UGC Pro 🦄

Someone pinch me 🥹 Tell me how I just had my UGC journey and 10-year business story featured in freaking @Entrepreneur?! This is for sure one of those ‘Mama I made it’ moments that I’ll always cherish. Special thank you to Amanda Breen and @jlthoms for bringing this piece to life, and for giving the UGC community a spotlight. 💓 I’ve said it before, I’ll say it till I’m blue in the face: this is a win for the UGC community at large. A rising tide lifts ALL boats! 🛶✨📈

Q4 thought: I actually think strategy is where creative quality starts to slip first, especially when teams are stretched thin and start oversimplifying their approach just to keep up with production demands. And it's low-key insidious, almost like an evil spirit creeping in unnoticed (yes, I'm feeling festive 🎃👻), because before you know it, you're producing MORE creative without actually testing anything meaningful or learning enough to inform what you should make next, which defeats the purpose of scaling in the first place! 😅 Creator fit is definitely important, but it's also just ONE ingredient in the recipe for effective performance creative, and even the perfect creator can't save a weak test. Then again, what do I know? Come fight with me in the comments, I need to let off some steam. 😂

"I don't know who needs to hear this"—I know exactly who needs to hear this. 💀 Creators considering a mentor: There’s a massive difference between advice that sounds good in theory and advice that still works when there’s a real client, real budget, real team and real media spend attached to it.

Unconscious competence is FASCINATING to me because the better you get at something, the easier it becomes to underestimate how difficult it actually is for someone else. What feels like common sense to you might actually be the result of thousands of decisions, mistakes, experiments, and lessons you've internalized over the years. And learning how to articulate that knowledge, let alone teach someone else how to apply it, is an entirely different skill. 👀 It's something I've become increasingly aware of over the years as I've gone from being the person DOING the creative work to building and leading teams responsible for producing it. Think about it... just because something makes perfect sense in MY head doesn't mean I've done a good job explaining the WHY behind it to someone else. And that's a huge part of what I'm excited to continue developing at @ContentjetUGC, building systems, frameworks, and feedback loops that help turn individual expertise into something an entire team can learn from and apply independently. I've learned that knowing how to do something really well and figuring out how to get an entire team to do it just as well are two VERY different challenges, and personally, I find the latter a hell of a lot more interesting. 👀

I think one of the biggest mistakes in the UGC space is treating “creator → mentor” like a natural promotion path... it isn’t. 💀

A creator who knows how to film a good video is great. A creator who understands WHY that video should work, who it's for, what objection it's overcoming, and how its performance will be measured? HOLD MY DRINK! Oh did I say HOLD it? I meant CHEERS FRIEND! 🤣 And this is EXACTLY why I've been advocating for UGC creators to learn creative strategy since launching UGC Pro in 2022 AND why I've been operating and marketing myself as equally analytical/data-minded as I am creative since 2016! Which is how I got my foot in the door with brands and agencies early in my career, without a college degree (back when it wasn't the "norm" to own the title college drop-out in this industry). I made sure I wasn't just showing them what I could create, I could explain WHY I made certain creative decisions and how those decisions connected to performance. Being equally analytical and creative made it a whole lot easier to stand out, and for over four years, that's exactly what we've been teaching our UGC Pro students. The goal was never just to teach creators how to make content, that comes naturally for most people fluent in social media. It was to teach them how to THINK about the content they're making. ☝️

One of the biggest mistakes we make when evaluating talent is confusing someone's ability to explain a concept with their ability to actually execute it. Knowing all the right terminology doesn't automatically mean you know how to apply it, and not having the vocabulary doesn't mean you lack the skill. 👀 ALSO, while I'm at it, just because someone uses industry jargon fluently (which I catch myself doing out of habit ALL the time) doesn't automatically mean they're trying to disguise themselves as knowing more than they actually do. All three things can be true! 😂 And instead of overanalyzing someone's choice of words or trying to poke holes in how they explain something, why not save everyone some time and look at their actual work, portfolio, and case studies? Because at the end of the day, I'd rather evaluate someone's ability to DO the work than how convincingly they can TALK about it. 😉

Nearly 20,000 people have learned through our free and paid resources since 2022. And something I've realized is that I know where a lot of their journeys started, but I don't necessarily know where they ended up. 🥹 If you ever took one of our courses, attended a live session, used our resources, or were part of the community, I genuinely want to know: Where are you now? What are you doing? What did learning UGC lead to? I want to hear ALL of it. ❤️

In performance creative, the rules change way too often. The moment you take yourself too far out of the game, you start losing access to the nuance of what’s actually happening in real time!

