Generative Engine Optimisation (GEO) is the practice of structuring your content so AI systems like ChatGPT, Perplexity, Gemini and Google’s AI Overviews quote it directly in their answers. Where SEO competes for a position on a results page, GEO competes for a sentence inside someone else’s answer.
That difference sounds academic. It isn’t. It changes what you write, how you structure it, and how you measure whether it worked.
(You’ll see it written both ways — Generative Engine Optimization with a z, Optimisation with an s. Same thing. I live in Australia, so you’ll get the s from here on.)
Why does this matter now?
Because the click is disappearing.
Pew Research tracked the browsing behaviour of over 900 adults across 68,879 Google searches in March 2025. When an AI summary appeared in the results, users clicked through to a website 8% of the time. When no AI summary appeared, they clicked 15% of the time — almost twice as often. And of the searches that returned an AI summary, only 1% resulted in a click on a link inside that summary.
Read that again: the AI answers the question, and almost nobody clicks anything.
If your entire content strategy assumes a person reads your headline, decides you’re worth a visit, and lands on your page — that assumption is quietly breaking. The traffic isn’t vanishing because your SEO got worse. It’s vanishing because a machine is now standing between your content and your reader, summarising you to them.
The question is no longer only “how do I rank?” It’s “when the machine explains this topic, does it explain it using my words?”
How is GEO different from SEO?
SEO optimises a page for a position. GEO optimises a passage for retrieval and quotation.
A traditional search engine returns ten links and lets the user judge. A generative engine does something else entirely: it reads across multiple sources, synthesises them into one response, and cites a handful. Your page either makes it into that synthesis or it doesn’t. There is no page two to languish on. You’re either in the answer or you’re invisible.
This has a practical consequence most people miss. In SEO, the unit of value is the page. In GEO, the unit of value is the self-contained passage — a chunk of text that answers one question completely, without needing the paragraphs around it for context. A model retrieving your content doesn’t read your article top to bottom. It pulls sections. If your best insight only makes sense after three paragraphs of throat-clearing, it will never be pulled.
The good news is that GEO and SEO aren’t in conflict. Content that’s genuinely clear, well-structured and specific tends to do well at both. The techniques overlap far more than the AI-marketing industry wants you to believe.
Does optimising for AI answers actually work?
Yes, and it’s been measured.
The foundational research here is a paper by Aggarwal and colleagues, published at KDD 2024, which introduced the term Generative Engine Optimization and built GEO-Bench to test it. Their finding: targeted optimisation “can boost visibility by up to 40% in generative engine responses.”
The same research found something more useful than the headline number — the effect varies significantly by domain and by technique. Adding citations, quotations and statistics to content produced some of the largest gains. Keyword stuffing, the old reflex, did essentially nothing. The methods that work are the ones that make content genuinely more credible, not the ones that game a ranking signal.
That’s the part I’d underline. GEO rewards the thing SEO spent twenty years teaching people to fake.
What happened when I ran this in practice
I spent 2024–2026 as Chief Community Officer and Growth Lead at a B2B AI SaaS platform, building the growth engine from close to zero. Content and SEO were the foundation — a team and system producing 20+ blog posts per month, mapped to high-intent keywords and structured for both traditional search and AI-driven discovery.
I wasn’t only optimising for Google. I was thinking about how ChatGPT, Perplexity and Gemini surface answers, and structuring content accordingly.
After six months:
- +938% increase in website visitors
- +1,696% growth in Google traffic
- 10x growth in traffic from ChatGPT — which went from a rounding error to a genuine acquisition channel
I want to be precise about what that last number does and doesn’t prove. It’s one company, in one category, over one six-month window. It isn’t a controlled study. But it does demonstrate something the aggregate data can’t: AI referral traffic is a channel you can deliberately build, not weather you wait out.
The other thing it taught me — the ChatGPT traffic converted better than the Google traffic. People arriving from an AI answer had already had their question answered and were further along in deciding. Fewer visitors, warmer visitors.
How do you actually optimise for generative engines?
Six things, in the order I’d do them.
