Template: Roundup skill

Template: Roundup

Description: Curated collection of expert quotes, insights, and strategies organized around a specific topic. Roundup posts leverage external authority, provide diverse perspectives, and are highly shareable because each featured expert has an incentive to promote the piece. They also build relationships with industry leaders.

Target Word Count: 1,500-2,000 words

---

When to Use This Template

• Content Goal: Aggregate diverse expert perspectives to create a uniquely valuable resource, build relationships with industry leaders, and earn social shares and backlinks
• Search Intent: Informational (users want curated, authoritative advice on a topic)
• Funnel Stage: Top-of-funnel awareness and trust-building
• Use When:
  • You want to cover a topic where multiple perspectives add genuine value
  • You have access to (or can reach out to) 5-8 credible experts
  • The topic benefits from diverse viewpoints rather than a single authoritative voice
  • You want content that is inherently shareable (each expert shares it with their audience)
  • You want to build relationships with industry figures for future collaboration

---

Section-by-Section Structure

---

Title

Format: "[N] Experts Share Their [Topic] Strategies for [Year]"

Alternative formats:

• "[N] [Industry] Leaders on the Future of [Topic]"
• "We Asked [N] [Role] About [Topic]. Here's What They Said."
• "[N] [Topic] Strategies From the People Who Know Best ([Year])"

Guidelines:

• Include the exact number of experts (specificity builds credibility)
• Name the topic clearly so the reader knows what advice to expect
• The year signals that insights are current
• Keep under 65 characters for full SERP display

# [N] Experts Share Their [Topic] Strategies for [Year]

[IMAGE] Collage or grid of expert headshots, or a branded graphic with the article title and expert count. Alt text: "[N] experts featured in [Topic] roundup - headshots and names."

---

Introduction (100-150 words)

[ANSWER-FIRST] State the key consensus finding or most surprising insight from the experts in the first sentence. Do not begin with "We reached out to experts..." - lead with the value.

Structure:

1. Key finding (1-2 sentences): The single most important takeaway from across all expert responses - what is the through-line?
   • [STAT: supporting data point that frames why this topic matters now]
2. Why expert perspectives matter (1-2 sentences): What do these practitioners know that generalist articles miss?
3. Preview of diversity (1-2 sentences): Highlight the range of perspectives - "From [context A] to [context B], these experts bring [X years] of combined experience"
4. What the reader will get (1 sentence): Set expectations for actionable takeaways

[INFO-GAIN: unique analysis] Your editorial synthesis is what makes this more than a list of quotes. Signal early that you have analyzed and organized these perspectives into actionable themes.

[INTERNAL-LINK] Link to your pillar page or foundational article on this topic to give readers who need background a place to start.

---

Expert Sections (5-8 experts, 150-200 words each)

Each expert gets their own H2 section. Order experts strategically - lead with the most recognizable name or the most compelling insight, not alphabetically.

For each expert section, use this structure:

## [Expert Full Name], [Title] at [Company/Organization]

[IMAGE] Expert headshot (with permission). Alt text: "[Expert Name], [Title] at [Company]."

Structure per section:

1. Expert context (1 sentence): Brief credential or context that establishes why this person's perspective matters for this specific topic. Do not copy their full bio - focus on the relevant qualification.

2. Key insight (direct quote, 2-4 sentences): The expert's core advice or perspective in their own words. Direct quotes are strongly preferred over paraphrasing.

> "[Direct quote from the expert providing their key insight or strategy.]"

3. Your analysis (3-5 sentences): This is where YOU add value. Do not just present the quote - analyze it:
   • What makes this advice noteworthy or different from conventional wisdom?
   • How does this connect to or contrast with what other experts in this roundup said?
   • What is the practical implication for the reader?
   • When might this advice be especially relevant (or not apply)?

[INFO-GAIN: unique analysis] Your editorial analysis between quotes is what differentiates a valuable roundup from a lazy quote dump. Each analysis paragraph should contain at least one original observation.

[STAT: supporting data] Where possible, include a statistic that supports or contextualizes the expert's claim.

[INTERNAL-LINK] Link to relevant how-to guides, tools, or articles that help the reader implement the expert's advice.

Repeat this structure for each of the 5-8 expert sections.

---

Synthesis: What the Experts Agree On (200-300 words)

[ANSWER-FIRST] State the strongest area of consensus in the first sentence. This section is where your editorial voice matters most.

Structure:

1. Common themes (100-150 words): Identify 3-4 themes that emerged across multiple expert responses. For each theme:
   • Name the theme (H3 or bold)
   • Note which experts align on this theme
   • Explain why this consensus matters

**Theme 1: [Theme Name]**
[Expert A], [Expert B], and [Expert C] all emphasized [specific commonality]. This suggests that [insight about why this consensus exists and what it means for practitioners].

**Theme 2: [Theme Name]**
[Describe the second area of agreement and its implications.]

**Theme 3: [Theme Name]**
[Describe the third area of agreement and its implications.]

2. Contrasting opinions (50-75 words): Where did experts disagree? Highlight 1-2 areas of divergence and explain what accounts for the different perspectives (different contexts, industries, experience levels, etc.)

3. What consensus tells us (50-75 words): Step back and offer a meta-observation - what does the overall pattern of agreement and disagreement reveal about the current state of this topic?

   • [STAT: data point that supports the consensus finding]

[INFO-GAIN: unique analysis] The synthesis is your original contribution. Anyone can collect quotes - your ability to identify patterns and draw non-obvious conclusions is the information gain.

[VISUAL: chart-type] Consider a simple visualization of expert consensus - a matrix showing which experts agree on which themes, a spectrum chart showing the range of opinions, or a Venn diagram of overlapping advice.

