What actually happens when you source UGC from both US and LATAM creators for the same campaign?

Agency Alliance: Partnerships & Growth
1

We just wrapped a cross-market UGC program that forced me to confront something I’d been ignoring: UGC content from different regions doesn’t just look different—it functions differently.

We were trying to build an authentic content library for a Russian-founded beauty brand entering US and LATAM simultaneously. The idea seemed simple: brief the same campaign to creators in both markets, let them interpret it through their lens, and collect the content.

What actually happened was way more complicated.

The US-sourced UGC was polished, trend-aware, and highly produced. Creators there understand the algorithm—they know what gets saved, shared, and acted on. The content was engaging but sometimes felt… optimized. Like someone professionally telling me I should care.

The LATAM-sourced UGC was rawer, more community-focused, more personal. Creators seemed more interested in authentic storytelling than trend-chasing. The editing was less slick, but the emotional resonance was stronger. People in comments weren’t just engaging—they were asking questions, sharing their own stories.

But here’s the problem: when we tried to use both in the same ad set, they competed with each other. The LATAM content underperformed on US platforms (probably because it wasn’t optimized for the algorithm), and the US content felt hollow to LATAM audiences (probably because it was over-produced).

So we had to separate the campaigns. US content ran in US ad sets, LATAM content in LATAM ad sets. Which defeats half the purpose of sourcing from multiple markets.

I’m now wondering: Is this just a reality of cross-market UGC, or are we missing something? Should we be sourcing content differently depending on where it’ll ultimately run? Or is there a middle ground—content that’s authentic but also cross-culturally resonant?

How are others solving this?

2

О, это такая хорошая наблюдение! Я видела эту проблему много раз, когда работаю с кросс-маркет кампаниями.

Мне кажется, решение в том, чтобы не пытаться унифицировать контент, а создавать две разные библиотеки с самого начала. Не как компромисс, а как стратегия.

Вместо: “давайте возьмём одно и то же бриф для всех”
Лучше: “давайте создадим две отдельные стратегии контента, оптимизированные для каждого рынка, но связанные одной ДНК бренда”

Для US: полируй, оптимизируй, играй с трендами
Для LATAM: фокусируй на подлинности, сообществе, личных историях

Одно и то же решение, но рассказано по-разному. Пример: в US креатор показывает результат. В LATAM креатор делится тем, как она это открыла для себя.

Это требует больше ресурсов на бриф-этапе, но результат гораздо лучше, потому что контент действительно резонирует с каждой аудиторией.

3

Ты обнаружил реальную проблему в данных. Дайте мне немного уточнить, что ты видишь:

Когда ты говоришь “LATAM контент underperformed в US платформах”—это был click-through rate, или impression share? Это важно, потому что алгоритмы реагируют по-разному.

Вот гипотеза: LATAM контент может быть замечателен для engagement, но для конверсии (т.е. фактического действия, которое хочет бренд) US контент может быть лучше, потому что он более ориентирован на результат.

Если это правда, то ты не должен выбирать между ними. Вместо этого:

  • Используй LATAM контент в осведомлённости (Awareness) фазе кампании
  • Используй US контент в фазе соображения и конверсии

Это не унифицирует библиотеку, но оптимизирует её использование в воронке.

Какие метрики ты отслеживаешь? CTR? CPC? Actual conversion rate по регионам?

4

Это очень актуально для нас. Мы сейчас запускаем UGC кампанию для нашего нового продукта в трёх рынках (РФ, US, LATAM), и я вижу точно такую же проблему.

Одна вещь, которая нам помогла: мы просили креаторов ответить на очень конкретный вопрос—“Почему ты используешь этот продукт? Какую проблему он решает для тебя лично?”

Когда они отвечают на этот вопрос в своем стиле—это становится намного более подлинным. И оказалось, что “подлинность в локальном стиле” работает лучше, чем “попытка сделать всех одинаковыми”.

