---
name: battlecard_craft
description: "Build and maintain competitive sales battlecards backed by win-loss research: one card per rival, honest strengths, verbatim objections with tested replies, proof points, walk-away criteria, and an update cadence. Use when creating or refreshing a battlecard, preparing reps for a competitive deal, running win-loss interviews, coding why deals were won or lost, or fixing cards reps ignore."
---

# Battlecard Craft

## Purpose

A battlecard is a one-page brief a rep can use in the middle of a live call against one named rival. Most cards fail for two reasons: they are built from marketing copy instead of deal evidence, and nobody owns keeping them current. This skill fixes both. It ships the research workflow behind the card (win-loss interviews, call evidence, evidence grading) and the maintenance cadence that keeps the card true after it ships.

## Workflow

### 1. Scope the card

- One card per rival. A card covering three rivals covers none of them in a live call.
- Build cards only for rivals that show up often enough to matter. Start with the rivals named most in recent closed deals, won and lost, plus no-decision deals where a rival was evaluated.
- Name one owner and set a review date before writing anything. A card with no owner goes stale on a schedule you can predict.

### 2. Gather evidence before writing

Pull from four sources, in this order of trust:

1. **Buyer interviews.** Short structured interviews with people who just chose you or chose the rival. This is the only source that knows the full reason. Full method in `references/win-loss-research.md`.
2. **Call recordings.** Search transcripts for the rival's name and phrases like "we also looked at" or "compared to". Write down objections in the prospect's exact words.
3. **Rep debriefs.** Ask top reps what they actually say when the rival comes up, and what made them lose. Treat rep accounts of why a deal was lost as a lead, not a fact: reps rarely hear the real reason.
4. **Public rival material.** Pricing pages, docs, changelogs, review sites, job posts. Date every item. Public claims about the rival need a source a rep could open.

Grade every fact that will land on the card:

| Grade | Meaning | Card rule |
|---|---|---|
| A | Buyer said it in a win-loss interview, or it is on the rival's public page today | Can go on the card as stated |
| B | Two or more reps report it independently, or one buyer mentioned it once | Goes on the card hedged: "buyers report..." |
| C | One rep's impression, a rumor, an old screenshot | Stays off the card. Research task, not content |

### 3. Run the win-loss loop

Follow `references/win-loss-research.md`. The short version:

- Interview wins and losses in roughly equal numbers, within 3 months of the decision, 30 minutes, run by someone who did not sell the deal.
- Ask the same core questions every time so answers can be compared: problem context, who else was evaluated, what decided it, price role, perceived risk, what would have changed the outcome.
- Code each interview against a fixed reason taxonomy (product fit, price, timing, risk and trust, sales experience, incumbent inertia, no-decision blockers). Tag quotes to codes.
- Roll up monthly. A reason named once is a story. A reason named across several interviews in a segment is a card change.

### 4. Write the card in Know / Say / Show layers

Keep the three layers separate. Collapsing them is why cards get too long to scan.

- **Know** (pre-call, can be a linked page): rival overview, target buyer, pricing model, recent moves, where they genuinely win.
- **Say** (the card itself, used live): talk tracks and objection replies. Each entry is 2 to 3 short lines: what to say, one proof line, where to steer next.
- **Show** (after the call): case studies, comparison sheets, ROI material the rep sends as follow-up.

The live card must pass the 10-second test: a rep mid-call can find the right entry and use it in under 10 seconds. If an entry needs a paragraph of reading, it belongs in Know or Show.

