Frequently Asked Questions About Joanna Wiebe CMO-Thinking Marketing Framework
20 answers covering everything from basics to advanced usage.
// Basics
What does it mean to 'think like a CMO from day one'?
It means constantly distinguishing between making something existing work better versus building something that doesn't exist yet — before starting any task, regardless of seniority. CMO thinking is a lens, not a title. A junior marketer applying this asks whether they're optimising a funnel or reshaping a vision, which changes every downstream decision about metrics, tactics, and success.
What is Answer Engine Optimisation (AEO)?
AEO is the discipline of getting AI answer tools — ChatGPT, Claude, and Perplexity — to cite you as the source of truth in their responses. It's the successor to SEO, where the currency shifts from traffic to citation. Instead of asking 'Will Google rank this?', you ask 'Will AI cite this?' and structure content to be referenceable rather than merely clickable.
What inputs do I need before running this framework?
You need three required inputs: your current role or career stage (beginner, mid, senior, or brand-side), your business or product context including revenue model, and your target customer or ICP. Two optional inputs help: your current marketing activities and any specialist interest area you already gravitate toward. Precise ICP definition matters most for the AI pressure-testing and referenceability steps.
// How To
How do I classify a marketing task as performance or growth?
Ask: 'Am I here to make something existing work better, or build something that doesn't exist yet?' If you're improving conversion rates, CAC, copy, or funnels, it's performance. If you're creating new channels, audiences, or revenue models, it's growth. Name it explicitly and let it govern your metrics and solutions — mixing them causes wrong success measures and wrong fixes.
How do I run an AEO referenceability audit on my content?
For each piece, ask: 'Would an AI chatbot pull this as a credible source when my ICP asks a question?' If content is optimised only for clicks or engagement, redesign it as a structured, definitive resource on a narrow question your ICP asks. Model your structure on Wikipedia, Reddit, and YouTube — the sources AI tools currently cite most. Rebuild your top posts first.
How do I pick the one thing to specialise in?
Pick the one thing you want to be known for — not just what you can do. It must be specific enough to become synonymous with your name, like 'positioning for enterprise B2B tech' or 'attention capture on social.' Then start a public record immediately — a newsletter, public writing, documented frameworks — and stay consistent for three years. Don't wait to be an expert; be the person figuring it out in public.
How do I map my customer's ecosystem?
Identify where your ICP already spends time, what rituals and communities they belong to, and which partnerships, sponsorships, collaborations, or platform presences would put your brand inside those spaces. Evaluate every distribution decision by asking: 'Does this make us part of the identity of the person who buys from us?' It's a growth question, not a content question, so it precedes producing more posts.
// Troubleshooting
My content is viral but generates no leads — what's wrong?
You've likely built shareable or viral content that isn't referenceable. Visibility without citability has declining value as AI answer tools replace search. Run an AEO audit: none of your content may be structured for citation. Rebuild your top posts as definitive resources on narrow ICP questions, then apply the Anti-Boring Audit to strip committee language and inject real customer voice from reviews and support transcripts.
My AI-generated content has declining engagement — how do I fix it?
You've fallen into the lowest-value AI use case: writing faster and producing generic output. Shift immediately. Use AI to pressure-test whether your strategy addresses real ICP problems and where readers tune out. Run an AEO referenceability audit and rebuild your top ten posts as citable resources. Then apply the Anti-Boring Audit to remove tension-free, committee-approved phrasing.
My growth has plateaued despite constant A/B testing — what should I do?
You're stuck in a performance loop treating a growth problem. Constant ad optimisation and landing-page testing improve an existing vision but can't unlock new demand. Reclassify the challenge as growth: your revenue model or audience definition may need to change, not just conversion rate. Map your customer ecosystem and build embedding partnerships in communities where your ICP already gathers instead of more ad spend.
I don't feel expert enough to start publishing my specialisation — what now?
Start anyway. Waiting to be a full expert before building a public record is a common pitfall — the compounding starts when you begin, not when you're ready. Be the person figuring it out in public: document your frameworks, experiments, and thinking in a newsletter or public writing. Pressure-test each piece with AI before publishing. Over 12–18 months this record becomes a moat.
// Comparisons
How does this framework compare to standard SEO content strategy?
Standard SEO chases Google rankings and traffic on rented land. This framework prioritises citability — being pulled as the source of truth by AI answer engines — because visibility without citability has declining value. SEO asks 'Will Google rank this?'; AEO asks 'Will AI cite this?' You still structure content well, but the target audience becomes AI models citing you, not just search crawlers indexing you.
How is pressure-testing with AI different from using AI to write?
Writing with AI produces generic, replaceable output — the lowest-value use. Pressure-testing uses AI as a thinking partner to find where your strategy fails before going to market. You upload work, describe your ICP, and ask 'Where does this fall apart?' The output is a list of weaknesses to fix, not a polished deliverable. One commoditises you; the other sharpens judgment AI can't replace.
How does specialising compare to being a versatile generalist marketer?
Generalists spreading across social, email, ads, and SEO are becoming interchangeable — essentially walking AI tools that can be prompted and replaced. Specialists who go deep enough that people cite their frameworks build real leverage. The framework is blunt: breadth equals forgettable, specificity equals promotable. Versatility feels safe but produces a weak signal; narrow depth produces a loud one.
// Advanced
What is 'rented land' and why is it risky?
Rented land is any platform or algorithm whose rules you don't control — Google, Instagram, TikTok, LinkedIn. Building exclusively there exposes you to sudden, unannounced rule changes that can destroy visibility overnight. The framework's antidote is creating referenceable content that AI answer engines cite as a source of truth, giving you an asset that isn't hostage to one algorithm.
How do I apply the Anti-Boring Audit to a specific piece of copy?
First ask 'What would make this completely forgettable?' and flag every red flag: generic language, no point of view, avoided tension, committee-approved phrasing, nothing a customer would disagree with. Then systematically remove them. The fix is sourcing real customer language from reviews, support tickets, and interviews and using it directly. A line that came easily and a boardroom could have written by consensus should be cut.
Can this framework work for solo founders doing their own marketing?
Yes. Solo founders benefit most from the performance-vs-growth lens because they have limited time and can't waste it optimising the wrong thing. They should pick one specialisation for their personal brand, use AI to pressure-test positioning, build referenceable content that AI cites, and map their customer ecosystem for embedding opportunities instead of spreading thin across every channel.
How long before specialisation produces a career moat?
Plan for three years of consistent public documentation, with meaningful traction often appearing at 12–18 months. The moat compounds: the longer you publish frameworks in one narrow niche, the more people cite your thinking by name. It's not about a single viral moment — it's the accumulating public record that job titles and generalist skill sets cannot replicate.
How do I know if my messaging has a real point of view?
Ask whether your message could be disagreed with. If a boardroom could have written it by consensus, it's boring and says nothing real. Genuine points of view create tension — some readers nod hard while others push back. Sourcing exact customer language and taking a stance are the two levers. Neutral, agreeable, committee-safe copy is the most common and most damaging marketing mistake.
Should I use this framework if I'm advising a brand rather than my own career?
Yes. The same six steps apply brand-side: classify each initiative as performance or growth, pressure-test the strategy with AI against a precise ICP, audit all content for AEO referenceability, help the brand own a specific position or specialty, map and embed into the customer ecosystem, and run the Anti-Boring Audit on all messaging. The lens scales from personal career to brand strategy.