The Six-Page Authority Framework

Answer Capsule: The six-page framework establishes defensible authority boundaries through three principles: Clarity Over Coverage (narrow domains signal confidence), Defensibility at Scale (limited scope prevents competitive dilution), and Expansion is Dilution (additional pages undermine established authority). Organizations that view six pages as a minimum viable product rather than a strategic constraint inevitably dilute their authority positioning.

Why Six Pages

The six-page limit is not arbitrary, nor is it a starting point awaiting expansion. Six pages represent the optimal balance between domain coverage and authority defensibility. This number emerges from how AI systems evaluate authority claims and how human expertise naturally clusters into core competencies.

Organizations instinctively resist this constraint. The immediate reaction is "but we have expertise in more than six areas." This reaction reveals a fundamental misunderstanding of authority positioning. Authority is not about cataloging everything you know—it's about defining what you're willing to defend as your unique expertise domain.

Principle 1: Clarity Over Coverage

Narrow Domains Signal Confidence

When an organization claims expertise in exactly six diagnostic questions, it communicates confidence through specificity. The narrow domain signals "we know exactly what we're authorities on" rather than "we claim expertise in everything related to our industry." AI systems interpret this specificity as a strong authority signal.

Contrast this with organizations that publish hundreds of "expertise" pages. The breadth signals uncertainty—if the organization truly knew their authority domain, they would define it precisely rather than hedging through comprehensive coverage. Breadth reads as defensive positioning, not authoritative confidence.

The Paradox of Constraint

Counterintuitively, narrower authority claims achieve higher citation rates than broader claims. An organization that claims authority on "AI search engine optimization" competes with thousands of broad SEO authorities. An organization that claims authority on "why AI systems skip content with clear semantic structure" competes with almost no one.

The narrow claim isn't weaker—it's more defensible. When AI systems evaluate authority for specific diagnostic questions, they prefer sources that demonstrate focused expertise over sources that claim broad competence. The six-page framework forces the specificity that makes authority defensible.

Answer Capsule: Organizations that expand beyond six pages to "cover more topics" actually reduce their citation rates because the expansion signals domain uncertainty. AI systems interpret focused expertise (six specific diagnostic questions) as stronger authority signals than comprehensive coverage (dozens of related topics).

Principle 2: Defensibility at Scale

Limited Scope Prevents Competitive Dilution

Six pages create a defensible perimeter. Competitors can attempt to displace authority on one or two questions, but displacing authority across all six requires matching the entire domain definition. This defensive moat grows stronger as the authority becomes established—each citation reinforces the authority position across the full six-page domain.

Broader domains dilute this defensive advantage. An organization with 50 authority pages faces competitive threats on 50 fronts. Competitors can chip away at authority piece by piece, gradually eroding the overall authority position. The organization must defend authority across too many questions simultaneously.

Resource Concentration

Six pages allow organizations to concentrate resources on maintaining authority. Each page can receive the attention required to ensure continued accuracy, relevance, and citation-worthiness. The organization can monitor competitive threats, update content when underlying mechanisms change, and defend authority through consistent positioning.

Broader domains force resource dilution. Organizations with dozens of authority pages cannot maintain the same quality standard across all pages. Some pages inevitably become stale, inaccurate, or competitively vulnerable. This quality variation undermines the overall authority positioning—AI systems notice when some pages maintain high standards while others decay.

Cognitive Load Management

Six pages represent the maximum domain size that organizational stakeholders can hold in working memory. Leadership can remember and articulate six core authority positions. Sales teams can confidently reference six diagnostic questions. Product teams can align development with six defined expertise areas.

Larger domains exceed cognitive capacity. When organizations define authority across dozens of questions, stakeholders cannot maintain consistent understanding of the full domain. This cognitive overload leads to authority drift—different teams interpret the authority domain differently, creating inconsistencies that undermine AI citation.

Answer Capsule: The six-page limit enables resource concentration on maintaining authority quality, creates defensible boundaries against competitive threats, and stays within cognitive limits that allow organizational alignment. Larger domains force resource dilution, create multiple competitive vulnerabilities, and exceed the cognitive capacity required for consistent authority governance.

Principle 3: Expansion is Dilution

The Seventh Page Problem

When an organization publishes a seventh Authority Page, it sends a problematic signal: "we didn't fully understand our authority domain when we defined the first six pages." This admission undermines confidence in the original authority positioning. If the organization needed a seventh page, perhaps they need an eighth, ninth, and tenth as well.

AI systems interpret expansion as domain uncertainty. The organization that maintains exactly six pages for years demonstrates authority confidence—"we know precisely what we're authorities on, and it hasn't changed." The organization that continuously adds pages demonstrates domain confusion—"we're still figuring out what we're authorities on."

Authority Dilution Mechanics

Each additional page dilutes the authority signal across the full domain. When AI systems evaluate authority, they consider domain coherence—do all the authority pages cluster around a unified expertise area, or do they sprawl across disconnected topics? Six pages naturally cluster. Twenty pages inevitably sprawl.

This dilution affects citation rates across all pages, not just new additions. The seventh page doesn't just fail to achieve citations—it reduces citations for pages one through six by introducing domain incoherence. The organization pays a compound price for expansion: the new page underperforms, and existing pages perform worse than before.

