Social Strategy

How to read this document

This is the strategic social media framework for Maxxim, produced in the Design phase against Master Briefing v2.1, the Gate 1 decisions, the locked Brand Strategy and Copy Deck, and the 1 July refresh that folded in the 29 June product mechanics and the live Jewell partner site. It defines which platforms to use and which to skip, what to post, how often, how to manage the community, and how organic and paid work together. It is not a content calendar with specific post copy. That is built downstream from this framework by the social-post skill, drafted by Pip in the Social Studio.

Two facts about this document matter before the strategy starts. First, this is the deliverable that unlocks the engine. The product gates the Social Studio behind exactly this document: Pip drafts and publishes nothing until a Social Strategy exists. So this is the framework Maxxim itself would run its own social from, and the framework any partner would run a client account from. Second, everything below is governed by one frame. The near-term customer is the trusted operator, the Capacity-Capped Client Partner (Operator Owen in the Customer Profile), a B2B, founder-led, LinkedIn-weighted audience. Social is therefore primarily a founder-led thought-leadership channel, voiced by Clent and Raef, that dramatises the arguments the brand already owns: the human-20-percent and machine-80-percent seam now proven by a live Jewell partner, the trust-taste-judgement position, the named engine of Max, Sal and Pip, the gated method with Pottsville as the cleared proof, and the partner community. End-client awareness is a secondary layer that rides on the same content and is reached through partners, not a separate strategy.

What is locked is stated plainly. What is open stays open. Per v2.1 and Gate 1, this document does not invent Maxxim's category lead word, partner economics percentages, the front-door product, the fractional CMO model for Maxxim, Maxxim's end-client visibility rule, or the 3 July showcase promise wording. Jewell's external lead word, growth, is locked and used. Proof respects clearance: Pottsville Acupuncture is the only cleared public Maxxim proof, OTR Earthmover is internal only, Hidrive is percentages only, and Jewell's own named results stay under Jewell's banner and are never re-used as Maxxim's own public proof. External style holds, no em dashes and no exclamation marks, Australian English, operator to operator, never hype. The business is Jewell, never the corrupted form. Ownership is Clent and Raef only.

The seam this strategy is voiced across

Since the 27 June version, the core of the business went from a model on paper to a working example in market. The human-20-percent and machine-80-percent split is now concretely embodied by the live Jewell partner. Jewell enters and owns the client, the Discover phase is always human, then Design and Deploy hand off to the Maxxim engine at scale, human-checked at every stage. Jewell is the name on the door. Maxxim is the engine behind it. That sentence sets the posture of every post: the human is always the hero, the machine is always the volume, and the content never lets the machine take credit the human is accountable for. On social this seam is not just a message, it is the operating posture of the channel itself, because Maxxim runs its own social exactly the way the model says work should be run.

  THE 80/20 SEAM, APPLIED TO SOCIAL ITSELF

  MACHINE 80%  (Pip / the Social Studio)   HUMAN 20%  (Clent + Raef)
  -----------------------------------      -----------------------------------
  Drafts posts from the strategy           The sharp, true claim to make
  Prepares carousels and variants          Which proof is cleared to show
  Schedules the approved queue             The judgement in every reply
  Repurposes proof into feed items         Reads the room, sets the tone
  Volume at machine speed                  Signs off before anything posts

  Pip = Prepare, Inspect, Post. Post only on human approval.
  The engine behind the partner, not the name on the door.

The strategic bet is the one in the product guide: good, fast, cheap stops being a trade-off when the human stays exactly where quality is decided. On social that means Pip does the repeatable volume and a named founder holds the claim, the clearance call, and the reply. The channel is a live demonstration of the thesis, not just an argument for it.

1. Social Media Objectives

Four objectives, each tied to a Marketing Plan goal, each measurable. Targets assume a near-zero starting base on a founder-led account and a minimum-viable production cadence, so they are deliberately modest and credibility-weighted rather than vanity-weighted.

Minimum viable cadence note. Every target above is set to be hit by two founders posting consistently, with Pip carrying the drafting and scheduling load, not by a content team. If capacity tightens, protect objectives one and two first. Awareness and community compounding follow from authority, not the reverse.

