Advanced prompt

ROLE & EXPERTISE: You're a Senior Content Strategist and SEO specialist with 10+ years of experience scaling B2B-SaaS customer acquisition through organic content. You understand search intent, competitive gaps, and how to produce content that both ranks AND converts.

WRITING STYLE: Combine the data-driven authority of the Harvard Business Review with the clarity of Basecamp's blog Signal v. Noise and the practical usefulness of Mind the Product. Be:

- Direct, no jargon (no corporate speak)
- Data-backed (cite concrete percentages, time frames, ROI)
- Actionable (every post has concrete takeaways)
- Opinionated but credible (take a position, back it with evidence)

COMPANY CONTEXT: We're a B2B-SaaS project management platform: USD 50M ARR, target: companies with 500–5,000 employees (mid-market to enterprise); main buyer: Director-level+ in PMO, Engineering, Operations; average deal: USD 50K ACV; sales cycle: 4–6 months; main competitors: Monday.com, Asana, Wrike.

CONTENT STRATEGY REQUIREMENTS: Focus on topics with:

1. High search volume (1,000+ monthly searches) with moderate-low competition (KD < 40)
2. Clear commercial intent (searchers are actively solving a problem)
3. Opportunity for original research/data or a contrarian perspective
4. Natural transition to product explanation without sounding salesy

Avoid: generic "what is project management" content we can't outrank; overly tactical tool tutorials (those belong in help docs); topics with purely informational intent and no buying signal.

YOUR TASK: Generate 7 blog-post concepts optimised for customer acquisition. For each, deliver:

1. TITLE (max 60 characters, must contain the target keyword)
2. VALUE PROPOSITION (one sentence: what the reader learns/gains/achieves)
3. TARGET PERSONA (job title + concrete pain point/trigger)
4. SEARCH STRATEGY: main keyword (+ estimated monthly volume); content gap we're closing; why we can win this keyword
5. DATA REQUIREMENTS (3 concrete statistics/studies that must be cited)
6. UNIQUE ANGLE (what separates this from the top-10 results)
7. TRAFFIC TARGET (realistic monthly organic sessions after 12 months)
8. CONVERSION ASSET (lead magnet/tool to extend the post)
9. PRODUCT LINK (how we'd naturally introduce our platform)

OUTPUT FORMAT: Return the result as a detailed table with all 9 columns. Then: rank the top 3 concepts by likelihood of generating demo requests, with a short rationale.

PRIORITY: Heavy weight on posts that speak to people actively evaluating PM tools or experiencing pain points that signal "we need better project management".

3-step prompt

Use these 3 prompts in sequence to build on each other topically. Just swap the "4-day week" topic for yours.

Prompt #1

I'm researching outcomes of the 4-day work week. Find 10–15 studies, reports, or pilot projects.
Spread broadly — include academic research, peer-reviewed research, media coverage, corporate case studies, consulting reports, and government pilots.
For each, give me: source name, year, and a one-sentence outcome/takeaway.

Prompt #2

Now filter this list by quality criteria:

KEEP ONLY sources that meet at least one of the following:

- Peer-reviewed academic research (published in journals)
- Reports from major consulting firms (McKinsey, BCG, Deloitte, KPMG, etc.)
- Studies from government labor / employment agencies
- Company pilot projects with 50+ employees

REMOVE:

- News articles and media coverage
- Blog posts and opinion pieces
- Sources you aren't sure actually exist

For each remaining source, deliver in a table:

- Title & year
- Publishing organisation
- Sample size (# employees / # companies)
- Geographic location
- Study duration
- Core methodology (survey / trial / longitudinal study)
- Central numerical outcome

Prompt #3

From your verified-sources table, pull the 8 most convincing data points. For each, analyse:

1. The concrete outcome (with exact numbers — don't estimate or extrapolate)
2. Source credibility (why should we trust this? Sample size? Methodological strength?)
3. Replicability (one company or many? One country or cross-cultural?)
4. Recency (how old is the data? Has work culture changed since?)

Format as a table:

| Outcome | Source & year | Sample | Why trustworthy | Limitations | Strength (1–10) |

If an outcome has no concrete numbers, mark it "qualitative only".

If you have to caveat a number, explain why.

Then rank: which 3 outcomes have the strongest methodology + most relevant outcomes?