Close Deals

Generate Sales Collateral

Every rep has the right asset for every deal situation — without waiting on marketing.
Of reps say they've lost a deal because they didn't have the right asset at the right time — and couldn't get it from marketing fast enough.

THE brıef

The gap between what marketing produces and what sales needs creates one of the most persistent GTM inefficiencies. Marketing builds assets on a content calendar. Sales needs a specific one-pager for a competitive deal in financial services right now. The request goes in, the asset gets built in 2 weeks, and the deal has already moved. The agent generates sales collateral on demand: one-pagers, battlecard summaries, solution briefs, and comparison sheets — specific to the use case, audience, and deal context — in hours, not weeks.

Generates on-demand one-pagers tailored to the deal context

A one-pager that works in a specific deal situation is tailored to the audience's role and pain — a one-pager for a CFO reads differently than one for a VP of RevOps reviewing the same product. The agent generates role-specific one-pagers from a brief: company name, contact role, primary pain being addressed, products in scope, and any competitive context. The output is a 1–2 page document with a clear value proposition for that specific audience, relevant proof points, and a next-step CTA. Generated in under 30 minutes.

One-pager generated: 'Enrichment for RevOps Leaders — Nexus Partners context.'
Audience: Jordan M. (VP RevOps).
Pain: data coverage gap at scale.
Proof: 2 matching case studies.
CTA: 20-minute demo.
Ready: 22 minutes.

Builds comparison sheets for competitive deal situations

When a deal is in competitive evaluation, the rep needs an asset that makes the comparison clear — not a generic product overview. The agent generates competitive comparison sheets from the battlecard data and deal context: a structured table showing the key differentiating dimensions, filled from live competitive intelligence (not static data from last quarter's update). The comparison sheet is calibrated to the competitor in the deal and the buyer's decision criteria, not a generic 'us vs. all competitors' template.

Comparison sheet: 'Lantern vs. Clearbit — for financial services RevOps teams.'
7 comparison dimensions.
Data sources: live battlecard intelligence.
Generated for: Jordan M. at Nexus Partners.
Competitive dimensions selected based on their evaluation criteria from discovery notes.

Produces use-case solution briefs for specific industry and role combinations

A solution brief for a healthcare CMO requires different framing than one for a SaaS RevOps manager — different terminology, different proof, different regulatory references. The agent maintains a template library for high-frequency use-case combinations (RevOps + SaaS, Marketing Ops + enterprise, Financial Services + compliance-oriented buyer) and generates briefs from the relevant template, populated with deal-specific details from the CRM. For use cases not yet in the library, the agent builds a new template from the relevant positioning and prospect context.

Solution brief: 'Data enrichment for financial services RevOps' — Nexus Partners context.
Template: FS-RevOps-v3.
Populated with: Jordan M. name and title, Nexus Partners company details, Meridian Financial case study, FINRA data accuracy reference. 4-page brief.

Routes collateral requests and tracks which assets influence deals

A collateral library is only useful if reps can find what they need and if the team knows which assets are actually influencing deal progression. The agent builds a searchable collateral hub integrated into the CRM deal view — reps search by use case, audience role, or competitor and get the most relevant asset. Every asset sent from the hub is tracked in the deal activity log: when it was sent, which contacts received it, and whether it was viewed. Over time, the system identifies which assets correlate with stage progression and which are never used — informing future collateral investment.

Collateral hub activity: this week 34 assets sent across 18 deals.
Top asset: 'Enrichment for RevOps Leaders' one-pager (sent 12 times).
Tracking: 8 viewed within 24 hours.
Deal stage correlated: assets sent in Stage 3 associated with 22% faster Stage 4 progression.

Today vs. with

Generate Sales Collateral

Today

• Reps request collateral from marketing and wait 1–2 weeks — the deal has moved on before the asset is ready.
• The collateral library contains generic assets — the financial services rep uses the same one-pager as the SaaS rep because there's nothing specific.
• No one knows which assets are actually used or whether they influence deals — collateral performance is untraceable.

With ABM Strategist

• Deal-specific collateral is generated on demand in under 30 minutes — marketing focuses on strategy, not reactive one-off requests.
• Assets are generated for specific use-case and role combinations — industry, audience, and competitive context built in by default.
• Every asset sent and viewed is logged to the deal activity — which assets correlate with stage progression is measurable and reported.