Compare your LinkedIn activity with your competitors'

A LinkedIn review is only as good as its list of who to read, and the company page is rarely the whole story. At many small companies, the founder's profile has more followers and far more engagement than the company page, so a review that reads only company pages can miss most of what a competitor is doing.

Kite reads both. For your company, it reads the company page and the profiles of up to two of your founders or executives, with founders first. For each competitor, it reads the company page and one founder or executive. Kite finds these people from company records in its built-in data, so you don't need to look up anyone's profile yourself.

Kite also checks that it has the right page. Some companies have an old legal-entity page or a stray page with a similar name that hasn't posted in years. When the page on record doesn't carry the brand's name, Kite looks up the page named after the brand as well, and reads that one instead when it's the company's own and the listed page has gone quiet.

You choose the competitors. Kite proposes the ones from its research, and you can name others or take some off the list.

Kite collects the original posts each page and person published in the last 30 days. For every post, it records the date, the text, the number of reactions, comments, and shares, and the format. Reposts and reshares are left out, because a post someone else wrote says nothing about how your competitor writes.

Kite is careful about what the counts mean. When it can't read back across the full 30 days for someone, it reports the count as "at least" that many posts rather than presenting a partial count as the whole month. A page or person Kite couldn't read in time is marked as not read, never as someone who doesn't post. That matters because the most common wrong conclusion in a competitor review is "they've gone quiet" when the data simply wasn't there.

For each page and person, Kite works out how many posts went up in the window, the typical number of reactions and comments a post received, and how many posts were videos or carried images. Kite reads each post's format, not its images, so it can tell you that video posts drew more comments without claiming to know what was in the video.

The most useful finding in a LinkedIn review is what the best-performing posts have in common, across your company and your competitors together. Kite compares the posts that drew the most reactions and comments with the ones that drew the least, and describes the difference in topic and format.

For example, Kite might find that a competitor's founder gets far more comments on short posts about mistakes they made with customers than on product announcements, and that the same pattern holds on your own founder's profile. Or it might find that video posts outperform text on every company page in your market, and your page has posted none.

Kite then says where each side wins. You might be ahead on how regularly your founder posts but behind on topics, because your competitors talk about the problem buyers have while your posts talk about your features. When Kite hasn't been able to read a competitor, it leaves that competitor out of the comparison rather than guessing.

A review that ends with "post more consistently" doesn't help anyone write next week's posts. Kite names the change in three concrete parts:

• The kind of post to make. For example, a short founder post built around one customer conversation, or a short video from the company page.
• Up to three topics. These come from what your company sells and what performs in the posts Kite read, so each topic is something your buyers respond to and your company has standing to talk about.
• How regularly to post. A cadence such as "every week" for the company page or for a particular founder, based on how your posting compares with your competitors'.

Kite saves the findings in your team's knowledge base, next to its research on your competitors, so later work starts from what it learned.

Once you agree on the change, Kite writes the posts. It writes in your brand voice for the company page and in each founder's own voice for their profile, using what it knows about how they write and what they've said before.

Kite asks before it writes a post for a person. A good founder post needs a specific moment, a concrete detail, and the founder's own point, so Kite asks them one to three short questions when it doesn't already have those. It never fills a missing story or number with a guess, because the post goes out under the founder's name.

Each LinkedIn draft waits in the Social tab in Kite. It shows how the post will look on LinkedIn, with two or three alternative openings to choose from. The author approves the post, copies it to LinkedIn, and marks it posted. Kite drafts posts for LinkedIn but doesn't publish them, so the person whose name is on the post is always the one who posts it.

Kite can run the same comparison again on a schedule, such as once a month, so each review covers a fresh 30 days against the same competitors. The new review shows whether your posts now draw more reactions and comments, whether the topics Kite recommended are working, and what your competitors have changed in the meantime.

For each founder, Kite can also run a weekly LinkedIn plan. Every Monday it reads their recent posts, including ones they wrote outside Kite, and compares each post they made through Kite with their usual number of reactions. It can also read the recent posts of people the founder chooses to follow and point out the technique behind the one that did best. Then it sends up to four new drafts and a short list of topics the founder could take a position on. When the founder edits drafts the same way more than once, Kite applies that pattern to the next week's drafts.