1. Answer the question in the first two sentences
No preamble, no scene-setting, no “in today’s rapidly evolving digital landscape.” The opening sentence should be the one a model would quote verbatim if it were only going to quote one. If you can’t state your answer plainly at the top, you don’t have an answer yet — you have a topic.
2. Go one click deeper immediately
Right after the answer, explain the mechanism behind it. This is what separates a source worth citing from a snippet worth paraphrasing and discarding. Models can generate generic definitions on their own; they cite sources that explain why.
3. Include at least one number only you have
Original data is the single strongest citation signal, because it cannot be found anywhere else. A recycled industry statistic makes you one of four hundred pages saying the same thing. A result from your own work makes you the primary source. If you’ve run something, measured something, or changed something — that’s your material.
4. Write headers as questions, and make each section stand alone
Every section should be liftable in full without the rest of the article for context. Question-phrased headers do double duty: they match how people actually ask things in ChatGPT, and they force each section to have exactly one job.
5. Add an FAQ block, phrased the way people actually type
Not “What are the benefits of GEO implementation” — nobody types that. Pair it with FAQ schema so the structure is machine-readable as well as human-readable.
6. Be consistent about what you call things
Use the same name for your business, your product and yourself across every page. Entity consistency is part of how models resolve who is being discussed. Referring to yourself three different ways across a site quietly undermines citation trust, even when the content is good.
What about AEO — is that different?
Slightly, and the distinction is often overstated.
Answer Engine Optimisation (AEO) generally refers to optimising for direct-answer features: featured snippets, voice assistants, AI Overviews. GEO refers to being cited as a source inside a generated response. In practice they’re layers on the same foundation, and content built properly for one usually performs for the other.
My honest advice: don’t spend time arguing about the taxonomy. Spend it on the structure. The sites winning at both are the ones that answer questions directly, back claims with real evidence, and organise content so any single section can be lifted whole.
What to skip
Two things get pitched hard right now and don’t earn their keep.
Chunking your content into unnatural fragments “for AI parsing.” Well-structured, genuinely clear writing already does this. Over-engineering for a hypothetical crawler makes the piece worse for actual readers — and eventually worse for models too, since they’re trained on what people found useful.
Publishing an llms.txt file as a growth lever. It’s cheap to add and I don’t object to it, but it isn’t what moves the number. Clear structure, real answers and consistent naming are.
Where to start
Take your five highest-intent pages — the ones tied to what you actually sell. Open each one and read the first two sentences.
If they don’t answer the question the page is about, rewrite them so they do. That single change, across five pages, will do more than any tool you could buy this quarter.
Then go find one number from your own work that nobody else can quote, and build a page around it.
If you need help, check my AI growth marketing services and get in touch with me.
Frequently asked questions
What does GEO stand for?
Generative Engine Optimisation — the practice of structuring content so AI systems like ChatGPT, Perplexity and Google’s AI Overviews cite it in their generated answers.
Is GEO replacing SEO?
No. It’s a layer on top of it. Generative engines still rely heavily on traditional search infrastructure to find and rank candidate sources, so a site that’s technically broken for Google is also invisible to AI. GEO changes what you write and how you structure it, not whether SEO fundamentals matter.
How long does GEO take to show results?
In my experience, faster than traditional SEO — AI systems tend to favour recent content, and there’s far less established competition. But it’s still months, not weeks, and it depends heavily on your starting authority.
How do I track whether AI is sending me traffic?
Set up referral tracking for ChatGPT, Perplexity and Gemini as their own channel in your analytics, and do it now even if the number is zero. You need the baseline to prove growth later. Separately, run your ten highest-intent questions through each assistant every month and note who gets cited — that’s your competitive benchmark and your content gap list in one.
Do I need special GEO tools?
Not to start. The first round of work is structural — rewriting openings, reorganising sections, adding original data — and none of that requires software. Tools help you measure citation share once you’ve got something worth measuring.
I’m Lia Golledge, a fractional AI growth marketer. I help founders and growth-stage teams build content systems that get found by people and cited by machines. If your content is good but invisible in AI answers, get in touch — that’s the problem I work on.
Leave a Reply