Build campaigns around belief gaps

Understanding segments is worthless if you don't build different campaigns for them. Most companies do the segmentation work, then write one generic campaign and send it to everyone. That defeats the entire purpose.

This chapter shows you how to create segment profiles that document current beliefs and missing assumptions, match segments to appropriate channels, craft messages that address specific doubts, and choose proof types that close belief gaps.

You'll also learn how to measure whether you're actually closing belief gaps (not just generating clicks) and how to adjust campaigns when segments aren't moving through awareness stages as expected.

For each segment, create a profile showing: current beliefs (what they already accept as true), missing assumptions (what they're unsure about), belief gap to close (the specific doubt preventing forward movement), channel fit (where this segment spends time), and message focus (what to emphasise in campaigns).

Example profile for compliance-driven segment in cybersecurity training:

Current beliefs: Security training is legally required. Employees need annual certification. Compliance failures have consequences.

Missing assumptions: Doubts training actually changes behaviour (sees it as checkbox exercise). Doesn't believe engaging training works better than basic compliance videos. Unsure if platform will satisfy auditor requirements.

Belief gap: "Training is just a compliance requirement, it doesn't actually improve security."

Channel fit: Responds to LinkedIn proof ads (peer validation), Google search for "compliance training requirements" (actively searching), industry site advertising (trusted context).

Message focus: Speed ("Complete annual training in 30 minutes"), compliance proof ("Satisfies SOC 2, ISO 27001, GDPR requirements"), ease ("Zero IT setup, works in any browser"). Don't emphasise behaviour change (they don't believe it matters).

Compare to proactive segment profile:

Current beliefs: Employee behaviour is biggest security risk. Training can change behaviour. Measuring impact matters for budget justification.

Missing assumptions: Doubts ROI can be proven with data. Unsure if behaviour change is measurable. Concerned about executive buy-in without clear metrics.

Belief gap: "I can't prove this investment will reduce our breach risk."

Channel fit: Responds to content marketing (builds case over time), LinkedIn thought leadership (learns from peers), organic search for "security culture" (researching approach).

Message focus: Data ("Reduce click-through rates 47% in 90 days"), behaviour metrics ("Track risky behaviours, measure improvement"), ROI case studies ("Guardey reduced security incidents 63% in 6 months"). Don't emphasise speed or compliance (they already believe those matter less than results).

These are completely different campaigns for the same product. One emphasises compliance and speed, the other emphasises measurable behaviour change and ROI. Create profiles for all 3-5 segments.

Different segments appear in different channels at different awareness stages. Your job is to match campaign types to segment characteristics.

Use the channel hierarchy: paid outbound (LinkedIn ads, cold email) reaches problem-aware people with no intent signal. Paid search (Google, Bing) reaches solution-aware people actively searching. Paid social remarketing reaches product-aware people who've engaged before. Organic (content, SEO) reaches all stages over time.

Map segments to channels based on where they actually spend time and what awareness stage they're at. Compliance-driven segment is often solution-aware (knows they need training, comparing options). They respond to Google search ads for "compliance training" and LinkedIn ads showing peer social proof. Don't waste money on cold outbound (they're already aware) or content marketing (they want quick answers, not education).

Breach-reactive segment only becomes aware after an incident. They're suddenly most-aware (ready to buy immediately). Remarketing is perfect (target companies that just announced breaches or visited your site after a breach). Search ads for "immediate security training" work. LinkedIn and cold outreach don't work (too slow, they need a solution today).

Proactive segment is often problem-aware to solution-aware (building the case over time). They respond to content marketing (guides, webinars, case studies that help them build internal business cases), organic search (researching "security culture" and "employee behaviour change"), and LinkedIn thought leadership. Don't push hard CTAs (they're not ready to buy yet).

Create a matrix: rows are segments, columns are campaign types within channels. Mark which combinations make sense. This becomes your campaign plan in the channel selection playbook.

For each segment, write messages that directly address their specific doubt. Don't be subtle. Call out the belief gap explicitly.

For compliance-driven: "Meet SOC 2 training requirements in 30 minutes" (addresses their doubt that training is time-consuming and complex). "Satisfies auditors, zero IT setup" (addresses their doubt about technical feasibility and compliance acceptance). The message doesn't mention behaviour change or culture (they don't care).

For breach-reactive: "Deploy security training today, not next quarter" (addresses their doubt about speed). "Set up in under an hour, trained team by tomorrow" (addresses urgency after a breach). "Works immediately, no IT involvement" (addresses implementation concerns when they're in crisis mode).

For proactive: "Measure behaviour change with data" (addresses their doubt about proving ROI). "Track risky employee behaviours and show improvement" (addresses their need for metrics to justify budget). "Guardey reduced security incidents 47% in 90 days" (addresses their doubt with specific proof).

Also choose proof type based on segment psychology. Three proof types work differently:

Data and statistics: Works for analytical buyers who need numbers to convince themselves and their teams. Proactive segment responds to "47% reduction in click-through rates" and "ROI achieved in 6 months". Compliance-driven doesn't care about behaviour data, but does care about "satisfies 12 compliance frameworks".

Testimonials and case studies: Works for risk-averse buyers who need peer validation. "Other companies like yours use this" reassures them they're making a safe choice. Compliance-driven responds to "used by 230 financial services firms". Tool-chooser segment (comparing vendors) responds to "why X chose us over competitor Y".

Process explanations: Works for implementation-worried buyers who doubt feasibility. Showing exactly how it works reduces perceived risk. Breach-reactive responds to "3-step setup: upload users, send invite, done". Compliance-driven responds to "integrates with your SSO, no IT tickets required".

Match proof type to segment doubt. If they doubt it'll work (effectiveness), show data. If they doubt it's a safe choice (risk), show testimonials. If they doubt they can implement it (feasibility), show process.

Most campaigns measure clicks and conversions. But what you actually need to know is: are you closing belief gaps and moving people through awareness stages?

Add questions to your lead forms or qualification calls that reveal belief state. For cybersecurity training: "What's your biggest concern about security training?" Answers reveal which segment they're in. "Not sure it changes behaviour" = compliance-driven. "Need it deployed fast" = breach-reactive. "Can't prove ROI" = proactive.

Track how beliefs change after campaign exposure. Survey people who clicked your ad but didn't convert: "What would you need to see to move forward?" If compliance-driven still doubts auditor acceptance after seeing your "satisfies SOC 2" message, your proof wasn't strong enough. If proactive still doubts ROI after seeing your data, you need better case studies.

Also track where people enter versus where they should enter. If your campaign targets solution-aware buyers (comparing training vendors) but you're attracting problem-aware buyers (not sure training is the answer), your channel targeting is wrong or your message is hitting the wrong awareness stage.

Adjust campaigns based on belief gap closure, not just conversion rate. A campaign with low conversion but high belief gap closure (people report "now I understand why this matters") is moving people through awareness. Keep running it. A campaign with high conversion but no belief gap closure (people convert but churn fast because beliefs weren't solid) is attracting wrong-fit customers.

Segments are worthless without segment-specific campaigns. Document profiles for each segment showing current beliefs, missing assumptions, and belief gaps to close.

Match segments to channels based on where they spend time and what awareness stage they're at. Write messages that explicitly address their specific doubts. Choose proof types (data, testimonials, process) that close their belief gaps.

Measure whether you're actually closing belief gaps, not just generating clicks. Track how beliefs change after campaign exposure and adjust when segments aren't moving through awareness stages as expected.

With stages of awareness mapped, segments identified, and campaigns built around belief gaps, you're ready to select channels and allocate budget. That's the next playbook.