A proposal note from OrbitalX
September 16, 2026

For ORTEC Corporate Communications and the CEO Office

Ten items like this one, every morning at 06:40.

This is the card your editor receives. Each part carries a tag; follow it to see where that part comes from and what it gives you. Nothing is ever posted by the system.

Illustrative item, not a real post or person
S. Bakker
VP Supply Chain Planning at a Dutch grocery retailer
Tier 1, customer executive4,300 followers
A

"We cut weekly schedule rework by 40% after moving planners off spreadsheets. The surprising part wasn't the software. It was that planners finally had time to talk to store managers before the schedule went out, not after."

Posted Tuesday 09:40, 20 hours old at collection. Open on LinkedIn

B
6.2×
this author's usual engagement,
projected to the post's lifetime
84 reactions19 comments6 reposts

Comments running at 23 per 100 reactions. Still rising at this morning's check.

C
Relevance 5/5 Workforce management Retail Netherlands English
D

Why it matters

A customer-side executive is publicly crediting planner workflow, not tooling, for schedule stability, on ORTEC's home ground. The comment thread is more active than the reaction count suggests.

Angles, in brief

  • Planner time, not planner tools, moved the number: a natural bridge to workforce scheduling.
  • The thread is asking what else was measured; retention and overtime are where ORTEC has something to add.
  • Worth a comment today. A fuller post on planner capacity would fit later in the week.
E
The editor decides. The system never posts.
F
  • A
    Who wrote it, and why they countAn account from the watchlist you curate with us, with its tier and reach.
  • B
    The post, and how fresh it isCollected this morning, with its age shown so the editor knows the window.
  • C
    How much traction, honestly measuredAgainst this author's own normal and the post's age, and whether it is still climbing.
  • D
    Whether it is yours to comment onA relevance score against your taxonomy: topics, industries, geographies, languages.
  • E
    Why it matters, and the anglesA short briefing in bullets for the editor to write from. Nothing is drafted in the CEO's voice.
  • F
    Your editor's decisionAccept, skip or commented. Every decision tunes tomorrow's list.

Hover a tag to light its line. Click to jump.

Six parts, and the work behind each

A

A watchlist of your ecosystem, not the whole of LinkedIn

Together we curate a list of 150 to 250 accounts: executives at your customers and partners, industry analysts, journalists, peer CEOs, competitors and the voices of your field. They sit in three tiers. The first tier is who the CEO would actually engage with. The second is who you want to keep in view. The third is what is moving in the wider conversation.

We check every account every morning. The list is yours; we review it with you monthly and add voices as they emerge.

B

Collected every morning, with its age on the card

Each post is stored once, with the time it went up. Because we look at the same accounts every day, the same post is seen on day one and again on day two, which is what makes the next part possible. The editor always knows how old an item is, and therefore how much of the conversation is still ahead.

C

Traction measured against the author's own normal

A hundred reactions mean little for an influencer and a great deal for a peer CEO. Every post is compared with what its author usually receives and with how far along its life it is. A post seen twenty hours after publication is judged on where it is heading, not on its raw count.

025%50%75% 0 h24 h48 h72 h hours since the post went up one look at 20 hours a number, no direction three morning checks same post, still climbing
Half of a post's lifetime engagement arrives in its first day. One look at 20 hours shows a number and nothing else. Three daily checks of the same post show whether it is climbing, which is what "still rising" means on the card. A post spotted on day one and confirmed on day two is still timely to comment on.
D

Relevance that follows your taxonomy

Industries, topics, geographies, languages, and the subjects the CEO will not comment on. You set it, we apply it to every candidate, and we review it with you monthly. The score on the card is the result, so the editor can see at a glance whether an item is yours to take.

E

A briefing in bullets, not a draft

For the items that make the list, the editor gets a short briefing in bullets: why the topic is gaining traction, what the thread is contesting, and which ORTEC offering it connects to. Nothing is drafted in the CEO's voice, so his own writing stays his own, and nothing is posted by the system, which your brief rules out.

