Brainforge Knowledge

CAMPAIGN_POST_TEMPLATE

8 min read

Campaign Post Template

Purpose: Standard format for drafting campaign posts so they’re pastable into Notion. Each post gets: First Draft (Post + Carousel) and Outline (Facts, Implications, CTA). Post structure is not fixed — it follows the chosen golden example from the CC content system.
Last Updated: 2026-02-04

Content creation sequence (workflow)

Follow this order when building campaign posts. Each step gates the next. Step 1 is mandatory and uses the CC content system first.

StepWhat to doOutput
1. CC content system — choose format and golden example(Required.) Use the CC content system for this campaign. The user specifies Robert GPT or Uttam GPT at brief intake. Then: (a) Open that GPT’s LinkedIn Format Index (Robert: content/cc-content-system/robert-gpt/memory/examples/linkedin/FORMAT_INDEX.md; Uttam: see README in content/cc-content-system/uttam-gpt/memory/examples/linkedin/). (b) Decide the post type (e.g. diagnostic, problem-solution, framework, event, partnership, lead magnet, personal reflection). (c) Choose one of the golden examples from the Format Index that best matches the post type and topic — use the “When to use” column and the example file names. (d) Open that example file and the matching structure pattern in memory/patterns/linkedin-patterns.md. Leverage our best-performing posts; do not default to a single generic structure.Chosen format name + example file + structure pattern
2. DraftDraft the post in the structure of the chosen golden example (hook, flow, length, tone). Use knowledge files the user references and key resources they ask you to check. Output in the standard shape below: First Draft (Post + Carousel) + Outline (Facts, Implications, CTA). The post body and carousel follow the example’s structure, not a one-size-fits-all template.First Draft + Outline (template shape below)
3. AlignmentCheck against positioning (Brainforge POV), sales (how the service is sold, who buys), and meeting/context (how this service line fits the bigger picture). Adjust tone and framing.Post that fits greater context
4. CTAUse the CTA framework: choose the engagement tier you want to capture (1–5), then pick a CTA that matches. Tier 1 = tracked link, 2 = lead magnet, 3 = event, 4 = DM, 5 = meeting. Ensure the setup for that tier is in place so we can measure. Do not default to “DM us” for every post.Final CTA for this post + tier (1–5) for tracking

Also confirm: Audience/ICP fit, campaign/brief goal, who reviews before publish, and learnings loop after the post runs (add wins to that GPT’s examples).

Scoring / quality frameworks: This template is compatible with additional scoring or quality frameworks (e.g. hook strength, CTA appropriateness, alignment score). Add and run such frameworks as needed; they do not replace the workflow above.

CC content system — usage sequence

Campaign post drafting must go through the CC content system, in this order:

  1. Which GPT — User specifies Robert GPT or Uttam GPT (per campaign brief).
  2. Format Index — Open that GPT’s LinkedIn Format Index. Robert: content/cc-content-system/robert-gpt/memory/examples/linkedin/FORMAT_INDEX.md. Uttam: content/cc-content-system/uttam-gpt/memory/examples/linkedin/ and its README for format list.
  3. Post type — Decide what kind of post this is (diagnostic, problem-solution, framework, event, partnership, lead magnet, personal reflection, etc.). Posts are not constrained to one type; the Index supports many.
  4. Choose a golden example — From the Format Index table, pick one example that best fits the post type and topic. Use “When to use” and the example file names. These are our best-performing or proven formats; choose between them instead of inventing a new structure.
  5. Read the example + pattern — Open the chosen example file and the corresponding structure pattern in memory/patterns/linkedin-patterns.md. Draft in that format.
  6. Output — Deliver in the standard output shape below (First Draft: Post + Carousel; Outline: Facts, Implications, CTA). The content structure (sections, length, flow) follows the golden example; the output shape (post + carousel + outline) is always the same.
  7. Learnings — After campaigns run, add high-performing posts as new examples (or update pattern confidence) in that GPT’s memory so the system improves. The set of golden examples is extensible (add new example files and register them in the Format Index).

Extensibility — scoring and quality frameworks: This workflow and output shape are designed to work with additional scoring or quality frameworks. You can add steps or checks such as: hook strength score, CTA appropriateness score, alignment-to-positioning score, or readability thresholds. Run them after Step 4 (or as a separate review step) without changing the core sequence. Document any new frameworks in the campaign brief or in a dedicated scoring doc and reference them from this template.

When to use

  • When drafting content for a campaign (supporting the campaign brief).
  • When the user or agent is asked to draft posts for a campaign — output each post in this structure so it can be pasted into Notion.

