---
name: "channel-content-review"
description: "Review, tag, brief, or rewrite partner/channel marketing content by buying stage, intent weight, reader role, delivery owner, and fit to the partner's own positioning."
---

# Channel content review

Use this when someone hands over a piece of channel content (or a batch), a brief for one, or a request to adapt brand content for a partner. The job is to say which buying stage the piece serves, whether its weighting, reader and delivery fit that stage, and, when a partner will deliver it, whether the buyer will read it as the partner's own expertise.

Works for both sides of the channel. A brand partner manager uses it to review what goes into the partner library; a partner uses it to review what the brand supplied and adapt it to their own positioning.

## The reference grid

Four buying stages. Each has a dominant intent, a most-active reader, and a usual delivery owner. Neighboring stages blend; the grid marks where the weight usually sits, as a starting point rather than a rule.

| Stage | Buyer is... | Intent (weight) | Reader | Usual delivery | Typical piece |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Discovery | naming a problem for the first time | Problem | Implementer | Brand | Guide to the problem in the reader's words; solution category named in the close |
| Collaboration | working out how to solve it, bringing in experts | Solution | Champion, influencers | Partner | How-to for solving it in the buyer's industry, built around the partner's service |
| Consensus | comparing options; committee forming, vetoes surfacing | Benefits | Whole committee (implementers return for the technical check) | Partner | Evaluation the champion forwards; carries the partner's proof plus technical detail |
| Decision | asking what success looks like | Outcome (ROI, business case, payback) | Decision maker, champion | Shared | Business case pairing the brand's numbers with the partner's delivery plan |

Reader roles use RACI-style vocabulary: decision maker (budget, sign-off), champion (advocates internally), influencer (consulted during evaluation), implementer (deploys after purchase), informed (aware of the category, no buying role).

## Procedure

### 1. Gather inputs
- The content (text, link, or file). For a batch, get every piece; don't sample.
- Who will deliver it, if known. If not, infer it in step 5.
- If a partner delivers it: the partner's positioning (see Partner profile below). Ask for their site, services page, case studies, or a one-paragraph description. Don't guess a partner's industries or claims.

### 2. Find the primary stage
Estimate roughly what share of the piece goes to each intent: problem, solution, benefits, outcome. The largest share points to the primary stage. State the split, e.g. "problem 60 / solution 25 / benefits 10 / outcome 5 → discovery".

Most pieces lean one way with the other intents present at lower weight. A discovery piece still names the solution category near the end; a decision piece still restates the problem in a line or two. If two intents are close to even, say so and pick the one the structure favors (what the headline promises, what the close asks for).

### 3. Compare the weighting with the stage
Compare the split to the grid. Patterns worth checking for:
- A solution-heavy piece planned as awareness content reads as collaboration content, and a partner is its likely carrier.
- A benefits section without proof leaves consensus readers short of what they look for.
- A long problem restatement inside a business case spends the decision reader's attention on ground already covered.
- An even weighting across all four intents gives the piece no primary stage, so no reader is served first.

### 4. Check the reader
Name the role most active at the primary stage and check the piece is written to them: vocabulary, depth, and what it asks them to do next. A consensus piece written only to the champion works best when it also holds up after being forwarded to the committee.

### 5. Determine delivery
Who is most likely to put this in front of the buyer: brand, partner, or both?
- Usually brand-led: discovery pieces reaching the market at scale.
- Usually partner-led: collaboration and consensus, where the partner is the face of the purchase.
- Often shared: decision, where the brand brings product numbers, ROI studies and customer results, and the partner brings the delivery plan.

If a piece is weighted to collaboration or consensus and written in the brand's voice for a general buyer, note it: the buyer will likely read it under the partner's name, and it will land better written for that.

### 6. If a partner delivers it, check partner fit
The buyer reads partner-delivered content against their own view of that partner, formed from the partner's positioning. Check the piece against each line of the partner profile:
- Does it sit inside a service the partner leads with?
- Is it for an industry the partner names?
- Does it use the value the partner already claims, in the partner's terms?
- Does the proof come from the partner (case studies, credentials, named customers)? This matters most at consensus.
- Does it match the service level the partner commits to?

A piece fits when the buyer would read it as the partner's own expertise, with the brand's product inside the partner's service. When it reads as brand collateral the partner forwarded, the adjustment is a rewrite for the partner's positioning. A co-branded logo on the brand's copy leaves the fit where it was.

### 7. Report
Use the output format below. Rank suggestions by impact: delivery and partner fit first, then weighting, then reader, then polish.

## Partner profile

Build this once per partner and reuse it. It answers the questions a buyer tends to ask when sizing up a partner they haven't worked with:

| Buyer's question | Answered by |
|---|---|
| What do they do? | Services they lead with |
| Do they know my world? | Industries they name |
| Do they know their stuff? | Expertise they publish (articles, talks, certifications) |
| Will they show up? | Service commitments (response times, SLAs, delivery model) |
| Can I trust them? | Proof: case studies, awards, staff credentials, client logos |
| What do they say they're worth? | Value they claim, in their words |

Record the answers as short lists, taken from the partner's own materials where possible. This profile is the reference for step 6 and the brief for any rewrite.

## Output format

**Single piece**

```
Piece: <title>
Primary stage: <stage> (problem X / solution Y / benefits Z / outcome W)
Weighting: fits | partly | leans elsewhere — <one line>
Reader: <role> — written for them? yes | partly | not yet — <one line>
Delivery: brand | partner | both — <why>
Partner fit (if partner delivers): fits | partly | not yet | not assessable — <which profile lines to address>
Suggestions, ranked:
1. ...
2. ...
```

**Batch review**

A table with one row per piece: title, primary stage, intent split, reader, delivery, partner fit. Then:
- Stage coverage: count per stage, and which stages have the fewest pieces.
- Delivery fit: pieces weighted to collaboration or consensus that are written brand-first.
- Openings: stages or readers with no pieces yet, and which partner-delivered pieces would round out the set.
- Top three suggestions.

**Brief or rewrite**

State stage, reader, delivery and the partner profile lines the piece should satisfy before writing. Then produce the piece in the partner's voice, with the brand's product placed inside the partner's service, for the partner's industries, using the partner's value terms. For consensus, lead the proof with the partner's own. For decision, pair the brand's numbers and customer results with the partner's delivery plan.

## Rules
- Don't force a stage. If a piece is split, report the split and the tension.
- Don't invent partner facts. With no profile, ask for one or mark partner fit as "not assessable."
- Fit comes from writing for the partner's positioning; co-branding alone leaves it unchanged.
- A piece can be well written and still sit at the wrong stage for its deliverer. The review is about fit to stage, reader and deliverer; note prose points last, briefly.
- When reviewing for a partner rather than a brand, turn the frame around: review what the brand supplied, find where collaboration and consensus pieces would help, and ask the brand for raw materials (technical detail, ROI studies, customer results, permission to publish under the partner's name) alongside finished collateral.

Based on "How to Weight Channel Content Across the Buying Cycle" (DemandVector, 2026): https://demandvector.com/resources/weighting-channel-content