I use acronyms and marketing jargon ALL the time, but I make it a point to explain what the heck they mean instead of assuming everyone knows WTF I'm talking about. And it's because I VIVIDLY remember learning marketing terminology years ago and feeling unbelievably self-conscious about getting “caught” not knowing something. And without a formal education or degree to point to, I genuinely felt like a fraud when, in reality, I was just experiencing something way too common in performance creative. 😅 And yes, this was before AI chatbots could explain something in two seconds or video courses were readily available. Some of us had to figure things out ourselves or work up the courage to raise our hands and ask for help. 😒 So consider this your reminder that you don't need to know the terminology for something to be exceptionally good at it. Sometimes you develop the skill before you even learn what it's called. And not knowing the language of an industry doesn't mean you don't belong in it. Don't confuse unfamiliarity with terminology for a lack of intelligence, ability, or potential. 🫶

Being a great mentor doesn’t automatically make you a better creator, strategist, editor or service provider. In the same way that being great at any of those things doesn’t automatically make you a great mentor.

Knowing how to create content people watch vs. creative that drives measurable business outcomes are two VERY different beasts. Organic social and paid ads are NOT the same. Is the gray area thinner than EVER BEFORE? Absolutely. But the two can (and SHOULD) inform each other. Because when you're only looking at one side, your strategy becomes a reflection of the echo chamber you've built in your own little corner of the internet, rather than the bigger picture of what actually resonates with consumers AND drives results.

Scaling creative production is one thing, but what about scaling GOOD creative decisions? 👀 Think about it, producing more assets is relatively straightforward compared to building a process where every new concept, test, and iteration contributes to a better understanding of your audience and what actually drives performance. And yes, that probably means investing MORE effort into pre-production, being more intentional about what you're testing, and dedicating time to post-mortems instead of immediately jumping into the next batch of deliverables. But here's where it gets interesting… that investment compounds. And that's ONLY if you're not just focused on improving the creative you're producing today, but actively taking everything you've learned and applying it to your next batch of creative, so that every round of testing informs the next instead of starting from scratch. Zoom out for a sec and look at the bigger picture here, because I promise it's worth it: The real opportunity isn't just scaling how much creative your team can produce, it's scaling how much smarter your team gets with every round of production. 😉

Just because you're testing MORE ads doesn't mean you're learning more about what works. 👀 You could produce 50 new ads, launch every single one, and STILL walk away without meaningful insights if you weren't intentional about what you were testing in the first place. Be honest: How much are you actually learning if every variation changes the same superficial elements without exploring different strategic angles, objections, messaging, or audience motivations? The value of creative testing isn't just in identifying winners, that's table stakes, especially with platforms like @motionapp_ making it easier than ever to see what's performing. 😉 The SAUCE is in understanding WHY something won (or lost) and using those insights to make better decisions about what gets produced next. Because otherwise, you're just keeping the production machine running without necessarily getting any smarter about your creative strategy. 😅

Organic social and paid ads are NOT the same. Hear me out before you come for me in the comments, please! 🤣 Is the gray area thinner than EVER BEFORE? Absolutely. But knowing how to create content people watch or engage with vs. creative designed to drive measurable business outcomes? Two VERY different beasts, guys. Pleaseee don't get it twisted! A creator's following or ability to make visually pleasing videos for their own audience doesn't automatically mean they understand consumer psychology, objections, messaging, or how to create content for a specific product, audience, and commercial objective. Because I'm here to break it to you: there's a difference between hiring someone for the audience they've cultivated and hiring someone for their ability to produce effective creative. Sometimes you need influence and distribution. Sometimes you need performance creative you can test, iterate, and scale. And sometimes you need BOTH! But if you're anything like me, when I'm investing in creator-led performance creative, I'm looking for creators who understand the WHY behind what they're producing, not just how to make it look good and perform on their own little slice of the internet. And when brands (or creators) confuse the two, they're potentially wasting budget, time, energy and opportunities to actually learn from their creative investments. So before hiring your next creator, ask yourself: Am I paying for their audience, their creative expertise, or both? That's exactly what we're focused on at @ContentJet: connecting creator-native execution with performance creative strategy instead of treating them as interchangeable. Because the goal isn't just creating content people want to watch... although that would be a nice little ego boost, wouldn't it? 💀 The goal is creating content that gives your brand a better opportunity to turn those viewers into customers. 📈

