Building Battlecards: Manual PowerPoint vs. Automated Platforms

The sales rep was on a competitive call. He messaged me: "Where's the Competitor X battle card?"

"It's in Klue," I said. "Click the Salesforce integration, search for Competitor X."

30 seconds passed. "I can't find it. Can you just send the PDF?"

I sent the PDF. The call ended. The rep lost the deal.

Later, he told me: "The battle card in Klue was 8 pages. I needed quick talking points, not a comprehensive competitive analysis. Easier to just ask you."

We'd paid $18,000 for Klue to automate battle card creation. Sales reps weren't using it because automated comprehensive battle cards were less useful than manual one-page quick reference cards.

I'd automated the wrong thing.

The PowerPoint Battle Card Days

Before Klue, I built battle cards manually in PowerPoint.

The process:

• One PowerPoint slide per competitor
• 4-6 bullet points: Why we win, handling objections, key differentiators
• Exported to PDF
• Shared in Google Drive
• Updated quarterly (or when major competitive changes happened)

Time investment: 2 hours per battle card

For our 6 main competitors = 12 hours quarterly = ~1 hour per week averaged.

Sales loved them:

• One page (quick reference before calls)
• Clear talking points (not analysis)
• Actionable objection handling
• Always in their Drive folder (no special tool needed)

The problems:

Problem 1: Updating was manual When Competitor X launched new features, I had to:

• Update battle card
• Re-export PDF
• Re-upload to Drive
• Notify sales in Slack

Problem 2: Version control was messy Multiple versions in Drive. Sales reps had old PDFs saved. Unclear which was current.

Problem 3: Distribution was slow From "competitor launches feature" to "sales has updated battle card" = 3-5 days.

Problem 4: Scaling was hard 6 competitors = manageable. 15 competitors = unsustainable.

I told my boss: "We need a battle card platform to scale and automate this."

The Klue Promise

Klue's demo showed exactly what I wanted:

Problem: Manual battle card creation Solution: "Template-based battle cards, create in minutes"

Problem: Slow updates Solution: "Update once, automatically distribute to sales"

Problem: Version control chaos Solution: "Version control built-in, sales always see latest version"

Problem: Can't scale Solution: "Support unlimited battle cards with same time investment"

Cost: $18,000 annually.

ROI: Save 10+ hours weekly on battle card management.

Approved. I migrated our 6 battle cards into Klue.

Month 1: The Template Trap

Klue had 20+ battle card templates.

I chose: "Competitive Positioning Template" (most comprehensive).

The template had 8 sections:

1. Competitor Overview (company info, funding, market position)
2. Product Comparison (feature-by-feature grid)
3. Pricing Comparison (pricing models, typical deal sizes)
4. Strengths (what they do well)
5. Weaknesses (where they fall short)
6. Why We Win (our differentiators)
7. Objection Handling (common objections + responses)
8. Proof Points (customer wins against this competitor)

This was comprehensive. Sales would have everything they need.

Time to fill out template for Competitor X: 4 hours

Wait. That's 2x longer than building manual PowerPoint slide (2 hours).

Why?

The template had more sections. I needed to research and fill out:

• Competitor funding and company info (30 min - didn't have this in PowerPoint version)
• Feature-by-feature comparison (1 hour - PowerPoint had high-level differentiation, template wanted granular features)
• Detailed pricing comparison (45 min - PowerPoint had simple "30% more expensive" note)

The template was more comprehensive. It was also more work to create.

Month 2: The Auto-Generated Problem

After 20 hours building 6 comprehensive battle cards, I exported to PDF for sales.

Klue generated 8-page PDFs.

I sent to 5 sales reps for feedback:

Rep 1: "Too long. I need one page I can review in 30 seconds before a call."

Rep 2: "The competitor overview info is interesting but not useful. I need talking points."

Rep 3: "Is there a short version?"

Rep 4: "I'll just ask you for the key points when I need them."

Rep 5: "Can you make a one-pager summary?"

Sales wanted: 1-page quick reference

Klue generated: 8-page comprehensive analysis

The automated platform optimized for comprehensiveness. Sales needed speed and simplicity.

I spent 4 hours creating one-page summaries manually in PowerPoint (back to the original approach).

Sales used the PowerPoint one-pagers. Klue's 8-page battle cards sat unused.

Month 3-4: The Distribution Illusion

Klue's "automatic distribution" sounded great in the demo.

The promise: Update battle card once, sales immediately see latest version.

The reality:

Scenario: Competitor X launches new product, need to update battle card.

1. Update battle card in Klue (1 hour - updating 8 sections)
2. Battle card auto-updates in Klue ✓
3. Sales gets notification... in Klue (which they don't check)
4. Manually notify sales in Slack anyway: "Updated Competitor X battle card" (5 min)
5. Sales: "Can you send the one-pager?" (they want PowerPoint version, not Klue)
6. Send PowerPoint one-pager

Auto-distribution failed because sales didn't work in Klue. They worked in Salesforce, email, and Slack.

Klue had "Salesforce integration" but:

• Opening Klue from Salesforce took 8-12 seconds (vs. 2 seconds to open Drive PDF)
• Required searching within Klue
• Showed 8-page version (sales wanted 1-page version)

Distribution automation didn't help if the distribution destination was wrong.

Month 5-6: The Update Tax

Klue made updates more work, not less.

Updating battle card in PowerPoint (before Klue):

1. Open PowerPoint slide
2. Update 1-2 bullet points (10 min)
3. Export to PDF (1 min)
4. Upload to Drive (1 min) Total: 12 minutes

Updating battle card in Klue:

1. Log into Klue
2. Find battle card (search + navigate)
3. Update relevant sections (need to update 3-4 sections because of template structure)
4. Save and publish (version control workflow)
5. Export PDF (if creating one-pager for sales manually anyway)
6. Notify sales Total: 45 minutes

The platform made updates slower, not faster, because the comprehensive template required updating multiple sections for one competitive change.

