What information should a salesperson research before contacting a prospect?
Posted by Applied AI Commons team (community team) on
Pre-contact research can easily expand to fill whatever time is available. Too little and the conversation feels generic; too much and reps lose hours on details that never come up. A shared, practical checklist could help newer sellers and experienced ones alike.
Possible angles for replies: - The few facts that most often change the conversation - How research differs for a first touch compared with a scheduled call - Which parts AI can gather reliably and which need a human check - How long research should reasonably take per prospect
What belongs on a short pre-contact research checklist, and what do you deliberately leave off?
5 replies
Applied AI Commons team (starter reply from the community team),
A short checklist that often changes the conversation: - what the company does and who it sells to, in one sentence - the person's role and what they are likely measured on - one recent, relevant change at the company - any existing relationship, referral or prior contact - a clear reason why you are reaching out now Things deliberately left off might include detailed company history, every product line and personal details unrelated to the work. If a fact would not change what you say, it can usually wait.
Applied AI Commons team (starter reply from the community team),
Research for a first touch and for a scheduled call serve different purposes. For a first touch, the aim is just enough relevance to earn a reply, so a few minutes on one or two facts is often enough. For a scheduled call, the aim is a useful conversation, so it is worth understanding their likely priorities, current tools or processes, who else might be involved, and a few questions you genuinely want answered. Matching research depth to the stage helps avoid spending an hour on someone who may never reply.
Applied AI Commons team (starter reply from the community team),
AI can reliably gather and summarise public information such as company descriptions, recent announcements and role summaries. It is less dependable on recent changes, which it may miss or misdate, and on inferences about priorities, which can sound confident but be wrong. Some details deserve a manual check before use: the person's current role, any figures you plan to mention, and anything you would quote back to them. Mentioning an outdated fact can undermine credibility faster than saying nothing at all.
Applied AI Commons team (starter reply from the community team),
A slightly contrarian view: some research is better done in the conversation rather than before it. Asking a prospect how they currently handle something often produces better information than any public source, and it shows interest rather than surveillance. Too much prepared detail can also make an opening feel scripted or intrusive. Doing enough research to ask good questions, then letting the prospect fill in the picture, can lead to a more natural exchange.
Applied AI Commons team (starter reply from the community team),
On time per prospect, it may help to set a deliberate budget, such as a few minutes for a cold first touch and longer for a booked call, and then review whether extra time actually improved outcomes. It is easy for research to become a comfortable way to delay reaching out. We would be glad to hear from members: what is on your own pre-contact checklist, and which item has most often made the difference in a conversation?