---

Actionable Takeaways (150-200 words)

[ANSWER-FIRST] Start with the single most actionable piece of advice from the roundup in the first sentence.

Structure: Present 5-7 bullet points combining the best advice from across all experts. Each takeaway should be:

• Specific and actionable (not vague platitudes)
• Attributed to the expert(s) who inspired it
• Framed as an action the reader can take

1. **[Action verb] [specific advice]** - Based on [Expert Name]'s insight about [topic]. [One sentence expanding on how to implement this.]

2. **[Action verb] [specific advice]** - [Expert Name] and [Expert Name] both emphasized this. [One sentence on implementation.]

3. **[Action verb] [specific advice]** - [Expert Name] recommends this because [brief reason]. [One sentence on getting started.]

4. **[Action verb] [specific advice]** - This emerged as a common theme across [N] experts. [One sentence on why it matters.]

5. **[Action verb] [specific advice]** - [Expert Name]'s contrarian take suggests [brief insight]. [One sentence on when to apply this.]

6. **[Action verb] [specific advice]** - [Attribution and brief context.]

7. **[Action verb] [specific advice]** - [Attribution and brief context.]

[INTERNAL-LINK] Link each takeaway to relevant supporting content (how-to guides, tool reviews, etc.) that helps the reader implement it.

---

Resources (100-150 words)

[ANSWER-FIRST] Name the single most recommended resource in the first sentence.

Structure: Organize resources into 2-3 categories based on what experts mentioned or recommended:

**Tools:**
- [Tool Name] - [One-line description]. Recommended by [Expert Name].
- [Tool Name] - [One-line description]. Mentioned by [Expert Name] and [Expert Name].

**Books & Courses:**
- [Resource Name] by [Author] - [One-line description]. Recommended by [Expert Name].
- [Resource Name] - [One-line description].

**Communities & Further Reading:**
- [Resource Name] - [One-line description].
- [Resource Name] - [One-line description].

Guidelines:

• Only include resources that were actually mentioned by experts or directly support their advice
• Include a mix of free and paid resources
• Link to resources where appropriate (use affiliate links with disclosure if applicable)

[INTERNAL-LINK] Link to your own tool reviews or resource guides where relevant.

---

FAQ (3-5 questions)

[FAQ] Source questions from the types of follow-up questions readers would have after reading expert advice.

Guidelines:

• Focus on implementation questions ("How do I start?") and clarification questions ("Does this apply to [my situation]?")
• Each answer should be 40-80 words and lead with a direct answer
• Reference specific experts when relevant

### How do I choose which expert advice to follow first?

[ANSWER-FIRST] [Direct 1-sentence answer.] [2-3 sentences on prioritization criteria based on the reader's context - team size, budget, experience level, etc.]

### Does this advice apply to [specific industry/size/context]?

[ANSWER-FIRST] [Direct 1-sentence answer.] [2-3 sentences noting which expert perspectives are most relevant for different contexts.]

### What if [expert advice A] contradicts [expert advice B]?

[ANSWER-FIRST] [Direct 1-sentence answer.] [2-3 sentences explaining the context behind the disagreement and how to decide which applies to the reader.]

### How often should I revisit these strategies?

[ANSWER-FIRST] [Direct 1-sentence answer.] [2-3 sentences on the pace of change in this topic area.] [STAT: relevant data on how quickly this field evolves.]

### Where can I learn more about [specific sub-topic mentioned by experts]?

[ANSWER-FIRST] [Direct 1-sentence answer with resource recommendation.] [2-3 sentences on next steps.]

[INTERNAL-LINK] Link FAQ answers to relevant supporting articles, pillar pages, or tool guides.

---

Methodology (100 words)

[ANSWER-FIRST] State the expert selection criteria in the first sentence to establish the roundup's credibility.

Structure:

1. Selection criteria (1-2 sentences): How and why these specific experts were chosen (e.g., minimum years of experience, specific domain expertise, practitioner vs. theorist, diversity of perspective)
2. Outreach method (1 sentence): How experts were contacted (email interviews, video calls, published statements, conference talks)
3. Response handling (1 sentence): Were quotes edited for clarity? Were responses reviewed by experts before publication?
4. Transparency (1 sentence): Note any experts who were invited but declined, or any potential conflicts of interest

Guidelines:

• This section builds trust - be transparent about your process
• If you sourced quotes from published materials (conference talks, podcasts, articles) rather than direct outreach, say so
• Keep it factual and brief - this is not the place for editorial commentary

---

Pre-Publish Checklist

• Total word count is 1,500-2,000 words
• All [ANSWER-FIRST] prompts have been fulfilled - every section leads with the answer
• All [STAT] markers replaced with real, cited statistics (with source and year)
• All [IMAGE] markers replaced with actual expert headshots (with permission) or branded graphics
• All [VISUAL] markers replaced with actual charts or diagrams
• All [INFO-GAIN] markers replaced with original editorial analysis (not just quote presentation)
• All [INTERNAL-LINK] zones populated with real links to supporting content
• All [FAQ] answers are concise (40-80 words) and lead with a direct answer
• 5-8 experts are featured with proper attribution (name, title, company)
• All expert quotes are accurate and used with permission
• Each expert section includes YOUR analysis, not just the quote
• Synthesis section identifies genuine themes (not forced patterns)
• Actionable takeaways are specific and attributed to experts
• Methodology section is honest about sourcing and selection
• Experts have been notified of publication (for sharing)
• Meta title includes the number of experts and topic
• Meta description is 150-160 characters with key finding and CTA