the trust and authority that search engines look for when ranking content.

How Search Engines Decide What to Rank

Search engines use complex algorithms, but the core principles remain consistent:

  • Relevance — Does the content match the search query?
  • Quality — Is the information accurate, helpful, and well‑written?
  • Authority — Do other trusted sites reference or link to it?
  • User experience — Do visitors stay, engage, and find what they need?
  • Performance — Does the site load quickly and work smoothly on all devices?

SEO aligns your site with these criteria so it becomes a strong candidate for top rankings.

What Makes SEO Effective Long‑Term

SEO compounds over time. A well‑optimized page can:

  • Attract ongoing traffic without additional cost.
  • Strengthen your site’s overall authority.
  • Support future content by improving domain trust.
  • Reduce reliance on paid advertising.

Because search behavior is constant, SEO becomes a sustainable engine for growth.

How SEO and Content Marketing Work Together

SEO brings people to your content; content marketing gives them a reason to stay. When combined:

  • SEO identifies what people want to know.
  • Content marketing delivers the answers.
  • Together, they build trust, visibility, and conversions.

They’re two sides of the same strategy.

 


What Is Content Marketing?

Content marketing is a strategic approach to creating and sharing valuable, relevant material that attracts and engages a clearly defined audience, ultimately guiding them toward a business goal such as a purchase, subscription, or long‑term loyalty.

What Content Marketing Actually Is

Content marketing focuses on providing value first rather than pushing a direct sales message. Instead of saying “buy this,” a brand offers information, insights, or experiences that help people solve problems, learn something new, or feel inspired. Over time, this builds trust—trust that eventually leads to action.

At its core, content marketing includes any format where a brand communicates through content rather than advertising. That content can be educational, entertaining, or both, as long as it serves the audience’s needs.

Why Businesses Use Content Marketing

Content marketing matters because it supports the entire customer journey:

  • Awareness — People discover a brand through helpful articles, videos, or social posts.
  • Consideration — They learn more through guides, comparisons, or case studies.
  • Decision — They feel confident choosing a product because the brand has already demonstrated expertise.
  • Loyalty — Ongoing content keeps customers engaged and returning.

This approach works because modern buyers prefer to research on their own. Content gives them the information they need—without pressure.

Common Types of Content Marketing

Different formats serve different goals and audiences. Some of the most widely used include:

  • Blog posts — Explain concepts, answer questions, and improve search visibility.
  • Videos — Demonstrate products, teach skills, or tell stories in an engaging way.
  • Social media content — Build community and spark conversation.
  • Email newsletters — Nurture relationships and deliver personalized value.
  • Podcasts — Share expertise and build a loyal audience through long‑form storytelling.
  • Infographics — Simplify complex information into visual summaries.
  • E‑books and white papers — Offer in‑depth insights for more serious or technical audiences.
  • Case studies — Show real‑world results and build credibility.

Each format plays a different role, and most brands use a mix.

How Content Marketing Works Behind the Scenes

Effective content marketing isn’t random posting—it’s a structured process:

  1. Understand the audience — What they care about, struggle with, or aspire to.
  2. Define goals — Traffic, leads, sales, brand awareness, or customer retention.
  3. Create a content strategy — Topics, formats, publishing schedule, and distribution channels.
  4. Produce high‑quality content — Useful, accurate, and aligned with the brand’s voice.
  5. Distribute the content — Through search engines, social platforms, email, or partnerships.
  6. Measure performance — Engagement, conversions, and long‑term impact.
  7. Refine and repeat — Adjust based on what resonates most.

This cycle turns content into a long‑term asset that continues to attract and convert people over time.

What Makes Content Marketing Effective

A few principles separate strong content from forgettable content:

  • Audience-first thinking — Content must solve real problems or answer real questions.
  • Consistency — Regular publishing builds momentum and trust.
  • Authenticity — People respond to genuine voices, not corporate jargon.
  • Search optimization — Content should be discoverable when people look for answers.
  • Clear value — Every piece should teach, inspire, or entertain.
  • A strategic path to action — Content should guide people toward the next step without being pushy.

When these elements come together, content becomes a powerful engine for growth.

Why Content Marketing Works Long-Term

Unlike paid advertising, which stops the moment the budget runs out, strong content continues to deliver value for months or years. A well‑written article can keep attracting visitors. A helpful video can keep earning views. A good email sequence can keep nurturing new subscribers.

This compounding effect is why content marketing is often considered one of the most cost‑effective ways to build a brand.

 


Writing for AI LLM Models

SEO for AI search is a hot topic.Search Engine Land published an article on February 18, 2026, in which it stated that 44% of ChatGPT citations come from the top one-third of the content on the page.

