Maurits Martijn Punches Above His Weight

Maurits Martijn Punches Above His Weight

I fell into a little LinkedIn rabbit hole this week, and I wasn't expecting the most "quiet" poster to be the one with the loudest signal.

Maurits Martijn has 2,866 followers, posts about 0.6 times per week, and still clocks a Hero Score of 337.00. That combo is rare. It basically screams: "when he shows up, people actually care." Pretty impressive, right?

So I wanted to understand what makes his content work. And to keep myself honest, I lined him up next to two other strong creators with different vibes: Jimmy Bijlani (big AI operator energy, 18,958 followers, Hero Score 333.00) and Elena Bezborodova (B2B SaaS marketing brain, 2,803 followers, Hero Score 326.00).

Here's what stood out:

• Maurits wins with journalistic framing: curiosity first, certainty later.
• He uses restraint (posting less, saying more) as a feature, not a bug.
• Compared to Jimmy and Elena, Maurits is the most consistent at turning nuance into a readable story that ends with a clean, low-pressure CTA.

---

Maurits Martijn's Performance Metrics

Here's what's interesting: if you only looked at raw audience size, you'd assume Jimmy would "win" by a mile. But Hero Score flips the script. Maurits is slightly ahead of Jimmy, even with a much smaller crowd. That usually means the content is either unusually relevant, unusually trusted, or unusually well-written (my bet: all three).

Key Performance Indicators

---

What Makes Maurits Martijn's Content Work

What I like about Maurits is that he doesn't "perform" expertise. He reports it. That subtle difference changes everything.

And when you compare him to Jimmy and Elena, you can see three distinct creator archetypes:

• Maurits: the investigative guide ("I went looking, here's what I found")
• Jimmy: the operator-educator ("Here's the playbook, here's the path to implementation")
• Elena: the growth strategist ("Here's what works in B2B, here's how to execute")

All strong. But Maurits' edge is the way he packages uncertainty without sounding vague.

1. He starts with a real question (not a fake one)

So here's what he does: he opens like a journalist talking to a smart friend, not like a creator trying to farm likes. The hook is often a genuine question, the kind you ask when something doesn't add up.

You can almost hear the tone: "Ok, but how does this work in real life?" Or: "Everyone says X. Is that actually true?"

Key Insight: Turn your hook into a real investigation: "I kept hearing [claim]. So I checked what happens when [real-world constraint]."

This works because LinkedIn is full of confident conclusions. Maurits shows up with curiosity, and people lean in. Also, a question buys you permission to be nuanced later. You're not preaching, you're exploring.

Strategy Breakdown:

2. He uses contrast like a tool (hype vs reality)

Now, here's where it gets interesting. Maurits is great at setting up two worlds: the shiny lab story and the messy outside world. AI is the perfect playground for this because it's drowning in "AI will replace everyone" takes.

He'll often sketch the believer logic first (fairly), then pivot: ok, but what about institutions, incentives, laws, office politics, and the fact that work is more than tasks?

And he doesn't need a rant. The contrast does the work.

Comparison with Industry Standards:

3. He writes for scanning without dumbing it down

A thing I noticed right away: the spacing. Short paragraphs. One-sentence pivots. Rhetorical questions on their own line.

It sounds small, but it's a superpower on LinkedIn where people read between meetings. He keeps things airy while still doing actual thinking.

And importantly: he doesn't hide behind buzzwords. He uses plain Dutch (with a few English tech terms) and makes complex stuff feel like a conversation.

If you want a simple mental model: he writes like a newsletter that happens to live on LinkedIn.

4. He posts less, but each post has a job

Posting 0.6 times per week is not "grindset" territory. But it can be a strategic choice if the posts are consistently substantial.

And honestly, it fits his brand. A journalist who posts five times a day would feel off. For Maurits, scarcity reads as focus.

Jimmy and Elena are more likely (based on their archetypes) to be in "teach and ship" mode. Maurits is in "observe, synthesize, publish" mode.

---

Their Content Formula

Want the practical template? Here's what Maurits' best posts feel like structurally: a curious opening, a steady build, a calm twist, then a polite "if you want more, it's here".

Content Structure Breakdown

The Hook Pattern

He often opens with something like: a question you can almost hear in your own head.

Template:

"Iedereen zegt dat [trend] alles gaat veranderen. Maar wat gebeurt er als je kijkt naar [real-world constraint]?"

A couple example openings in his spirit (not literal quotes):

"Hoe maak je chocola van alle AI-voorspellingen die elkaar tegenspreken?"

"Klinkt overtuigend, niet? Tot je kijkt naar wie er eigenlijk profiteert."

Why this works: it doesn't insult the reader. It invites them. And it sets up a story where changing your mind feels good, not embarrassing.

The Body Structure

What I love is how he moves. He doesn't sprint to the conclusion. He walks you there.

Body Structure Analysis:

The CTA Approach

Maurits' CTA isn't a hard sell. It's basically: "If this made you curious, there's a longer version." That feels aligned with the value exchange.

Psychologically, this is huge. Because the CTA doesn't change the tone. Lots of creators write a thoughtful post and then suddenly switch into marketer voice at the end. Maurits doesn't.

His signature phrasing is simple and direct:

"Hier kun je je inschrijven voor mijn nieuwsbrief: https://corr.es/maurits"

That CTA works because it's specific, it matches the content, and it respects the reader's agency.

---

Side-by-Side: Maurits vs Jimmy vs Elena

Ok, now for the fun part. When you line them up, you can see why "success" on LinkedIn isn't one thing.

Comparison Table 1: Audience and Signal

What surprised me: Maurits beats Jimmy on Hero Score even though Jimmy has a much bigger audience. That usually means Maurits' content-to-audience fit is extremely tight.

Comparison Table 2: Positioning and Reader Promise

This matters because LinkedIn rewards clear promises. You can be nuanced, but the reader still needs to know what they're getting.

Comparison Table 3: Content Moves (what each does best)

And if you're building your own content strategy, here's the honest takeaway: you don't need to copy their topics. You need to copy the move that fits your identity.

Maurits wouldn't sound authentic doing "5 AI tips" posts. Jimmy wouldn't sound authentic writing a slow, reflective mini-essay every two weeks. Elena probably shouldn't write long philosophical takedowns of hype (unless that's her thing). Different tools.

---

3 Actionable Strategies You Can Use Today

1. Start with a real question - it pulls people in without forcing a hot take, and it gives you room to be nuanced.

2. Use one contrast to structure the whole post - hype vs reality, theory vs practice, "what people say" vs "what happens"; it keeps writing clear.

3. Make your CTA match your voice - if your post is thoughtful, your CTA should be calm and specific ("Here you can read more" beats "DM me NOW").

---

Key Takeaways

1. Maurits' edge is trust - with 2,866 followers he still earns a 337.00 Hero Score, which usually means people don't just scroll, they stop.
2. Posting less can work if each post is substantial - 0.6 posts/week is enough when the writing is consistently worth saving.
3. Nuance wins when it's readable - short paragraphs, clean transitions, and one strong contrast make "complex" feel easy.
4. Jimmy and Elena prove there are multiple paths - scale (Jimmy) and niche B2B usefulness (Elena) can both perform, but the reader promise must be clear.

If you try one thing this week, try opening with a question you actually care about. Not a trick question. A real one. And see who shows up in the comments.

---

Meet the Creators

---

This analysis was generated by ViralBrain's AI content intelligence platform.