If a first draft would ever save time rather than cost it, we can test one alongside the briefing. The briefing comes first.

F

Delivered at 06:40, decided by your editor

The ten items arrive by email, and the same ten sit in a simple web view where the editor records a decision on each. One row per item is added to an Excel log on your SharePoint, so the archive is searchable over time. Your editor reads them in fifteen to thirty minutes and marks each Accept, Skip or Commented. Those three words are the feedback loop: weekly we read the acceptance rate and what the CEO engaged with, and monthly we tune the list and the taxonomy from it.

Three facts about LinkedIn shaped the design

They are also why the answer to your brief is a workflow and not a license.

No trending view

LinkedIn has no trending feature for members. Its news module is written by editors, hashtag pages were removed in 2024, and none of it can be exported.

No sort by engagement

Post search offers two orders, Top and Latest. Top is personalized relevance, not reach, and a query returns a few hundred posts at most, so a broad topic is never fully seen.

Listening tools see only your own page

The enterprise listening suites document LinkedIn as owned-pages-only. Creator tools can watch a list of people but cannot listen for a topic. None of them measures whether a post is still rising.

Sources: LinkedIn's help pages on post search and on news, LinkedIn's engineering notes on how post search ranks, and the listening vendors' own documentation of their LinkedIn coverage. We can share the reference list on request.

Against the six criteria in your brief

CriterionWhat this delivers
Use-case fitBuilt for exactly this brief: a daily shortlist of ten posts from the CEO's own ecosystem, each with a why and an angle. Not a general listening dashboard adapted after the fact.
Output qualityEvery item shows the signals that put it on the list, so the editor can validate it in seconds: traction against the author's normal, comment activity, relevance against your taxonomy. Editor decisions tune the next day's list.
CompliancePublic posts only, no ORTEC credentials anywhere, no profile enrichment, short retention, a documented legitimate-interest assessment, and a fallback to official sources. We are explicit about what LinkedIn does and does not allow, below.
Ease of useAn email at 06:40, a simple web view for the editor's decisions, and one row per item in an Excel log on your SharePoint. Fifteen to thirty minutes of editor time a day.
Supplier experienceOrbitalX already runs LinkedIn-based data pipelines and AI workflows for B2B clients. The same team designs, builds and supports this, with a monthly review of keywords, watchlist and priorities.
ROI and scalabilityReplaces daily manual browsing with a half-hour review. Grows from 100 to 500 accounts without changing the workflow. Commercial terms are set out in the proposal.

What LinkedIn allows, and what we do about it

  • The posts are public LinkedIn content gathered through a third-party data service. LinkedIn's terms are restrictive, and we design for that rather than around it.
  • No ORTEC or CEO login is used anywhere. Nothing is posted, liked or followed on anyone's behalf.
  • Public posts only. No profile enrichment, no contact data, no dossiers on authors.
  • Post text is kept for 90 days. After that only aggregate statistics and the editor's decisions remain, which is what the archive and analytics need.
  • A documented legitimate-interest assessment and a line for ORTEC's privacy notice come with the pilot.
  • If your legal team prefers official sources only, the same digest can run on LinkedIn's own alerts and editorial picks, with narrower coverage.

A pilot of three weeks, plus one to set up

Long enough to judge honestly, short enough to decide quickly

You provide

  • Around 100 accounts across the three tiers
  • The taxonomy, the CEO's themes and his exclusions
  • One review owner
  • A privacy contact for the assessment

You receive

  • The daily email of ten items
  • An Excel log on your SharePoint, one row per item
  • A review at the end of week three

How we judge it together

  • The share of items the editor accepts; we aim above roughly a third
  • Editor time per day, under thirty minutes
  • The items the CEO actually engaged with
  • Anything the editor found by hand that the digest missed