2. Platform Strategy

Platform selection is the most important decision in this document. Being excellent on one platform the partner actually lives on beats being mediocre on five. The Customer Profile and Audience Teardown are unambiguous: Operator Owen trusts demonstration over decks, judges the engine operator-to-operator, and moves inside a founder network. He wants to see a run, not a brochure. That behaviour is LinkedIn-shaped, and the live Jewell partner reinforces it, since a peer operator running the full model in market is exactly the walk-through reference this audience responds to. The platform map below sets roles and priority before the per-platform detail.

                        MAXXIM SOCIAL
                              |
        +---------------------+----------------------+
        |                     |                      |
   PRIORITY 1            PRIORITY 2             PRIORITY 3
   LINKEDIN             YOUTUBE                EMAIL-ADJACENT
   (the home)           (the proof vault)      (owned, not social)
        |                     |                      |
   founder-led           long-form proof:       partner hub /
   thought leadership    method walkthroughs,   newsletter feed;
   to the partner.       Pottsville teardown,   carries the same
   80% of effort.        Max/Sal/Pip at work.   content to a warm list.
        |                     |                      |
   role: authority,      role: depth + the      role: nurture the
   pipeline, community   "watch it work"        warmed partner, no
   in public.            evidence the trust     algorithm tax.
        |                gap demands.                |
        v                     v                      v
   +-------------------------------------------------------+
   |  SECONDARY / OPPORTUNISTIC, NOT RESOURCED YET         |
   |  Instagram  -> end-client proof, partner-run, later   |
   |  X / Twitter -> repost founder takes, low effort      |
   +-------------------------------------------------------+
   +-------------------------------------------------------+
   |  SKIP for now: TikTok, Facebook page, Threads,        |
   |  Pinterest. Rationale in "Platforms to skip" below.   |
   +-------------------------------------------------------+

Platform 1: LinkedIn (priority 1, the home, roughly 80 percent of effort)

• Why this platform. The primary buyer is a B2B operator who signs at principal level and moves through a founder network. That is exactly where LinkedIn concentrates attention. The decision turns on one person closing the trust gap, and LinkedIn is the only platform where founder-to-operator credibility, long-enough-form argument, and warm network reach all live in one place.
• Audience overlap. Operator Owen (A1, primary) and Connector Carol (A2, referrer) are both active here looking for proof they can scrutinise and operators worth trusting. Specialist Sena (A3) and Director Diane (the highest-value end client) are reachable here too, Diane when a partner reshares proof into her feed.
• Content format. Founder text posts that lead with one sharp, true claim; document carousels that walk the 80/20 split, the gates, or the Pottsville teardown; native short clips of Max, Sal or Pip running a step or a founder signing a gate; the occasional long-form article for the method argument.
• Posting cadence. Three to four founder posts per week across Clent and Raef combined, plus daily light engagement. Rationale: enough to compound authority and stay in-feed, few enough that two founders can sustain it with Pip carrying the drafting.
• Tone adaptation. The Sage compressed, per the Copy Deck tone guide. One claim per post, sized to the proof. Emphasis comes from the claim, not punctuation, since exclamation marks are off the table. Plain operator-to-operator, never hyped.
• Competitive landscape. Per Competitor Analysis, agencies post case-study sizzle and AI-tool vendors post feature hype. Almost no one posts the honest middle: what is proven, what is open, a named human at the gate. That restraint is the open lane, and it is precisely the Sage posture the brand already owns.

Platform 2: YouTube (priority 2, the proof vault)

• Why this platform. The trust gap is closed by watching the work, not reading about it. Owen wants to see a run. YouTube is the durable, searchable home for the long-form proof that LinkedIn clips point to: the method walkthrough, the Pottsville teardown, Max running the words, Sal running the pixels, Pip running social, a human signing a gate.
• Audience overlap. Owen and Diane both go deep here when they are seriously evaluating. It is a consideration-stage asset, not an awareness engine.
• Content format. Eight-to-fifteen-minute demonstrations and teardowns, evergreen, with strong titles and chapters so they work as on-demand proof linked from anywhere.
• Posting cadence. One to two videos per month. Low volume, high durability. Each one is a sales asset, not a feed item.
• Tone adaptation. Fullest expression of the Sage. Show the structured output and the gate, never a black box. Let cleared evidence and the live partner persuade.
• Competitive landscape. Competitors rarely show the engine working end to end. Showing it, with a named human accountable, is the single most differentiating thing Maxxim can do on video.