Required sections for the live card, in this order:

1. Header: rival name, card owner, last updated date, evidence grade note.
2. Quick intel: who they sell to, their core pitch in one line, pricing shape, one recent move that matters.
3. Where they genuinely win: 2 to 4 honest strengths. Reps who get blindsided stop trusting the card.
4. Where we win for this buyer: advantages tied to a buyer pain, each with a proof point. No feature lists without a pain attached.
5. Objections: the top 3 to 5, written the way prospects say them. Each reply follows LAER: Listen, Acknowledge, Explore, Respond. Acknowledge the rival's real strength first, then reframe to the buyer's stated priority, then offer proof. Include a concede line for cases where the objection is simply true.
6. Questions to plant: discovery questions that surface the rival's weak spots in the buyer's own evaluation, phrased as things to ask the rival too.
7. Walk away: the 2 to 3 situations where the rival is the better fit. Saying this out loud early builds more trust than winning a bad-fit deal.
8. If you hear this, say this: 3 to 5 one-line triggers for the most common live moments.

Use the fill-in file in `assets/battlecard-template.md` and validate the draft with `bin/check_battlecard.py`.

### 5. Handle objections with LAER

For every objection entry, draft all four moves:

- **Listen**: let them finish. Note the exact wording for the card.
- **Acknowledge**: name the concern as legitimate. Never argue with the premise in the first sentence.
- **Explore**: one question that finds the root. "Too expensive" can mean total price, one line item, timing of budget, or a cheaper rival quote used as leverage. Each root gets a different reply.
- **Respond**: answer the root, with proof, then check: "Does that cover the concern, or is there a piece I missed?"

Sort objections by root cause, not by wording: price, timing, authority, need, trust, incumbent. The same words from a prospect can hide different roots.

### 6. Launch and maintain

Follow `references/cadence-and-ownership.md`. Minimum viable rhythm:

- Field intel lands on the card within 48 hours of verification.
- Weekly: 15-minute triage of new signals and rep reports.
- Monthly: fold win-loss rollups into card changes. Publish a short note on what changed and why.
- Quarterly: full review of positioning, pricing, and proof against current rival material.
- Trigger-based, no waiting for the calendar: rival pricing or packaging change, major launch, acquisition, or a clear shift in competitive win rate. Update within a week of confirmation, pricing changes faster.

Retire cards for rivals that stop appearing in deals. A library with dead cards teaches reps to ignore live ones.

### 7. Measure whether the card works

- Tag opportunities in the CRM with rival and card used. Compare competitive win rate with and without card use, by rival.
- Track which objection entries reps actually use. An entry nobody uses in a quarter gets rewritten from fresh call evidence or cut.
- Ask reps after competitive deals: what worked, what fell flat, what did the buyer say back. Feed answers into the monthly rollup, not into ad hoc edits.

## Output Contract

A finished job delivers:

1. One battlecard per rival, built on `assets/battlecard-template.md`, passing `bin/check_battlecard.py` with no errors.
2. An evidence log: each card claim with its grade (A, B, or cut) and its source.
3. The win-loss interview guide and coded rollup behind the card, per `references/win-loss-research.md`, when research was run.
4. An ownership line: named owner, review date, and the cadence from `references/cadence-and-ownership.md` written into the card header.
5. A change note for reps when an existing card changes: what changed, why, and which talk track to use differently.

## Operating Rules

- Never invent rival facts: no pricing, dates, feature claims, or customer quotes without a source from step 2. Unverifiable claims get cut or graded C and kept off the card.
- Never write a card that pretends the rival has no strengths. Reps can smell it and buyers punish it.
- Never disparage the rival by name-calling or vague claims. Contrast on criteria the buyer cares about, with proof.
- Keep the live card to one page of scannable entries. Depth goes in linked Know and Show layers.
- Write objections in the prospect's words, replies in a top rep's words. Cleaned-up marketing phrasing helps nobody mid-call.
- Every claim on the card carries a date. Pricing and packaging claims older than one quarter must be rechecked before reuse.
- If the evidence base is thin (fewer than 3 buyer interviews and no call recordings for a rival), ship the card marked as draft grade B, say so in the header, and schedule the interviews. Do not present a draft as settled intel.
- No-decision is its own outcome category. Losing to inertia needs different card content (risk reducers, phased start, cost of delay) than losing to a rival.