You spent two weeks creating comprehensive battle cards for your top competitors. Detailed product comparisons, pricing analysis, messaging frameworks, customer intelligence.
Your sales team opened them once, maybe twice. Now they sit in a Google Drive folder while reps wing it in competitive deals.
The problem isn't that battle cards don't work. It's that most battle cards are built for PMM consumption, not sales execution. Here's how to create battle cards sales actually uses.
Why Traditional Battle Cards Fail
Common battle card structure:
- Competitor overview and history (who cares?)
- 50-row feature comparison table (impossible to scan mid-call)
- Strengths and weaknesses (too vague)
- Generic positioning guidance (not actionable)
This format works for research documents. It fails for live sales conversations.
What reps actually need:
- Instant answers to specific objections
- Questions to ask that expose competitor weaknesses
- Proof points they can cite without searching
- Verbal scripts they can use immediately
Battle cards should be decision trees, not encyclopedias.
The One-Page Battle Card Framework
Force yourself to one page. If it doesn't fit, it's not essential.
Structure:
Section 1: One-Sentence Positioning (Top, bold, 18pt) Section 2: When We Win vs When They Win (4 bullets each) Section 3: Trap Questions (3-5 questions) Section 4: Objection Response Scripts (4-6 scripts) Section 5: Proof Points (3 customer examples with names)
That's it. One page. No fluff.
Section 1: One-Sentence Positioning
This sentence is how reps position against this competitor. Not a paragraph. One sentence they can memorize.
Bad examples: "We offer more comprehensive features and better support at a competitive price point for companies seeking enterprise-grade solutions." (Too long, too vague, no differentiation)
Good examples:
Against HubSpot: "We're built for B2B companies with complex sales cycles who need deeper account intelligence than HubSpot's SMB-focused automation."
Against Slack: "We're the collaboration platform for teams where security and compliance matter more than consumer-friendly design."
Against Intercom: "We're the customer communication platform that combines support, marketing, and product messaging in one system instead of separate tools."
What makes it work:
- Acknowledges competitor as legitimate
- Defines clear differentiation
- Gives target customer context
- Rep can say it verbatim without notes
Section 2: When We Win vs When They Win
Reps need to know which deals to fight for and which to concede.
When we win against [Competitor]:
- Complex enterprise buying process with 8+ stakeholders
- Deep CRM integration requirements
- Custom reporting and data governance needs
- Need for professional services and implementation support
When they win against us:
- Small businesses (under 50 employees) prioritizing simplicity
- Marketing-led organizations focused on content automation
- Budget-conscious buyers seeking lowest entry price
- Quick self-serve implementation required
Why this matters:
Reps can qualify themselves in or out early. If prospect fits "when they win" profile, rep either adjusts approach or focuses elsewhere.
This prevents burning cycles on low-probability deals.
Section 3: Trap Questions
Questions that expose competitor weaknesses without direct attacks.
Bad trap questions (too obvious): "Are you concerned about their limited feature set?" "Doesn't their poor customer service worry you?"
Prospects know you're attacking. It creates defensiveness.
Good trap questions (prospect discovers themselves):
Against competitor weak on integrations:
- "Walk me through how you currently sync data between systems. Does that process work well?"
- "How important is it that your tools connect natively to your data warehouse?"
- "What's your tolerance for manual data exports in your workflow?"
Against competitor weak on enterprise features:
- "How do you currently manage permissions across teams? Will that approach scale as you grow?"
- "What's your audit and compliance process? How do you track who accessed what when?"
- "How important is SSO and directory integration to your IT team?"
Pattern: Ask about workflow/process, not about competitor. Let prospect articulate the gap themselves.
Section 4: Objection Response Scripts
When prospects say specific things, reps need specific responses.
Format for each script:
Prospect says: "[Exact objection quote]" Rep responds: "[Exact response script]"
Example 1:
Prospect says: "Competitor X is 30% cheaper."
Rep responds: "You're right, their starting price is lower. Most companies your size end up on their Professional tier once they need [capability you include standard]. When you add [feature they charge extra for] and [another feature], the price gap is usually 10-15%. Can I show you an apples-to-apples comparison at the tier you'd actually need?"