Platform 3: Email-adjacent owned feed (priority 3, support, not strictly social)

• Why this platform. The partner hub and a founder newsletter carry the same content to a captive, warmed list with no algorithm tax. It is the nurture layer between a social impression and a partner conversation, and it compounds the community without depending on any platform's reach.
• Audience overlap. Founding-cohort partners and warm prospects who have raised a hand but not yet signed.
• Content format. A short founder note, the month's best proof, one open question put to the table. Repurposed from LinkedIn and YouTube, not written fresh.
• Posting cadence. Monthly, aligned to the community cadence.
• Tone adaptation. Warmer and more reciprocal, the table voice, not the proof-surface voice.
• Competitive landscape. Owned audience is the defensible asset a faster incumbent cannot borrow. This is where the human moat is quietly built.

Secondary, opportunistic, not yet resourced

• Instagram. Reserve for end-client proof later, partner-run, once the partner motion is proven and there is launched, cleared work to show visually. Not a founder-authority channel.
• X / Twitter. Low-effort reposting of founder takes only if it costs near-zero time. Not a primary surface for this audience.

Platforms to skip

• TikTok. Audience mismatch and format mismatch. The B2B principal buyer is not making a licence decision off short entertainment video, and the trend-chasing, high-volume production model is the opposite of the resource-realistic, Sage posture this brand needs. Skip.
• Facebook page. A branded page would be a low-engagement obligation. End-client reach on Facebook, where it matters at all, belongs to the partner who owns the local relationship, not to a Maxxim corporate page. Skip the page; allow partner pages later.
• Threads and Pinterest. No audience fit, no proof-surface value, pure resource drain at this stage. Skip.
• Paid-heavy brand accounts on any platform before authority exists. Spending on reach before the founder voice is established wastes budget on an audience that has nothing proven to trust yet. Earn the authority first.

3. Content Pillars

Content pillars make social sustainable. Without them every post is a blank page. Five pillars, mapped directly onto the Copy Deck messaging hierarchy and the brand pillars in Brand Strategy, so nothing posted has to be reinvented per channel. The refresh adds a dedicated engine pillar, because the 29 June product guide made the engine nameable and showable for the first time, and showing Max, Sal and Pip at work is now a distinct, high-value job. The diagram sets share and theme; the detail follows.

   +---------------------------------------------------------+
   |  BRAND IDEA: the proven method, run by a human, at AI   |
   |  speed. The engine behind the partner, not the name on  |
   |  the door. A community, not a lone operator.            |
   +---------------------------------------------------------+
       |          |          |          |          |
       v          v          v          v          v
   +--------+ +--------+ +--------+ +--------+ +----------+
   | P1     | | P2     | | P3     | | P4     | | P5       |
   | THE    | | THE    | | THE    | | THE    | | THE      |
   | 80/20  | | HUMAN  | | ENGINE | | PROOF  | | TABLE    |
   | THESIS | | MOAT   | | SHOWN  | | IT     | | (comm-   |
   |        | |        | | (Max/  | | WORKS  | |  unity)  |
   | your   | | named  | | Sal/   | |        | |          |
   | judge- | | at the | | Pip +  | | Potts- | | partners,|
   | ment   | | gate   | | gates) | | ville  | | Jewell   |
   +--------+ +--------+ +--------+ +--------+ +----------+
     ~25%       ~20%       ~15%       ~25%        ~15%
   category   objection  the engine  evidence    the moat
   + growth   closed     made real   that        in public
                                     persuades

Pillar 1: The 80/20 Thesis, the engine for your judgement (around 25 percent)

• Rationale. This is the category-making argument and the primary partner job-to-be-done. It names the cap Owen feels daily and reframes AI from threat to engine. It carries the lead word growth and makes the white-space quadrant legible.
• Example topics: AI made the first 80 percent cheap, so where did the value go; why the 20 percent is the only thing a client actually pays for; the difference between a tool and a machine for your judgement; what "scale without becoming an agency" actually means; the cap a capable operator hits and why hiring is the wrong answer; good, fast, cheap stops being a trade-off when the human stays where quality is decided; days not months, shown not claimed; why finished beats busy.
• Recommended formats: founder text posts (the sharp claim), document carousels (the 80/20 split visualised), the occasional long-form article.