Why Battle Card Platforms Often Fail

I talked to other PMMs about their battle card tools:

Friend using Crayon ($15K/year): "Same problem. Their battle cards are comprehensive but sales wants simple. We build PowerPoint versions anyway."

Friend using Kompyte ($12K/year): "Great for tracking competitor changes. Battle cards are too detailed for sales to use."

Friend using PowerPoint ($0): "Simple, fast, sales actually uses them. Tried platforms, went back to PowerPoint."

The pattern:

Battle card platforms optimize for:

• Comprehensiveness (8-page detailed analysis)
• Standardization (everyone uses same template)
• Version control (track all changes)
• Automated generation (pull from competitor database)

Battle card platforms don't optimize for:

• Sales usability (1-page quick reference)
• Quick updates (comprehensive templates slow updates down)
• Actual distribution (sales don't work in these platforms)
• Context (different scenarios need different battle card formats)

The core issue: Battle card platforms treat battle cards as documents to manage.

Sales treats battle cards as quick reference tools to use in the moment.

Different mental models → different design priorities.

What Actually Matters in Battle Cards

After 6 months with Klue, I realized what actually mattered:

Not: 8-page comprehensive competitor analysis Need: 1-page quick talking points

Not: Feature-by-feature comparison grids Need: High-level "why we win" and objection handling

Not: Platform-based distribution Need: Battle cards where sales already works (Drive, email, Salesforce)

Not: Comprehensive templates Need: Fast updates when competitive landscape changes

Not: Standalone battle card management Need: Battle cards that auto-update when messaging or competitive intelligence changes

The best battle cards are simple, fast, and integrated—not comprehensive, slow, and standalone.

The Consolidated Platform Alternative

After 6 months, I explored alternatives:

Option 1: Back to PowerPoint

• Simple, fast, sales loves them
• But manual distribution and no integration with competitive intelligence

Option 2: Different battle card platform

• Same comprehensiveness problem

Option 3: Consolidated PMM platform

• Battle cards auto-generated from messaging + competitive intelligence
• Simple format by default
• Updates propagate when underlying data changes

The third option was interesting.

Platforms like Segment8 approached battle cards differently:

Traditional platform (Klue):

• Fill out comprehensive battle card template
• Export and distribute manually
• Update battle card separately from messaging

Integrated approach:

• Build messaging framework + competitive positioning
• Battle cards auto-generate (1-page format)
• Updates to messaging or competitive intelligence auto-update battle cards

Instead of battle cards as standalone documents, battle cards as outputs of messaging + competitive intelligence.

Testing the Integrated Approach

I tested for 30 days:

Week 1: Setup

• Imported messaging frameworks
• Imported competitive positioning
• Battle cards auto-generated (1-page format)

Week 2: Update test

Scenario: Competitor launches new feature

With Klue:

1. Update competitor profile in Klue (30 min)
2. Update battle card template (45 min - multiple sections)
3. Export and manually create one-pager anyway (30 min)
4. Distribute to sales (10 min) Total: 2 hours

With integrated platform:

1. Update competitive positioning (15 min)
2. Battle card auto-regenerates
3. Auto-distributes to sales Total: 15 minutes

Time saved: 87%

Week 3: New competitor

With Klue:

1. Create competitor profile (1 hour)
2. Fill out 8-section battle card template (4 hours)
3. Create one-pager sales actually wants (1 hour) Total: 6 hours

With integrated platform:

1. Add competitive positioning (1 hour)
2. Battle card auto-generates Total: 1 hour

Time saved: 83%

Week 4: Sales adoption

Klue battle cards:

• Sales usage: 6% opened battle cards in Klue
• Why: Too long, wrong tool

Integrated platform battle cards:

• Sales usage: 67% used battle cards
• Why: 1-page format, embedded in Salesforce, automatically updated

What I Do Now

I cancelled Klue after 12 months.

Current battle card approach:

Format:

• 1-page quick reference (not 8-page comprehensive analysis)
• 4-6 key points: Why we win, objection handling, differentiation
• Auto-generated from messaging + competitive positioning

Creation:

• Build competitive positioning once
• Battle cards auto-generate
• No manual template filling

Updates:

• Update competitive intelligence → battle cards auto-update
• Update messaging → battle cards auto-update
• Time per update: 45 min (Klue) → 10 min (integrated)

Distribution:

• Auto-embedded in Salesforce
• One-click export to PDF/PowerPoint
• Sales gets notifications in Slack automatically

Results:

• Time per battle card: 4 hours (Klue) → 1 hour (integrated)
• Time per update: 45 min → 10 min
• Sales usage: 6% → 67%
• Tool cost: $18,000 → included in $2,400 consolidated platform
• Annual savings: $15,600 + 150 hours

Do You Need a Battle Card Platform?

Here's the test:

You might need dedicated battle card platform if:

• You have 100+ competitors requiring detailed analysis
• You have dedicated competitive intelligence team
• Comprehensive analysis is more important than sales adoption
• Battle cards are standalone deliverables (not integrated with messaging)

You probably don't if:

• You're a PMM building battle cards as one part of your role
• Sales wants simple reference cards, not comprehensive analysis
• Battle cards should integrate with messaging and competitive intelligence
• You're spending more time managing platforms than creating useful content

Most PMM teams fall into the second category.

The best battle cards are simple, fast-updating, and integrated—not comprehensive, slow, and standalone.

I spent $18,000 learning that lesson. Sales doesn't want comprehensive competitor analysis. They want quick talking points when they need them.

Optimize for sales usage, not battle card comprehensiveness.