Your Boilerplate Is a Strategy Test

Leaders often think of the boilerplate as an afterthought — the small paragraph at the end of a press release that nobody reads. But the boilerplate is one of the most useful strategy tools a CMO or communications lead has. It’s the smallest space where a company’s story either holds together or quietly falls apart.

A quick bit of context: the term “boilerplate” goes back to early-1900s newspapers, when editors used reusable steel plates to print standard text. It was the paragraph they never had to rethink. Today, it’s still the most consistent description a company publishes. It shows up in press releases, media kits, About pages, funding announcements and, increasingly, as the default source material AI systems pull from when summarizing who you are. If the boilerplate is unclear, everything that depends on it becomes unclear too.

Why the Boilerplate Matters More Than Leaders Expect

A boilerplate forces a simple but uncomfortable choice: What do we want to be known for in the fewest possible words? Many organizations avoid that question because compressing the business into three or four sentences requires agreement on things they haven’t actually aligned on — who they are, what they do, who they serve, and what makes them different. Slide decks can hide those disagreements through nuance and detail. A boilerplate has no such buffer. It exposes the gaps immediately.

For CMOs and communications leads, this is where the real work happens. If the story breaks in the boilerplate, it will break everywhere else — in sales decks, analyst briefings, website copy, and press conversations. A weak boilerplate doesn’t just signal a writing issue; it signals a decision-making issue.

Why Leaders Struggle With 3–4 Sentences

When you ask an executive team to describe the company in under 100 words, every function suddenly wants representation. Product wants to convey breadth. Sales pushes for simplicity. The CEO wants vision. Legal wants disclaimers. Regional teams want their markets acknowledged. The result often isn’t a strategy — it’s a compromise assembled to keep internal groups happy.

A strong boilerplate avoids that trap. It forces hierarchy and focus. It makes leaders confront choices about what actually matters. Trade-offs are the core of strategy, and the boilerplate is one of the few moments where those trade-offs can’t be avoided.

A Familiar Scenario

A marketing executive at a fast-growing company recently sent me their updated boilerplate and asked for a reaction. The length was perfect. The structure was clean. But the content read like a committee assignment — a string of phrases pulled from product sheets, investor decks, and internal ambitions that had little to do with the company’s real position in the market. Five product lines fought for attention. A half-dozen adjectives appeared with no proof. Future aspirations mingled with outdated claims.

Nothing in the paragraph was technically “wrong,” but none of it felt grounded either. It was a paragraph trying to satisfy internal politics rather than define the company for the outside world. My reaction was simple: this wasn’t a writing problem. It was a sign the company still needed alignment on what it stands for today. Their opportunity now is to narrow the description to what’s true and defensible — the move that creates coherence across every other communication.

Boilerplates Reveal Misalignment Quickly

One reason I treat boilerplates as a strategy test is how quickly they surface issues. Long documents allow teams to hide behind dense detail. A boilerplate has nowhere to hide. When a company debates a single sentence for weeks, the problem usually isn’t the sentence. It’s the lack of agreement about direction. When multiple “approved” versions exist across regions or business units, it’s a signal of internal fragmentation. When a boilerplate tries to cover every market, every product and every ambition, the organization is trying to say everything — which usually means it’s saying nothing.

These tensions are useful. They show leaders exactly where clarity is missing.

Editing Is Where Strategy Becomes Real

The discipline of editing a boilerplate forces organizations to make decisions they often postpone. If a detail doesn’t belong in the boilerplate, it’s probably not core. If two lines contradict each other, the business isn’t aligned. If the description requires qualifiers, the positioning isn’t clear. Most organizations don’t need more words; they need to decide which words matter.

CMOs and communications leads who start major messaging or rebrand efforts with the boilerplate almost always move faster. The exercise crystallizes priorities early and avoids weeks of downstream debate. It’s a simple tool that brings the real questions to the surface.

In the Age of AI, the Boilerplate Carries More Weight

There’s a new layer of urgency. AI systems often treat your boilerplate, About page, and corporate LinkedIn description as the canonical summary of your company. When the boilerplate is bloated or inconsistent, AI-generated outputs become bloated or inconsistent. Reporters, analysts, partners, and even employees increasingly see these summaries before they land on your website.

The boilerplate has effectively become metadata for your company. A clear, disciplined version protects you from misinterpretation and keeps your story consistent across platforms you don’t control.

The Strategic Opportunity

For CMOs and communications leads, the boilerplate is no longer a compliance task. It’s a simple, powerful way to force clarity, test alignment, and create a foundation that scales. Starting with the boilerplate sets the tone for everything else — the messaging architecture, the website, the sales narrative, the analyst briefings.

A strong boilerplate isn’t a writing exercise. It’s a strategy exercise.

If you need support sharpening your company’s story, here’s how I work with clients as a Fractional Chief Communications Officer.