Pillar 2: The Human Moat, named at the gate (around 20 percent)

• Rationale. Directly answers the one objection under every persona: can AI hit a standard I will put my name on. This is the trust position, owned in four words, "the human at the wheel." It is the thing a pure-AI competitor structurally cannot say.
• Example topics: the gate as a quality bar, not a slogan; what it means to put your name on an output and mean it; why a named human signing every phase is the structural answer to AI anxiety; taste and judgement as the durable layer when speed is commoditised; the moment a partner watches the engine run the 80 percent and signs the 20 percent; why "no human needed" is the wrong promise; accountability shown, not asserted.
• Recommended formats: founder text posts, short native clips of a gate sign-off, carousels that show the gated flow.

Pillar 3: The Engine Shown, Max, Sal and Pip and the gates (around 15 percent)

• Rationale. New in this refresh. The 29 June product guide made the engine concrete: three named specialists, each a process, and mechanical gates. Owen judges the engine by seeing it, not by reading about it, so making the machine legible is now a distinct pillar. This is where the "watch it work" evidence lives, and it keeps the machine subordinate to the human by always ending on the sign-off.
• Example topics: Max does the words, Sal does the pixels, Pip runs social, and the human decides; what the gates actually enforce, so creative unlocks only as its briefs exist and a logo is locked; the Social Studio unlocks only once a Social Strategy exists, so the strategy comes before the posting; a structured output a partner receives, shown behind a gate; the difference between a black box and a legible engine; how the same rails run for Jewell as for any licensed partner.
• Recommended formats: short native video (a step running, a gate opening), document carousels (the gated flow), founder posts framing the demo. Guardrail: the specialists are always shown as features of Maxxim and subordinate to the accountable human. Never present Max, Sal or Pip as the accountable party or as separate products.

Pillar 4: The Proof It Works, Pottsville and the method (around 25 percent)

• Rationale. The Brand Strategy is unambiguous that closing the cleared-proof gap is the single highest-value brand action. Proof is what converts a sceptical operator. Pottsville is the cleared public lead; the method run for years is the pattern proof; the live Jewell partner is the proof the whole model holds.
• Example topics: the Pottsville Acupuncture run, a launched site the client owns outright; what a full Discover, Design, Deploy run actually looks like; the method run with real clients for years, not a prototype; ownership as the opposite of agency lock-in; a premium engagement transacted at around $80,000 inside the $25,000 to $250,000 band, the band is real; the diagnostic as a low-risk, credited first step carrying the word growth; behind a gate, the structured output a client receives.
• Recommended formats: carousels (the case teardown), YouTube long-form (the full walkthrough), founder posts linking to the proof. Clearance: Pottsville only in public. OTR Earthmover never appears in public content. Hidrive may inform a point as a percentage only, with clearance, never named, never shown. Jewell as a live partner may be cited as proof the partner model works, always attributed to Jewell, and Jewell's own named client results stay under Jewell's banner and are never re-used as Maxxim's public proof.

Pillar 5: The Table, the community as the moat (around 15 percent)

• Rationale. The community is the moat, and building it in public is a first-order strategic act per Gate 1. Posting the table makes belonging visible and turns the founding cohort into advocates whose wins become shared proof.
• Example topics: stronger together than alone, why a community beats a lone operator; the founding cohort and what it is proving; Jewell running the whole model in market as the worked example every partner is shown; the shared table and shared deal flow as the tangible payoff of belonging; one named partner owns each client relationship, always; the compounding Deepen loop that improves the method for everyone; the annual offsite as the family glue.
• Recommended formats: founder posts, partner spotlights and reshares, behind-the-table clips. Guardrail: no named client specifics or named partners in public without consent, consistent with the v2.1 confidentiality rule. Keep Christy Kilmartin's two hats, referrer and specialist, separate in any spotlight.

4. Content Mix and Formats

Format ratios are set for what two founders plus Pip can realistically produce, not an ideal-world studio. The bias is toward founder text and document carousels, which are cheap, high-signal, and native to LinkedIn, with video reserved for the proof and the engine demonstration that justify the production cost.

Prioritise by capacity. If production is tight, the minimum viable mix is founder text plus document carousels, roughly 70 percent of output, which alone can carry every pillar. Video is the first thing to scale up once a content cadence is proven, and the last thing to let block the schedule.

