Brand advocate finder

Purpose

Independent voices are worth more than a company's own posts, when they are credible in the field and not paid to say what the company wants. This skill finds candidates with real standing in a specific sub-field, screens them for independence and reach, and shows the evidence for each judgment, so the team knows what is verified and what still needs a check.

When to use

• The company wants advisers, speakers, or public endorsers in a named field.
• A co-marketing or content program needs credible outside voices.
• An existing advocate list needs checking.

Route elsewhere when:

• The question is customers or prospects. Use prospect-list-building.
• The question is paid influencer campaigns. Use creator-program-strategy.

Inputs

• The specific sub-field, not the broad category.
• The role wanted: public representative, or advisory. A public role leans on reach. An advisory role leans almost entirely on credibility.
• Exclusions: direct competitors, existing partners, and anyone the company has already ruled out.

Procedure

1. Pin the sub-field and the role. "B2B demand generation for software" is a sub-field. "Marketing" is not.
2. Set the exclusions before searching, and record them.
3. Source candidates in layers, strongest credibility signal first:
   • Former senior operators in the sub-field who now advise or consult independently.
   • Authors of well-regarded articles, talks, or research in the field.
   • Former employees of a recognized leader in the field, now independent. Their standing can come from the company they left.
   • Founders of companies that were sold or closed, where the field knows their work.
4. Screen each candidate on three criteria, in this order:
   • Field credibility: a track record in the sub-field that others can verify.
   • Independence: no current employment or paid relationship that would conflict, and no commercial tie to a competitor.
   • Reach: a visible audience, judged from evidence the team can check, such as published work, speaking, or audience data the candidate shares.
5. Mark each criterion as confirmed, likely, or unverified. Do not mark a criterion confirmed on the basis of the candidate's own description.
6. Rank by credibility first. A candidate with high reach and weak credibility stays lower on the list than one with strong credibility and modest reach. Read the size and type of companies in the work history before the reach figure. A large audience built only on small-company or solo work transfers little credibility to a buyer audience.
7. List the outstanding checks for each candidate: independence, availability, past endorsements, and any conflicts found.
8. Tier the shortlist. As author defaults: approach now for candidates with confirmed credibility and independence; nurture for those with likely credibility; pass for any candidate with a failed independence check or unverified credibility.

Output

• A shortlist, one row per candidate, with the criteria marked confirmed, likely, or unverified.
• A one-line rationale for each candidate, and a tier: approach now, nurture, or pass.
• The outstanding manual checks.
• The exclusions applied.

Quality bar

Credibility is ranked above reach. No criterion is marked confirmed from self-description alone. Exclusions are applied and recorded. No candidate is treated as a sales target. Watch for shortlists sorted by audience size, criteria marked confirmed without evidence, and candidates with a current paid relationship with a competitor.