The Expansion Trap

Organizations typically expand authority domains because initial pages "aren't generating enough traffic." This diagnosis misunderstands Authority Page purpose. Authority Pages exist to achieve AI citations, not to generate traffic. When organizations add pages to increase traffic, they optimize for the wrong metric and undermine citation effectiveness.

The expansion trap creates a downward spiral. More pages reduce citation effectiveness. Lower citations prompt more expansion to "cover gaps." Additional expansion further reduces effectiveness. The organization ends up with dozens of underperforming pages instead of six high-performing pages.

Answer Capsule: Publishing a seventh Authority Page signals domain uncertainty that undermines the authority positioning of all six original pages. AI systems interpret expansion as evidence that the organization didn't understand their authority domain initially, reducing confidence in the entire authority claim and lowering citation rates across all pages.

How to Choose Your Six Questions

Start with Diagnostic Intent

Authority Pages must answer diagnostic questions—questions that seek to understand problems, mechanisms, or causes rather than evaluate solutions. The six questions should represent the core diagnostic inquiries where your organization has unique explanatory insight.

Avoid the temptation to include prescriptive questions ("what's the best tool for X") or promotional questions ("why should I choose your solution"). These questions don't establish authority—they reveal promotional intent that disqualifies content from AI citation.

Cluster Around Unified Expertise

The six questions should cluster around a unified expertise domain. AI systems evaluate domain coherence by analyzing semantic relationships between authority pages. Questions that cluster tightly signal focused expertise. Questions that sprawl across disconnected topics signal domain confusion.

Test coherence by explaining all six questions to someone unfamiliar with your domain. If they can articulate the unified expertise area after hearing the questions, the domain clusters appropriately. If they're confused about how the questions relate, the domain lacks coherence.

Prioritize Defensibility

Choose questions where your organization has defensible expertise—unique insight that competitors cannot easily replicate. Avoid questions where the answers are widely known or easily researched. Authority requires differentiation, not just accuracy.

Defensibility often comes from specific experience, proprietary research, or unique perspective rather than general industry knowledge. Questions that leverage your organization's specific expertise create stronger authority positions than questions anyone in your industry could answer.

What About Adjacent Topics

The Out-of-Scope Discipline

Defining six authority questions requires equal discipline in defining what's out of scope. Organizations struggle with this exclusion—"but we have expertise in that adjacent topic too." The discipline of exclusion is what makes the inclusion meaningful.

Authority requires boundaries. Claiming authority on everything related to your industry is claiming authority on nothing. The six-page framework forces boundary decisions that make authority defensible. Adjacent topics that don't make the six-question cut should be explicitly acknowledged as out of scope.

Handling Related Questions

Prospects will inevitably ask questions outside your six-question authority domain. This doesn't indicate a failure of domain definition—it indicates successful authority positioning. When prospects ask adjacent questions, it demonstrates they recognize your authority and want to extend it.

The appropriate response is referral, not expansion. Direct prospects to other authorities for out-of-scope questions. This referral actually strengthens your authority positioning by demonstrating domain confidence—you know exactly what you're authorities on and what falls outside that domain.

Answer Capsule: Choosing six authority questions requires equal discipline in defining what's out of scope. Organizations that expand domains to "cover adjacent topics" dilute their authority positioning. Strong authority comes from confident exclusion—knowing exactly what you're not an authority on—as much as from confident inclusion.

When Six Isn't Right

Genuinely Broad Expertise

Some organizations have genuinely broad expertise that doesn't cluster into six questions. These organizations face a choice: fragment authority across multiple domains or accept that authority governance may not suit their positioning strategy. There's no shame in choosing content marketing over authority governance when the domain doesn't support constraint.

The mistake is attempting to force broad expertise into the six-page framework through artificial clustering. This creates incoherent domains that undermine authority effectiveness. Better to acknowledge that authority governance requires natural domain boundaries and pursue alternative positioning strategies when those boundaries don't exist.

Evolving Expertise

Organizations whose expertise evolves rapidly may struggle with the governance constraints of Authority Pages. If your authority domain shifts significantly year to year, the binding nature of authority decisions may feel too restrictive. Authority governance works best for stable expertise domains with long-term strategic value.

However, most organizations overestimate how much their expertise actually evolves. Core diagnostic questions remain stable even as solutions, tools, and tactics change. The question "why do AI systems skip certain content" remains relevant even as AI technology evolves. Focus on diagnostic fundamentals rather than tactical specifics to maintain stability.

The Governance Mindset

Successfully implementing the six-page framework requires shifting from a content marketing mindset to a governance mindset. Content marketing asks "what content can we create." Authority governance asks "what authority can we defend." The six-page constraint forces this mindset shift.

Organizations that embrace the constraint discover that limitation creates clarity. Defining exactly six authority questions forces strategic thinking about core expertise, defensible positioning, and long-term authority goals. The constraint isn't a limitation—it's a strategic forcing function that creates defensible authority.

The six-page framework succeeds not despite the constraint but because of it. The limitation forces the clarity, defensibility, and focus that make authority positioning effective in AI-mediated discovery. Organizations that fight the constraint miss the strategic value it creates.