Visual and brand note. All visual formats obey the locked identity, Signal Blue #2D5BFF, Poppins, Edition 03, Blue Frog removed. The reversed wordmark variant (white "maxxim" logotype on transparent, the inverse mark) is the correct mark for dark grounds and Signal Blue fields, for example a dark quote card or a video end-frame. Imagery follows the Brand Strategy guide: real over illustrated, outcome over abstract, never glowing-brain AI stock, because abstract AI imagery undercuts the human-at-the-wheel position.

5. Content Calendar Framework

This is the rhythm, not the calendar. The social-post skill, run by Pip in the Social Studio, fills it with dated copy. The weekly template maps pillar and format to a slot so no day starts blank, and the rhythm diagram shows how social syncs to the partner community cadence.

  WEEK   MON        TUE     WED        THU     FRI        weekend
         founder            carousel           proof /
         claim      (light  or engine    (light community  (off / light
         post       engage) demo        engage) post       engage only)
         |          |       |           |       |
         +-- LinkedIn pulse: 3-4 posts/wk across Clent + Raef --+
                                |
   MONTH ---------------------- + ---------------------------------
         1x YouTube proof asset  |  1x owned newsletter to the list
                                 |  (repurposed, not fresh)
                                 v
   COMMUNITY CADENCE, social mirrors it:
     weekly table  -> seeds Pillar 5 posts (the table in public)
     monthly review-> seeds Pillar 1 + 4 (what improved, what proved)
     quarterly show-> case-study factory feeds Pillar 4 for weeks
     annual offsite-> a content moment: vision, recognition, family

Weekly posting template

Content batching approach

• One weekly writing session. Clent and Raef set the week's three to four claims in a single sitting, drawing raw material from that week's table and client friction. Pip drafts the posts from those claims and the pillars, and a founder approves before anything queues. This is the cheapest way to stay consistent.
• One monthly proof session. Record the month's YouTube asset and harvest two to three carousels and clips from it in one block, so video cost is paid once and repurposed many times.
• Quarterly case harvest. The quarterly showcase is a case-study factory; one quarterly produces weeks of Pillar 4 content.

Key dates and moments

• 3 July showcase, the founding meeting of the partner community, is the anchor moment. Build toward it, then mine it for content, with consent and no named specifics without it. The showcase promise wording is OPEN and Clent's to finalise, so content builds toward it without scripting the promise.
• The founding cohort window, July to September, sets the near-term content arc.
• Each Pottsville or future cleared-proof milestone is a planned content moment.
• The annual offsite is a recurring flagship moment.

Evergreen versus timely split

Roughly 80 percent planned and evergreen (pillars, proof, the method argument, the engine) to 20 percent timely and reactive (a relevant AI-in-marketing conversation, a community moment). This brand is built by showing up reliably on a true position, not by chasing trends. Trend-chasing is explicitly out of character for the Sage and is not resourced.

6. Community Management Approach

Community management is where trust is built or lost, and for a brand whose entire thesis is the human moat, it is non-negotiable. On a founder-led account, the founders are the community managers, and replies are part of the proof. Pip can surface and draft, but a named human signs the reply, the same rule that governs posting.

• Tone for replies. Warmer and more personal than the post itself, the table voice, reciprocal and operator-to-operator. Still no hype, still no exclamation marks, still a named human (Clent or Raef) signing the reply.
• Escalation triggers, when to involve a human deliberately: a clear partner-licence intent signal escalates to a direct founder conversation; an end-client or sales lead is routed to the partner who owns that relationship, since one named partner owns each client relationship; a complaint, a probity or compliance question, or any reputational risk goes straight to Clent; a question that would require quoting an open number (economics, fees, caps) is answered with the honest "structure set, numbers being proven through the founding cohort" line and never an invented figure.
• UGC approach. Encourage partners to post their own wins and reshare them, with consent, no named client specifics without it. Curate the best into Pillar 5. The compounding loop applies to content too: a partner's public win becomes the community's proof.
• Engagement tactics. Proactive, not just reactive. Clent and Raef comment substantively on the posts of operators in the target segment, join the AI-in-marketing conversation where they can add the honest middle, and engage in the founder networks where Owen already lives. The goal is to be a recognised,