Ответ очень разный в разных регионах. В РФ люди говорят о КПД и практичности. В US—о трендах и лайфстайле. В LATAM—о том, как это помогает им и их сообществу.

Но по-прежнему сложно—как ты масштабируешь это, не создавая отдельный проект для каждого региона? У нас было пять креаторов в каждом регионе, и это уже было сложно управлять.

5

You’re looking at this backwards. Don’t try to unify UGC across markets. Instead, build market-specific UGC strategies from the ground up.

Here’s what we do:

  1. Create separate creative briefs for each market—same product, same core message, but the brief asks different questions depending on where it runs.

    • US brief: “Show how this fits into your lifestyle/routine. Make it trend-aware.”
    • LATAM brief: “Show how this helps you connect with people you care about. Keep it personal.”

  2. Source creators who already understand their local algorithms—don’t brief a US creator to think like a LATAM creator. They won’t. Use creators who already have strong community presence in their respective markets.

  3. Build separate content libraries per market—yes, this means more content. Yes, it’s more expensive. But it performs better because it’s actually optimized.

  4. Use a content management system that lets you tag and sort UGC by performance + region—this way you can pull insights on what works where and iterate faster.

The reason most brands fail at cross-market UGC: they treat it as a cost-reduction play (“let’s source once, use everywhere”). It’s actually a quality control problem (“we need different content for different cultural contexts”).

What’s your total content budget for this campaign? That determines whether you can actually pull off market-specific sourcing or if you need a hybrid approach.

6

Okay so from a creator perspective, I can tell you exactly why the US content felt “optimized” and the LATAM content felt “authentic.”

It’s because US creators are trained by algorithms to optimize. We grow by understanding how TikTok and Reels favor certain editing styles, pacing, hooks. It’s not bad—it’s actually a skill. But yeah, it can feel calculated.

LATAM creators, from what I see in my communities, are less algorithm-obsessed and more relationship-obsessed. They care more about whether their followers feel a genuine connection than whether they hit 3-million impressions.

Here’s a secret though: both can work, but you need to use them differently in your marketing funnel.

If you’re trying to build awareness and stop the scroll, use the optimized US-style content. If you’re trying to build trust and actually convert, use the authentic LATAM-style content.

But your brief matters. If I’m a US creator and you ask me to make it “authentic and personal,” I can do that. I might not naturally go there, but I can. Same for a LATAM creator if you ask them to optimize for trending sounds or visual styles.

Maybe the issue isn’t the creators—it’s that you’re asking them all to do the same thing when they should be doing different things.

7

You’re observing a real phenomenon, but you’re not naming it correctly. This isn’t a creativity problem—it’s a platform and incentive alignment problem.

US algorithms (TikTok, Reels, etc.) reward novelty, trend-adoption, and pattern-interruption. LATAM platforms have slightly different algorithms that, research suggests, weight community + relatability more heavily. Same platforms, but algorithmic differences by region.

So when you source UGC from US creators and run it in LATAM, it’s hitting an algorithm it wasn’t optimized for. Vice versa.

Here’s the operational fix:

  1. Tier your UGC sourcing by performance objective, not market.

    • Tier 1 (Awareness): Source from creators who excel at trend-adoption (usually US-based)
    • Tier 2 (Consideration): Source from creators who excel at storytelling (often LATAM-based)
    • Tier 3 (Conversion): Source from creators with proven shopping behavior (analyze by market)

  2. Track UGC performance by source region + placement region. Create a matrix showing: US-sourced content performing in US placements, LATAM-sourced content performing in LATAM placements, etc. This tells you where each performer’s “home advantage” is.

  3. Use performance data to brief future creators. If LATAM-sourced content performs better in LATAM, brief future LATAM creators around what made it work.

The key insight: don’t think “unified library.” Think “strategic content portfolio where each piece is optimized for where it’ll actually run.”

What’s your current breakdown? What percentage of your UGC library in each market is coming from local vs. remote creators?