Why is this important? Because we know that AI now dominates search. Many people will not go beyond the ChatGPT or Copilot snippet at the top of their search engine results. AI search snippets have become the new top of funnel (TOFU) content. While we used to build this out on our own websites, now we, as marketers, try to get as many AI snippets and citations as possible. Their snippets have replaced ourTOFU content, and our websites focus onMOFU and BOFU content.

But how do you encourage ChatGPT and Copilot to pick up on your own content, produce it as a snippet, and cite your brand (with a link)? The secret is in the shape – that is, shaping your content by packing useful information into the top of the article, or throughout the whole thing. 

This is called the upside-down triangle method of content shaping, when the first paragraph packs the most information. Let’s dive into shaping content for AI search.

The Upside-Down Triangle Paragraph and Its Importance in SEO for AI Search

 I first learned about the upside-down triangle in sixth grade. We had a workbook that reproduced paragraphs, and we had to choose which ‘shape’ the paragraph was: a triangle, an upside-down triangle, or a rectangle.

The upside-down triangle pushes the main idea to the top of the paragraph. The topic sentence becomes the lede. In content writing for SEO, we want to put the big idea or key takeaway first.

  • The triangle puts the main idea or topic sentence last. It anchors the paragraph, and all the information preceding it builds until it concludes with the big idea. Many of us wrote for theinternet using this formula in the pre-AI days, but in today’s AI-driven search, this writing style will not help your content rank well.
  •  The rectangle uses every sentence to provide rich details and useful information. No one sentence is more important than the others. All answer the question with different, very useful information. This is actually the most difficult shape to write, yet it does occur. I have found it mostly in scientific and healthcare literature, and somewhat in technology.

When it comes to AI-based search, the goal is to push the most useful, relevant information into the topic sentence and the upper third of the content. Hence, the upside-down triangle wins when it comes to shaping content for AI search.

Good SEO Techniques Still Rule!

I used the example from my own website, Home Garden Joy, to prove that both the basics of good SEO and the upside-down triangle are the most helpful for gaining the top SERP position.

Myrecipe for vegetarian bierocks – an original adaptation of a traditional runza (stuffed dough pocket) recipe – ranks #1 for the keyword: vegetarian bierocks.

It comes up first in Microsoft Copilot for AI-based snippets or the ‘best vegetarian bierocks recipe’ with a link back to my website, Home Garden Joy. That is pure GOLD in today’s AI-driven search.

It also ranks first in the images in Google for the keyword term, as well as the first article for the same keyword term.

Why does it rank well?

Traditional SEO Best Practices

I usetraditional SEO best practices throughout the article. I have gone back and revised the original article several times.

  • Keywords – I chose a good keyword term. My content on the website is optimized around the keyword term, using H1, H2, meta title, meta description, and so forth, all around the term. The content is not “orphaned” on my site.
  • Structure – The recipe is structured in the upside-down triangle method. No rambling stories or gushing tales of how my family loves them. I know why recipe bloggers did this in the past, but it was never my style. Now, in today’s AI-driven search, I believe that such content at the beginning of a recipe or article is detrimental when, in the past, it was helpful to rankings. I go right to the point: what is a bierock, how I made this recipe vegetarian and whole food-plant based, and how it transports and freezes well. Boom, done, into the article.
  • Images -In the last update, I took new photos of the finished bierocks, focusing on making them look appealing. Thankfully, the last time I made them, they did come out looking tasty! Adding good alt tags to the images has helped them rank well in Google Image search.

SEO for AI Search

The structure is what makes this blog post appeal to AI search. It’s the upside-down triangle format of the piece. The first several sentences of the article are packed with information directly on the topic of ‘vegetarian bierocks’. This includes the definition of what a bierock is, what makes this recipe vegetarian, and whether it freezes or transports well.

How to Get Your Older Posts to Rank Well for AI Search

I have edited hundreds of blog posts over the years, and I have noticed that many writers “circle the airport before landing the plane”, meaning they take a while to get to their topic sentence. As an editor, I found I could typically cut 1-3 sentences (sometimes entire paragraphs) and finally get to the lede – the topic sentence – and the meatof the introduction.

In order to rank well for the current AI-based search models, you need to cut away all of the fluff at the beginning of your online content and immediately answer the question that is posed by your topic. It doesn’t matter if you’re writing about vegetarian bierrocks or SEO. “The facts, ma’am, just the facts” should be your mantra moving forward.

What About Creative Expression?

I’m glad you brought that up, because I have always felt that ‘writing for the search engines’ limited my creative expression. Even before the advent of AI-based search, I always felt that writing for a keyword phrase limited my ability to cover a topic. I was so concerned about using the keyword correctly and all the stuff that goes along with “SEO writing” that I forgot that SEO writing is simply good writing – writing first for people, and for search engines second.