Template (output shape — copy per post)

Use this output shape for every campaign post. The structure inside (sections, length, flow) comes from the golden example you chose in Step 1, not from this placeholder. Different post types (diagnostic, framework, event, lead magnet, etc.) have different internal structures.

Post N — [Topic / hook one-liner]
Chosen format: [e.g. Diagnostic List Format, Quick Event Format, Lead Magnet — from Step 1]

First Draft

Post

[Structure and content follow the chosen golden example.
 e.g. Diagnostic: hook → reveal → numbered list → consequence → reframe → CTA.
 e.g. Event: energy hook → activity → time-bound CTA.
 e.g. Framework: stage-based sections → philosophical close → invitation.
 e.g. Lead magnet: value buildup → comment trigger.
 Open the example file and match its sections and length.]
CAROUSEL N — [Topic short title]
 
[Slide structure follows the chosen example.
 Some formats use 8 slides (hook, reality, evidence, consequence, reframe, CTA);
 events may use fewer. Match the example's carousel shape.]

Outline

POST N — [Topic]

FACTS / EVIDENCE:

  • [Bullet]
  • [Bullet]
  • [Bullet]

IMPLICATIONS:

  • [Bullet]
  • [Bullet]

CTA:

  • [One line — use CTA framework; do not default to “DM us”]

Example (filled)

This example uses one format (Diagnostic List). Other post types (event, framework, lead magnet, partnership, etc.) will have different structure and length; always follow the golden example you chose in Step 1.

Post 3 — What attribution tools can never recover
Chosen format: Thought Leadership - Diagnostic (Diagnostic List Format)

First Draft

Post

If your attribution model keeps making your paid social look weak, it's probably not the model's fault.
 
It's the invisible touchpoints you never tracked that are killing your numbers.
 
Dropped cookies, consent gaps, cross-device switches. Any of these can erase a touchpoint. And attribution tools? They can only model what survives. If the signal never reaches them, it's gone for good.
 
Here's what actually happens when touchpoints go missing:
 
1. Upper funnel gets undervalued. Awareness channels like paid social and display often touch users early, before they convert in a later session. When that early touchpoint disappears, the channel looks like it's underperforming when it's actually doing exactly what it should.
 
2. Journey length gets compressed. A user might engage six times before converting, but if only three touchpoints survive, your model thinks you're running a short, efficient funnel. You're not. You just can't see the rest.
 
3. Session stitching breaks. Same user, different device, different browser, cleared cookies. If identity resolution fails, what was one journey becomes three fragments, and none of them tell the full story.
 
Add it all up, and the damage compounds. Even sophisticated modeling can't fix this. It just scales the distortion because it learns from the same incomplete data. Channels appear to underperform when they're actually contributing, teams pause or kill campaigns that were working, and CAC and ROAS calculations become structurally biased toward whatever touchpoints happened to survive.
 
This isn't an attribution model problem. It's a data capture problem.
 
If this sounds familiar, you're not alone. Most stacks we audit have the same blind spots. Want to know what yours is missing? DM us to set up a call.
CAROUSEL 3 — What attribution tools can never recover
 
Slide 1 (Hook)
Attribution tools can't fix data they never receive.
 
Slide 2 (Reality)
If a touchpoint is lost, it's lost forever.
 
Slide 3 (What breaks)
Missing touchpoints:
• Undervalue channels
• Shorten perceived journeys
• Break session stitching
• Break identity resolution
 
Slide 4 (What modeling can't do)
No model can recreate a missing event.
 
Slide 5 (Business consequence)
Channels look like they underperform when they don't.
 
Slide 6 (Common outcome)
Teams pause or kill campaigns that are actually working.
 
Slide 7 (Reframe)
This isn't a modeling problem.
It's an upstream signal problem.
 
Slide 8 (CTA)
Want to see what your attribution tools never see?
DM us.

Outline

POST 3 — What attribution tools can never recover

FACTS / EVIDENCE:

  • If a touchpoint is lost during a conversion journey, downstream tools cannot recover it
  • Lost touchpoints cause: undervaluation of channels (especially upper funnel), underestimation of journey length, broken session stitching, failed identity resolution
  • Attribution and modeling tools can only work with the data they receive
  • Missing events permanently distort the customer journey

IMPLICATIONS:

  • Channels appear to underperform when they actually contribute
  • Teams pause or kill campaigns that are working
  • CAC and ROAS calculations become structurally biased

CTA:

  • DM us to pressure-test what your attribution tools never see

Graph View

Backlinks