What happens when creative teams are stretched too thin and pressured to produce MORE creative? Let me paint you a picture (proceeds to grab sticks for paintbrushes and mud for paint), because this is NOT going to be a pretty one. 😂 Strategy is often the first thing that gets oversimplified to compensate for maxed-out bandwidth, and that's where things start falling apart, because when the underlying strategy is weak, increasing production volume just means producing MORE creative that probably wasn't worth testing in the first place. 😅 So consider this your reminder that the goal isn't just to produce more creative, fam! It's to get better at producing creative that ACTUALLY makes sense from a testing perspective. Because when your creative decisions make sense strategically, they have a much better chance of making money. 😉

I've seen this way too many time to not say something... “being on social media” does not count as staying close to the work as a creative marketer… your FYP is literally YOUR algorithm, not everyone else’s, and even trends aren’t universally relevant across demos. 🫣 Seeing something everywhere on your feed is not the same as seeing what’s actually holding spend, scaling, fatiguing or converting across multiple accounts and verticals. That’s the difference between spotting a trend and spotting a performance pattern. 😤 And please don’t tell me we’re blindly doing trends for ads because… we already know how people feel about that. 😭

@ Most marketers: Using acronyms and industry jargon without explaining what they mean isn't the flex you think it is. And if I'm being honest, it’s giving troll-under-the-bridge gatekeeper vibes. 🧌😂 Knowing the terminology doesn't make you smarter than someone who doesn't... so let's normalize making knowledge accessible instead of making people feel stupid for asking what something means. 🫶

Organic social and paid ads are NOT the same. Is the gray area thinner than ever? Absolutely. But knowing how to create content people watch vs. creative that drives measurable business outcomes? Those are two VERY different beasts, guys. Pleaseee don't get it twisted. 😂 A larger following might get you noticed, but it won't automatically get you booked. Want repeat clients and consistent work? Learn how to deliver a meaningful return on their investment (what they paid YOU but also the money they're backing your ad with). 📈

Someone asked me a REALLY good question the other day: “When creative volume goes up, where does quality break first?” My answer? 👀 I think when teams are stretched thin and pressured to produce more creative, strategy is often the first thing that gets oversimplified to compensate for maxed-out bandwidth, and that's usually where things start to fall apart. Because suddenly, you're producing more ads, but you're not necessarily testing in a way that generates meaningful learnings to inform what you do next as a strategist, which means you could be spending more time and money producing creative without actually getting any better at understanding what works and WHY. And if the underlying strategy isn't strong to begin with, increasing production volume just means you're producing more creative that probably wasn't worth testing in the first place. 😅 This is why I don't believe creative quality and creative volume are mutually exclusive, and I'd actually argue that the real bottleneck is often the process supporting both, because the goal shouldn't be to produce fewer ads to protect quality, it should be to build systems that allow teams to produce MORE without sacrificing the strategic thinking that makes those ads worth producing. And while scaling creative production is one thing, scaling good creative decisions is an entirely different challenge, because it requires more intentional pre-production, probably a little more effort on the post-mortem, and a process that actually connects what you're learning from one round of creative to what you're producing in the next. But that's also where the investment starts to compound, because you're not just improving the creative you're producing today, you're developing a deeper understanding of your audience, your messaging, and the strategic bets worth making next, which makes every subsequent round of creative that much more intentional. So consider this your reminder that the goal isn't just to produce more creative, fam! It's to get better at producing creative that ACTUALLY makes sense from a testing perspective. Because when your creative decisions make sense strategically, they have a much better chance of making money. 😉

If I’m hiring someone to create, I care about how good they are at creating. If I’m hiring someone to strategize, I care about how good they are at strategy. If they also teach or mentor, great, but that doesn’t automatically make them the stronger hire.