Example 2:
Prospect says: "Competitor X has [feature we don't have]."
Rep responds: "They do have that feature. Can I ask how you'd use it day-to-day? [Listen] The reason we haven't built it is [strategic reason], but what we've focused on instead is [your differentiated capability]. For most teams at your stage, [your approach] ends up being more valuable because [outcome]. Does that match your priorities, or is [their feature] a hard requirement?"
Key principles:
- Acknowledge truth, don't argue
- Ask clarifying questions
- Reframe toward your strengths
- Offer proof or deeper conversation
Write these word-for-word. Reps will customize in the moment, but having scripted language gives them confidence.
Section 5: Proof Points
Generic claims don't work. Specific proof points win deals.
Bad proof points: "Great customer satisfaction" "Proven enterprise reliability" "Best-in-class support"
Nobody believes vague claims.
Good proof points:
"[Recognizable Company Name] in [their industry] switched from [Competitor] to us and reduced their sales cycle by 35% within 90 days. Their VP of Sales said the difference was [specific capability]. Happy to connect you."
Structure every proof point:
- Customer name (recognizable if possible)
- Their industry/use case
- What they switched from
- Specific outcome with number
- What drove the outcome
- Offer to connect
The offer to connect makes it credible. Reps won't always make the connection, but the offer signals it's real.
Include 3 proof points: One for each major use case or customer segment where you beat this competitor.
Format and Distribution
Make it scannable:
- Use bullets, not paragraphs
- Bold key phrases
- Plenty of white space
- Color-code sections consistently
Make it searchable:
- PDF with competitor name in filename
- Tags: competitor name variations
- Store in CRM attached to competitor account
- Add to sales enablement platform
Make it accessible:
- Embed in CRM as note on competitor accounts
- Pin in Slack sales channel
- Include in email signatures of PMM team
- Print laminated cards for reps who prefer physical
If reps have to search for battle cards, they won't use them.
The Update Cadence
Battle cards degrade fast. Update them:
Immediately when:
- Competitor changes pricing
- Competitor launches major feature
- You launch feature that changes competitive positioning
- You win/lose 3+ deals with new patterns
Quarterly:
- Refresh proof points with recent customers
- Update win/loss patterns
- Adjust trap questions based on sales feedback
- Revise response scripts if not working
Assign one owner per battle card. Make updates part of their goals.
Testing Battle Cards with Real Calls
Best validation: listen to sales calls where competitor comes up.
Questions to answer:
- Did rep reference the battle card?
- Which sections did they use?
- Which sections did they ignore?
- What questions did they get that battle card doesn't address?
- What worked well?
- What fell flat?
Update based on real usage, not theory.
Sales Enablement: Making Battle Cards Stick
Creating battle cards isn't enough. Sales needs training.
Battle card enablement session (30 minutes per competitor):
Positioning review (5 min): Read one-sentence positioning. Have reps practice saying it.
Win/loss discussion (10 min): Review when you win vs lose. Discuss qualification implications.
Trap question practice (10 min): Roleplay asking trap questions. Get comfortable with the flow.
Objection handling (5 min): Practice common objections and responses.
Record session. Make available for new reps.
Measuring Battle Card Effectiveness
Track these metrics:
Usage:
- Views/downloads in sales enablement platform
- CRM page views on competitor accounts
- Slack channel searches for battle cards
Outcomes:
- Win rate before vs after battle card creation
- Sales cycle length in competitive deals
- Rep confidence scores (survey after enablement)
Sales feedback:
- Which sections get used most?
- What's missing that reps need?
- What's included but never referenced?
If usage is low, change format or delivery method. If outcomes don't improve, content isn't actionable enough.
The Real Goal
Battle cards aren't competitive intelligence repositories. They're sales tools for one specific moment: when a competitor comes up and the rep has 30-60 seconds to respond.
Design for that moment. Make it fast, actionable, and confident.
Everything else is nice-to-have. The essentials are: positioning, qualification, questions, scripts, proof.
One page. Sales will actually use it.