For B2B technology companies, turning executive visibility into a competitive advantage is the holy grail of marketing. Yet, many fall into the trap of confusing simple presence with true thought leadership, a mistake that wastes millions and leaves brands invisible in an increasingly AI-driven world. We sat down with Aisha Amaira, a MarTech expert who has spent her career helping companies leverage technology and customer data to build powerful executive communications programs.
Our conversation explores the critical difference between having a loud executive and having a strategic one. We delve into why the “accidental spokesperson” can dilute a brand’s message and how to build a cohesive program that aligns individual voices with core company positioning. Aisha offers a clear framework for identifying genuine thought leaders, avoiding the pitfalls of hollow content, and ensuring your company’s expertise is findable—not just by humans, but by the AI agents that now intermediate 90% of B2B buying decisions.
Many companies have an “accidental spokesperson”—an executive who becomes the loudest voice without a strategy. How does this typically happen, and what are the first steps a marketing leader should take to address the scattered personal brands that result from it?
It’s a pattern I see constantly, especially as companies scale. It almost always starts organically. You have one executive who is just a natural on social media, maybe on LinkedIn. They post consistently, get great engagement, and suddenly they’ve become the de facto voice of the company, but completely by accident. The leadership team sees this, sees the traction, and their first instinct is to say, “We need more of that!” They then push other executives to “be more active,” but without any strategy connecting it back to the company’s core positioning. The result is a mess of scattered personal brands that don’t compound or build a coherent narrative. The first, most critical step for a marketing leader is to pause the replication effort and facilitate a direct, explicit conversation. Get the executive team in a room and define the difference between executive presence and thought leadership. You have to reset expectations and make it clear that the goal isn’t just activity, but strategic alignment.
You draw a clear line between executive presence and true thought leadership. Could you explain that distinction? And with B2B buyers increasingly using AI for vendor discovery, what are the specific risks a company runs by confusing the two?
The distinction is absolutely fundamental. Executive presence is table stakes; it’s about recognition and visibility. It looks like a polished LinkedIn profile, occasional posts celebrating company wins, and showing up at the right industry events. Most executives can and should maintain this. Thought leadership, however, is a different beast entirely. A true thought leader possesses a genuine, often contrarian, point of view that’s backed by years of deep experience. They are missionaries for an idea, not just corporate figureheads. The real tell is when the sales team starts pulling them into deals, not to sell, but because their expertise authentically adds value for the potential client. The risk of confusing these two has become incredibly acute. With Forrester finding that 61% of purchase influencers are already using or plan to use generative AI for purchasing, your online footprint is everything. AI agents don’t browse your website; they index third-party sources—press, bylined articles, conference appearances. Scattered, presence-only content creates a weak, unreadable signal. It’s just noise that a machine can’t parse, which means when a buyer asks an AI to recommend vendors, your company simply won’t show up.
Imagine a company wants to elevate an executive as a thought leader. How do you assess if they have a genuinely unique point of view worth hearing, rather than just a polished corporate message? What does that evaluation process look like in practice?
This is where discipline is crucial, because you can’t manufacture expertise or appetite. The evaluation process starts by looking for internal and external signals. First, who on the team is already a sought-after expert? I’m talking about the person colleagues and customers instinctively turn to with their toughest questions. They are already getting pulled into industry conversations without a formal push from marketing. Second, you have to dissect their point of view. Does it sound like what anyone else in their role would say? If so, that’s just executive presence. A true thought leader is focused on what’s next; they have a missionary zeal about the future of the industry. They’re not just repeating the company line. Finally, and this is a big one, you have to honestly assess their willingness to commit. Thought leadership is not a side hustle you can squeeze in between meetings. It requires real time and resources. The company has to officially build it into their role, otherwise, it will never get the consistency it needs to make an impact.
A common problem is forcing thought leadership on executives who lack the expertise or appetite. Can you share an example of what this “hollow content” looks like and how it ultimately damages a brand’s credibility with both journalists and potential buyers?
Oh, “hollow content” is painfully easy to spot. It’s the LinkedIn article that feels like it was written by a committee, full of jargon and platitudes but offering zero unique insight. It’s the conference keynote where the speaker is just reading a script about company milestones. It lacks a soul. I’ve seen it happen where a company invests heavily in a media tour for an executive who simply isn’t a true expert in the designated topic. The journalists see right through it. After one or two superficial interviews, the opportunities dry up completely because the media realizes there’s no real substance there. This doesn’t just waste budget; it actively damages credibility. Buyers see this content and feel it’s inauthentic. It tells them the company is more interested in its own promotion than in genuinely helping them solve a problem. It erodes trust, and in B2B, trust is the foundation of every sale.
For a company ready to build a strategic program, you suggest starting with positioning, not people. Can you walk us through the steps of mapping company expertise to specific executives and then deciding on different levels of investment for each person?
Absolutely. Jumping straight to people is how you end up with scattered voices. You must start with positioning. The first step is to ask: “What are the three to five core areas of expertise we want to own in the market?” This defines the thematic pillars of your entire program. Once you have those pillars, the second step is to map them to your executives. You look at your leadership bench and identify who has genuine, demonstrable authority in each of those specific areas. This can’t be based on title alone; it has to be based on actual experience and passion. The final step is to differentiate your investment. The executive who is a true, committed thought leader with a powerful point of view gets the full amplification package—media relations, a bylined article strategy, speaking circuit support, maybe even proprietary research. Executives with strong expertise but less appetite for the spotlight might get a lighter touch, perhaps focusing just on targeted LinkedIn content or internal evangelism. And for everyone else, the goal is simply to maintain a polished executive presence. This tiered approach ensures every voice reinforces the core message, creating a coherent and powerful story.
Given that many B2B purchase decisions are now influenced by AI agents indexing third-party sources, how does a cohesive executive communications strategy directly impact a company’s ability to be found and valued during M&A due diligence?
This is an aspect that is often overlooked but is becoming critical. During M&A, the executive bench itself is a major part of the valuation story. Acquirers and investors aren’t just buying your technology or your customer list; they’re investing in your leadership team’s vision and authority. They perform deep due diligence, and today, that includes assessing your digital footprint. They want to see a leadership team with recognized, third-party-validated authority in your market. If all they find are disconnected LinkedIn profiles and a few scattered mentions, it signals a lack of strategic cohesion. But when they see a team of executives consistently speaking on their mapped areas of expertise across credible media outlets, industry stages, and analyst reports, it tells a powerful story. It demonstrates a well-run organization with a deep bench of talent that has a real influence on the market. That perceived authority directly translates into a stronger valuation and a smoother M&A process.
What is your forecast for B2B marketing as AI agents become the primary gatekeepers for vendor selection?
My forecast is that a company’s collective, third-party-validated expertise will become its most valuable marketing asset. The days of driving all traffic to your website to control the narrative are fading fast. As Gartner predicts, with 90% of B2B buying soon to be intermediated by AI, the game is no longer about just being visible, but about being findable and credible to a machine. This means the quality and consistency of your executive thought leadership program will directly determine your place in the consideration set. Companies that continue to produce scattered, hollow content will simply become invisible to AI-driven discovery, and their pipelines will suffer. The winners will be the organizations that are disciplined enough to map their core positioning to the right expert voices and invest in amplifying those voices across credible, third-party platforms. Your reputation, as indexed by the AI, will be your new front door.