Cognition #10: Developing theories as a creator | My theories

I want to ask you something. Be honest.

Do you create content? If yes, how do you think you're gonna stand out?

A million other creators are on the same path, hoping for the same career, and working as hard as you do.

How do you differentiate? What's your USP?

I asked myself the same questions.

I love creation. I put all my energy into it, and I believe it's evident in my content.

But efforts aren't everything.

Thousands of creators create in the same domain I operate in, which is why I need to differentiate myself from the rest.

How did I think of achieving it?

I began looking into the details of content creation.

Apart from learning from various experts, I realized we need to develop our own theories based on what works (and doesn't) for us; and use them as the primary approach towards creation.

I also realized developing theories is universal.

Think of your favourite course. It's nothing but the theory that worked for the tutor.

Think of your favourite book. The concept is nothing but the theory that worked for the author.

Think of your favourite TED talk. The idea is nothing but the theory that worked for the speaker.

And the list goes on.

What's my point?

And as a creator, I feel you should do the same too—Develop your theories.

Cognition #10 is about three such theories I developed on my journey, and I want to share them with you.

The theories worked wonders for me, and I wish they could help you in your content journey.

This issue includes:

1. Acquired knowledge—Applied knowledge theory.

2. The upskilling theory.

3. Self Qualification theory.

4. Non-technical, aka fun segment!

Here we go!

Acquired knowledge-Applied knowledge theory

Knowledge is sexy—and content creation is moulding knowledge into words, pictures, videos, etc.

I segment knowledge into two categories: acquired knowledge and applied knowledge.

—Acquired knowledge is what you inhibit from knowledge consumption via multiple sources.

Like courses, books, YouTube videos, blogs, etc.

—Applied knowledge is the mix of experiences, learnings, and expertise when acquired knowledge and real-time execution are put together.

I gain this from the content I create, the clients I work with, mistakes I make, etc.

Here is how I approach content creation with acquired and applied knowledge:

Chalo I'll give you an example with the headlines.

This is what acquired knowledge headline looks like:

"5 ways to master your content marketing game!

A thread from my takeaways from the HubSpot marketing course."

And this is what applied knowledge headline looks like:

"I've run content marketing campaigns for 3 brands in the last 90 days.

Here are my top 5 learnings to master your content marketing game."

Now, both the headlines can create killer content.

But here lies the difference.

In the first case, anybody who took the course can present the same strategies in a different way.

In the second situation, only you know what you did with a company, which will niche your content and make it different and specific.

The best part with applied-knowledge-based content is you might have used the same strategies that are popular or commonly used, but you've worked with a company that no one else worked with—Blending data, story, and specifics of the brand with the strategies you used will make your content unique, and if it's worth your audience's time, you'll STANDOUT!

PS: This doesn't apply if you're a content curator. Curation depends on the quality of knowledge you acquire as a consumer.

Curation is an acquired knowledge game. At least, majorly.

Presentation is what makes curators standout.

So that's acquired knowledge—applied knowledge theory for you.

If you're a creator, create both acquired-and-applied-knowledge-based content.

But make sure you create adequate content using applied knowledge because, in my opinion, applied-knowledge-based content is what makes you stand out.

Okay, now let's get to theory number 2.

One person theory

Content creation is strange.

When you grow as an individual, you want to detach yourself from less important things like seeking validation from everyone, follower count, etc.

But as a creator, you have to constantly put your work in the public domain and look out for opinions, feedback, engagement, etc.

I designed this theory and made it my mantra after numbers fucked my mental health.

As I've told in my previous editions, I was stuck between 300-320 followers for 7 months, and there was no progress in the follower count irrespective of what I did.

All my peers who started with me have crossed over 3k followers in the same seven-month period.

I took content very seriously and having no progress made me feel lonely. I felt I didn't belong in this space.

But something else happened in the seven months.

Even though I had less followers, there were 4-5 folks who constantly engaged and DMed me mentioning how they like my content.

And that is when one person's theory came across my mind.

