A star is boring

In general, we found that consumers liked novel and surprising content, while the industry professionals on streaming juries disliked surprises. Of the 221 Streamy nominees, 80 per cent were nominated only once. The 20 per cent who were nominated more than once shared a surprising trait: their content was less novel. Many of them stuck to formats that fit cleanly into existing categories.

Why do the nominees that stand out to juries fit in, while many of the videos that go viral are out in left field? Because consumers and professionals look for different things. Consumers embrace novelty because they prioritise personal utility. They don’t care about a video’s category or adherence to genre boundaries; they want to be entertained. A video that surprises them through offbeat humour or an unconventional format can attract millions of views.

But for industry professionals, categories and standards matter, in part because they are custodians of professional standards, and also because their power often stems from their affiliation with a genre or a professional group so they are more likely to favour content that reinforces and aligns with categorical boundaries (see Table 1).

For content creators, this means innovation isn’t just a creative choice; it’s a strategic one. In some cases, originality drives success. In others, it can hurt your chances. Creators often feel caught between two goals: building broad appeal and earning industry recognition.

The stark divide between the two audiences makes this dilemma even harder. Success with fans doesn’t always lead to industry recognition. Some insiders are sceptical of creators who gain mass popularity, fearing that hype is overtaking substance. For them, professional recognition such as awards should be bestowed on superior performances that uphold high professional standards, rather than rewarding viral content.

At the same time, general audiences are sceptical of creators who seek too much professional validation and industry recognition. Aligning too closely with elite standards can be seen as ‘selling out’, a sign that a creator has lost the originality that made them relatable in the first place. For example, Lilly Singh was a popular YouTuber who had difficulty replicating her success in mainstream media. Some longtime fans accused her of selling out after she dropped the ‘Superwoman’ persona before launching her NBC show. Unfortunately for Singh, laying the cape to rest in favour of a more conventional persona didn’t win her many new fans, as she had hoped, and NBC cancelled her programme at the end of its second season (BBC, 2019; Carras, 2021; Yam, 2019).

Insider scepticism towards novelty isn’t absolute; it varies depending on the type of category. In well-defined genres like food, professionals expect creators to follow familiar formats. Deviation from these norms, say a cooking show in beachwear, can be perceived as unprofessional, even if audiences find it entertaining.

But in broader, fuzzier categories like comedy, where genre lines are more fluid, professionals tend to be more accepting of creative risks. For example, creators like Bo Burnham gained critical acclaim from professional peers by mixing stand-up, music, visual art, and social commentary. Comedy’s flexible boundaries made space for his creativity. His unconventional mix of stand-up, music, and social commentary wasn’t just accepted; it was celebrated (Fox, 2016; Logan, 2021).

This variation in how insiders respond to novelty creates a strategic challenge for creators. Success depends not just on how novel their content is, but also on how clearly defined the category they operate in happens to be. These two factors, level of novelty and category fuzziness, shape how both general audiences and professional gatekeepers respond.

The framework below maps out four strategic positions that creators can occupy. It highlights the tension between appealing to mass audiences and earning recognition from industry insiders. For example, creators in the diagonal quadrants (Rule Followers and Disruptive Trailblazers) may succeed with professional gatekeepers but struggle to engage a broader audience. If stronger fan reception is the goal, they may need to adjust their strategy by leaning further into novelty, or operating within clearer, more defined categories.

At first glance, this might seem like a unique challenge for digital creators. But the reality is that many businesses, whether individuals, agencies, or manufacturers, face a similar dilemma: marketing to two audiences that value novelty differently.

This isn’t a new problem. Take the case of John Harrison, an 18th-century watchmaker who invented the marine chronometer, a tool that transformed ocean navigation. Sailors immediately recognised its value. But the award committee appointed by the British Parliament rejected it for years. Why? It was too unconventional (Cattani et al., 2017). This pattern is familiar: many groundbreaking scientific ideas have struggled for recognition until influential gatekeepers are replaced or the norms shift (Azoulay et al., 2019). More recently, academia long overlooked Katalin Karikó’s pioneering mRNA research until it became crucial to developing COVID-19 vaccines. Her work eventually earned her a Nobel Prize, but so far, still no tenured position (Katalin Karikó – Interview, 2023).

Whether you’re a YouTuber, a clockmaker, or a molecular chemist, the key marketing insight is to choose your primary audience carefully, and align it with your innovation goals. If your aim is to be seen as cutting-edge while still gaining professional credibility, it’s often better to compete in broader, more flexible categories where experimentation is not seen as breaking the rules. For example, venture capitalists often prefer innovative start-ups in the fuzzy categories such as enterprise software and are more likely to steer clear of entrants working in categories with clear-cut boundaries such as cybersecurity software (Pontikes, 2012).

So how do you know where you belong? As the framework above illustrates, your position depends on three key factors: how much novelty you want to introduce, how clearly defined your category is, and which audience you’re prioritising: industry insiders or general users.

Another effective strategy is to leverage popularity-driven recognition within professional systems. Many industry awards now feature people’s choice categories, hybrid formats that offer the best of both worlds. They allow creators and businesses to build institutional credibility while staying connected to mainstream audiences. This kind of dual recognition helps close the gap between expert approval and public appeal. It signals that a brand or creator can both meet professional standards and engage everyday consumers.

In the end, success depends on understanding two distinct and often conflicting audiences. For the most part, outsiders reward bold, unconventional ideas, while insiders often reject them unless they fit within their norms. Whether the market is YouTube or the stock market, Instagram or the automotive world, winning both takes strategy.

Chandrika Rathee is an assistant professor at Rotterdam School of Management, Erasmus University. Sumeet Malik is an assistant professor at the Amsterdam Business School, University of Amsterdam. Oliver Alexy is an associate professor at the Technical University of Munich. Taiyuan Wang is a professor at China Europe International Business School (CEIBS). This article is based on research by the authors, who first published it in the Strategic Management Journal.