Creator Differentiator Adjective Test
Name the defining attribute that makes a creator worth following
- Difficulty
- Easy
- Time to result
- ~days to results
- Steps
- 5
- Confidence
- 99%
The Creator Differentiator Adjective Test asks whether a creator can be described through one clear, audience-relevant attribute such as hilarious, thoughtful, contrarian, or unusually rigorous. Review enough work to identify the recurring quality, then test whether followers would independently recognize the same distinction. Examine how the attribute manifests through topic selection, storytelling, framing, and consistent angles rather than accepting a self-applied label. Finally, connect that quality to the partnership's purpose: the brand should know why it wants access to that specific attribute. Metrics still matter, but this test detects whether the creator has a memorable reason to be followed and enough differentiation to lend meaningful identity or influence to a brand.
Origin
Extracted from Marketing Against The Grain when Steph Smith explained how she identifies the core differentiator of a successful creator.
Core principles
- 01Strong creators have a recognizable core differentiator
- 02A simple adjective can expose whether that differentiator is clear
- 03Polarized affinity can be more valuable than universal approval
- 04The creator's angle must appear consistently in their work
- 05Simple positioning often rests on years of difficult craft
How to run it
- 1
Sample the Work
Review content across different dates, formats, and subjects to find characteristics that persist.
Pro tip Include both high-performing and ordinary work to avoid judging only viral outliers.
Watch out A single popular post cannot establish a durable differentiator.
- 2
Choose One Attribute
Complete the sentence 'People follow this creator because they are especially...' with one adjective or concise trait.
Pro tip Prefer a specific comparative attribute over vague praise such as good or authentic.
Watch out If the description requires a paragraph, the positioning may not be clear.
- 3
Validate with the Audience
Check comments, testimonials, referrals, and interviews for evidence that followers perceive the same quality.
Pro tip Look for repeated audience language rather than isolated compliments.
Watch out Do not mistake the creator's intended identity for the audience's actual perception.
- 4
Trace the Execution
Identify the story choices, angles, expertise, or delivery habits that repeatedly produce the attribute.
Pro tip A real differentiator should be visible in the creator's process and output.
Watch out Contrarianism without insight may simply be rudeness, and attempted humor may not create influence.
- 5
Test Partnership Fit
State why the brand needs access to this attribute and how the creator can retain it within the partnership.
Pro tip Use the attribute as part of the creator-selection thesis.
Watch out Do not select a distinctive creator and then edit away the quality that made them valuable.
In the wild
A B2B brand reviews a creator's posts and finds a consistent ability to challenge accepted growth advice with evidence. Audience comments repeatedly praise the creator for saying what others avoid. The brand chooses the creator because it wants credible access to that independent, contrarian perspective—not merely the follower count.
→ The partnership has a clear strategic reason and preserves the quality that created audience influence.
Common mistakes
Using Vague Praise
Words such as great, authentic, or engaging do not explain why this creator is meaningfully different from alternatives.
Confusing Performance with Positioning
High engagement may reveal distribution strength without identifying the attribute that creates durable audience affinity.
Underestimating the Craft
A simple adjective can summarize the result, but reproducing humor, insight, or novelty may require years of practice.
Is it for you?
Best for
This is best for teams screening creators whose audience trust and distinctive voice matter more than raw follower count.
Not ideal for
It is not ideal as the only evaluation for technical builders or partnerships governed primarily by measurable conversion.
From the transcript
“can I describe them through a very simple adjective?”
“the creators that really succeed, the creators that have people who buy into them, who are truly influenced by them, have some sort of spin,…”
“you should be able to articulate like what is their thing and why do we want to access that unique attribute.”
From the episode
Why Creators are Disrupting Marketing with Steph Smith