It says,

Yes, you’ll need a large audience to succeed, but you already have a person. You have a start.

Let me rephrase it this way.

When I realized I'm making an impact in the lives of 3-4 writers with my content on writing, I didn't mind having fewer followers.

Or let me ask you this.

What would you choose? 10k followers + your content making difference to no one. Or much lesser followers but you impact 30-40 people.

Your answer decides if one person theory is suitable for you or not.

I understand the importance of numbers like follower count in content creation.

But when you have bigger priorities, follower count doesn't really matter to you internally.

I create content to teach, educate, and help people with their growth. Similarly, you have your priorities that are above metrics like follower count, engagement rate, etc.

Does this theory ensure your growth as a creator?

Most probably not. You have to do things at scale to succeed.

But does the theory keeps your mental health in check?

It did for me. I was more focussed on my priorities and purpose over distractions and less important things. Peace was easier to acquire.

Try it out. See if this works for you.

But what if you're looking to build authority and credibility as a creator? The next theory is alllllll about it!

And it's my favourite one.

Self Qualification theory

I shared SQ theory in Cognition #2 when I spoke about generating and qualifying ideas.

I'm just gonna repeat it here.

If you already know this from Cognition #2, you may skip to the non-technical segment.

Or you may read it again. Common, it's a good revision!

So,

If the answer is no, disqualify the idea, or curate the content.

I’ll give you an example.

Let’s say I want to create content on “How to gain 50k followers on Linkedin?”

Now, I’ll do the self-qualification:

“I have around 5.2k followers on LinkedIn. 50k is ~10x of what I have. Does speaking about gaining 50k followers make me credible? Absolutely not.”

I may know the general process of getting to 50k, but I don’t know the struggles, mistakes, learnings, strategies, etc., that worked (and didn’t) for me.

To keep the theory simple, “Talk the talk only if you’ve walked the walk.”

More examples of self-qualification (SQ) theory:

IDEA: How to make a six-figure income (in USD) as a freelancer?

SQ: Not qualified. I didn’t make a six-figure income yet. I didn’t live the journey to teach others what to do.

IDEA: Three strategies to master web copy.

SQ: Qualified. I’ve written web copies under multiple niches. I have an idea of what the path looks like.

So that's Vikra Vardhan's theories for you!

If you're liking this newsletter, or my content on Twitter, LinkedIn, or Instagram, it's because I abide by these theories and follow them at every step.

Do these theories bring the same results to you?

Honestly, I don't know. But it's on me to share what I learn.

Give these theories a try and see if they work for you.

And most importantly, be observant of what you do as a creator, and try to develop your own theories irrespective of how stupid, genius, dumb, or pathbreaking they might sound.

The technical segment ends here.

Now let's look at what I have for you in the fun segment.

Non-technical aka fun segment

Favourite quote from a book

What's life without hope?

Sometimes you have one in a million chance to get something. You still challenge the probability because you have a hope of possibility.

It's the 'optimistic what ifs' of outcomes that make taking a shot worth it.

Movie I watched this week

I watched Cubicles after the release of its second season.

I've to say it's one of the most beautiful series I ever watched. I love how TVF approaches their stories! The episodes are very short and every second of the series is worth your time.

Originally in Hindi. Available on Sony Liv.

Watch the Season 1 trailer here. 👇🏻

Tweets I loved

[tweet https://twitter.com/motivational/status/1502997706842726402]

YouTube video I loved

It's a two-and-a-half-minute video and a very important one.

Do watch. Just. Do. Watch!

Song I’m listening to on a loop

Hoyna Hoyna is one of the most soul-soothing and emotional songs I know.

It only gets more beautiful every time I listen to it.

That's it from Cognition #10.

Will see you next week. Cheers!

Until then, take care, stay safe, and develop your own theories.

Love,

Vikra Vardhan.

Enjoyed Cognition? You can always gift Vikra chocolates as a token of appreciation. He’s a BIGGG foodie. He loves to eat.

Or you can just support Vikra.