There are ways you can address this if you truly feel that your creativity is stifled. First, you can add a summary to the start of your article. It should pack all the juicy information at the top. If you are updating older blog posts, that’s a good way to update them without having to delete stories that you love. Keep the story about Aunt Mary’s mashed potatoes, but add an opening summary that addresses why this is the best mashed potato recipe on the internet and the unusual ingredients it contains, and that may be enough to bump it in the SERPs.

Updating Old Posts for New AI-Based Search

Now that you understand this one facet of crafting text for AI-based search, what’s next? What do you do if (like me) you have over 1,000 old posts – and some of them are written in the old let’s ramble on before we start style?

  • Download the URLs using Google Search Console. I download mine into a spreadsheet because it is easier to sort and search through the metrics using spreadsheets than trying to find them on Google.
  •  Prioritize your updates on posts languishing on the second page of Google’s SERPs. These are the posts with promise – but not with so much traffic that you jeopardize their position if you make a mistake during the update.
  • For each post, research the current trending keywords and competitors' articles. What should you add to yours to improve it?
  • Read with a critical eye. Do you “circle the airport without landing the plane” in prose, or ramble on without getting to the point? Adding summaries packed with information helps, or pruning back your text (your choice).
  • Add FAQs, if appropriate.
  • Update internal links and check all links to make sure they aren’t dead-ending in a 404 page not found error.
  • Make sure your post isn’t orphaned. It’s amazing how many blogs are filled with posts that aren’t linked from anywhere else on the website, making them orphans – effectively invisible to search engine crawlers.
  • Check your images. Did you license them properly? If not, go back and either remove them or license them now. If you took them yourself, can they be improved? My bierocks article benefited greatly from new photos. You may find your articles do, too. I have found that search engines seem to like original photographs.

Get Help with Big SEO Update Projects

Seven Oaks Consulting tacklesSEO updates for AI search. It's ideal for companies that want to improve their presence in AI search but lack the resources to do it themselves. We’d love to speak with you further. Contact us today about updating older posts for new AI-based SEO.


Jeanne Grunert, Sr. Content Strategist and Copywriter, Appointed to Fourth NAIWE Term

Jeanne Grunert, noted content marketing expert and award-winning writer

Sr. Content Strategist and Copywriter Jeanne Grunert Returns to NAIWE for Fourth Term on Expert Panel

Seven Oaks Consulting’s founder and president, Jeanne Grunert, will return to the National Association of Independent Writers and Editors (NAIWE) to serve a fourth term as the nonprofit’s branding and marketing expert.

“I’m excited to share my branding and marketing knowledge with my fellow writers and editors,” Jeanne said. “I love serving on the NAIWE expert panel and teaching writers how to market and promote their work.”

Jeanne is no stranger to the writing world. An award-winning writer herself, she enjoyed a successful freelance writing career before entering the marketing profession over 30 years ago.

“I understand the difficulties writers face when marketing their work,” she said. “And I know what it takes to build a personal brand as an independent writer and editor. As a certified personal branding specialist, I know the importance of personal branding for writers. I have built brands for startups and worked with 100-year-old organizations that wish to update their brand image. There is so much to building a great brand, and writers can truly benefit from using these techniques.”

Jeanne began her writing career at the age of 14 when her short story, “Runaway Boys,” won the Brockport Science Fiction and Fantasy competition. She studied fiction writing with Nancy Kress and Stephen Donaldson and published several short stories and magazine articles while in her teens. In her early 20s, she was a frequent freelance contributor to equestrian and religious publications, writing feature articles and personal essays. Her work has been anthologized numerous times, including in the popular “Chicken Soup for the Soul” book series.

In 1995, Jeanne was promoted to Marketing Manager of Martin Viette Nurseries, an upscale garden center and retail store on Long Island’s Gold Coast. She then embarked on a successful marketing career, obtaining her Master of Science (with distinction) from New York University and winning numerous awards for branding, catalog, and direct mail marketing. She has led marketing for divisions of The College Board, McGraw-Hill Education, and Teachers College, Columbia University.

In 2007, Jeanne moved to Virginia and founded her own marketing consulting agency, Seven Oaks Consulting. She offers content marketing strategy and plans, fractional senior content marketing support, and copywriting services through Seven Oaks. Seven Oaks supports technology, manufacturing, healthcare, and business services companies and white-label content marketing services to digital and local marketing agencies that focus on these industries.

As the NAIWE Branding and Marketing Expert, Jeanne Grunert serves on a distinguished panel of experts that offers guidance and help to writers through seminars, workshops, articles, and more. The National Association of Independent Writers and Editors is home to more than 9,000 freelance (independent) professionals focused on copywriting, creative writing, editing, and book publishing.