account-research · diff
git:20260723.de898c0 to git:20260906.85504a9
31 added, 17 removed. Audit A to A.
---
name: account-research
- description: Build a complete account sheet before a meeting — company, people, news, tech, pains, and talking angles. Use before any important prospect or client interaction.
+ description: Build a complete account sheet before a meeting - company, people, news, tech, pains, and talking angles. Use before any important prospect or client interaction.
metadata: {"navin":{"emoji":"🗺️","category":"sales"}}
---
# Account Research
- ## Overview
+ Walk into every meeting knowing more about their context than they expect. Timebox research; separate facts from hypotheses.
- Walk into every meeting knowing more about their context than they expect. 30–45 minutes of research, one structured sheet.
+ ## When to use
+ - Before discovery calls, demos, or strategic meetings
+ - Deep-dive on a single target account
+
+ ## When not to use
+
+ - Bulk list building (`lead-prospector`)
+ - Presenting hypotheses as facts to the prospect
+
## The account sheet
```markdown
- ## Account — <Company> (<date>)
+ ## Account - <Company> (<date>)
### Company
- - What they do (their own words) — size, geography, structure
+ - What they do (their words) - size, geography, structure
- Business model & who THEIR clients are
- - Recent news: funding, projects, expansions, incidents
+ - Recent news: funding, projects, expansions, incidents (URL + date)
### People (per attendee)
- - Role, tenure, background, recent posts/statements
+ - Role, tenure, background, recent public statements
- Likely personal win from this project
### Signals
- Tech stack hints (site, job postings)
- Hiring patterns → priorities
- - Public tenders / projects (DZ/Gulf: BAOSEM, official portals)
- ### Hypotheses
- - Top 3 likely pains (with the evidence)
+ - Public tenders / projects when relevant
+ ### Hypotheses (to verify in meeting)
+ - Top 3 likely pains with evidence
- Budget/timing signals
### Angles
- Openers & smart questions
- Relevant references/cases of ours
- - Risks (competitor incumbent? bad history?)
+ - Risks (incumbent? bad history?)
```
## Sources
- `web_fetch` their site (about, news, careers) · `web_search` news + "{company} + projet/contrat/recrutement" · LinkedIn (company + people) · reviews (their clients') · tender platforms · `entity-research` for deep corporate data.
+ `web_fetch` site (about, news, careers) · `web_search` news + hiring · public profiles · reviews · tender platforms · `entity-research` · `buying-signals`.
## Workflow
- 1. Timebox by stakes: 15 min (routine) / 45 min (big meeting) / half-day (strategic account).
- 2. Fill the sheet; separate facts (sourced) from hypotheses (marked).
- 3. Store in `sales/accounts/<company>/research.md`; brief the user with the top 5 points.
- 4. After the meeting: `discovery-call-assistant` notes update the sheet — it lives.
+ 1. Timebox: 15 min routine / 45 min big meeting / half-day strategic.
+ 2. Fill the sheet; tag every claim with source URL or `unverified`.
+ 3. Store `sales/accounts/<company>/research.md`; brief top 5 points in chat.
+ 4. After the meeting: update via discovery notes - the sheet lives.
## Rules
- Public sources only.
- - Hypotheses are for the meeting to verify — never present them as facts to the prospect.
+ - Hypotheses are for the meeting to test - never sell them as facts.
+ - Prefer recent evidence (<90 days) for timing claims.
+
+ ## Anti-patterns
+
+ - Wall of unstructured browser notes
+ - Invented org charts