Activation Lever: Content Velocity
Yesterday you built a tagged content library. Today you use it.
If you followed the prompt and instructions for yesterday, the setup work is done. You have case studies, battle cards, and one-pagers tagged by persona, pain point, and use case. Now the question remains: given what you know about a prospect, which content should you send?
This prompt takes your call notes or prospect research and matches it against your content library. It recommends specific pieces, explains why they're relevant, and suggests how to position them in your outreach. No more hunting. No more guessing. Just "here's what to send and here's why."
How to use this prompt
What you'll need:
- Your tagged content library from Day 7 (or any structured content database)
- Call notes, prospect research, or CRM data about a specific deal
- 5-10 minutes per prospect
Step-by-step:
- 1
Copy the prompt below into your AI tool
- 2
Paste your content library (or the relevant section)
- 3
Paste your prospect context (call notes, research, CRM data)
- 4
Review the matched recommendations
- 5
Send the recommended content with the suggested positioning
The Prompt
You are an expert sales enablement specialist who matches content to prospect situations. Your task is to analyze prospect context and recommend the most relevant content from a provided library, with specific guidance on how to position each piece.
CONTEXT: WHY CONTENT MATCHING MATTERS
Reps often have great content but send the wrong pieces. They default to their favorites instead of what's relevant. They send case studies from the wrong industry. They share battle cards when the prospect isn't in a competitive evaluation.
Effective content matching requires:
- Understanding the prospect's situation (persona, pain points, deal stage)
- Knowing what content exists (the library)
- Connecting the two with clear reasoning
Your job: Given prospect context, recommend 2-4 pieces of content and explain exactly why each one fits.
MATCHING PROCESS:
STEP 1: ANALYZE PROSPECT CONTEXT
From the provided information, extract:
- Primary persona (who are we talking to?)
- Key pain points mentioned (what problems did they articulate?)
- Deal stage signals (early discovery? competitive eval? negotiation?)
- Industry or company context (any specifics that matter?)
- Objections or concerns raised (what pushback have we heard?)
STEP 2: SEARCH THE CONTENT LIBRARY
Using the prospect profile, identify content that matches on:
- Persona tags (content designed for this buyer type)
- Pain point tags (content addressing their specific challenges)
- Use case tags (content appropriate for this deal stage)
Prioritize content that matches on 2+ dimensions.
STEP 3: GENERATE RECOMMENDATIONS
For each recommended piece (2-4 pieces), provide:
RECOMMENDATION [Number]:
Content: [Title from library]
Match Strength: [Strong | Good | Moderate]
Why It Fits: [2-3 sentences explaining the connection to this specific prospect]
Positioning Guidance:
"[Exact language the rep could use when sending this content. Frame it around the prospect's situation, not the content itself.]"
Best Delivery Method: [Email attachment | Link in follow-up | Share in meeting | Reference in proposal]
STEP 4: FLAG GAPS
After recommendations, note:
- Any prospect needs NOT addressed by available content
- Content that would be helpful but doesn't exist
- Suggestions for what to create
OUTPUT FORMAT:
=====================================
PROSPECT PROFILE (Extracted)
Name: [If provided]
Company: [If provided]
Role/Persona: [Title and buyer type]
Key Pain Points: [Bulleted list of articulated challenges]
Deal Stage: [Discovery | Evaluation | Negotiation | Other]
Industry Context: [Relevant details]
Concerns/Objections: [Any pushback noted]
=====================================
CONTENT RECOMMENDATIONS
[Recommendation 1]
[Recommendation 2]
[Recommendation 3]
[Recommendation 4 if applicable]
CONTENT GAPS
[Any needs not addressed by current library]
=====================================
MATCHING PRINCIPLES:
Relevance over recency: A perfect-fit case study from 2023 beats a mediocre one from last month.
Specificity wins: If you have a case study from their exact industry, that beats a generic one with better numbers.
Match the moment: Discovery calls need different content than competitive evaluations. Don't send ROI calculators to someone still figuring out if they have a problem.
Less is more: 2-3 perfect pieces beat 6 "might be relevant" pieces. Don't overwhelm.
Position around them, not you: "Given what you shared about forecast accuracy..." beats "Here's our case study about..."
---
INPUTS:
Content Library:
[Paste your tagged content library entries OR the relevant subset for this prospect's situation]
Prospect Context:
[Paste call notes, CRM data, research, or any information about this specific prospect/deal]
Specific Questions (optional):
[Any particular content needs? "I need something for the CFO meeting" or "Looking for
competitive ammo against Competitor X"]
What Success Looks Like
Input Example:
Content Library (subset):
TITLE: DataFlow Inc. - Forecast Accuracy Transformation
PERSONA TAGS: #VP-Sales #Executive
PAIN POINT TAGS: #Forecasting #Pipeline-Quality
USE CASE TAGS: #ROI-Justification #Executive-Meeting
SUMMARY: 500-person SaaS company reduced forecast variance from ±20% to ±8% in 90 days.
CONVERSATION TRIGGER: When prospect says "our forecasts are always off"
TITLE: Competitive Battle Card - Competitor X
PERSONA TAGS: #VP-Sales #Sales-Manager
PAIN POINT TAGS: #Competitive-Deals
USE CASE TAGS: #Competitive-Displacement #Objection-Handling
SUMMARY: Key differentiators, landmines to set, and responses to their claims.
CONVERSATION TRIGGER: When prospect mentions evaluating Competitor X
TITLE: ROI Calculator - Sales Productivity
PERSONA TAGS: #CFO #VP-Sales #Executive
PAIN POINT TAGS: #Rep-Productivity #Reporting
USE CASE TAGS: #ROI-Justification #Proposal-Support
SUMMARY: Interactive model showing productivity gains and payback period.
CONVERSATION TRIGGER: When prospect asks "what's the ROI" or needs to justify budget
Prospect Context:
Call with Sarah Chen, VP Sales at TechCorp (500 employees, SaaS)
- Frustrated with forecast accuracy, currently ±20%
- Mentioned they're also talking to Competitor X
- Needs to present to CFO next month for budget approval
- Said "I can't keep defending these numbers to the board"
Output Example:
=====================================
PROSPECT PROFILE (Extracted)
Name: Sarah Chen
Company: TechCorp (500 employees, SaaS)
Role/Persona: VP Sales - Executive buyer
Key Pain Points:
• Forecast accuracy at ±20% variance
• Losing credibility with board due to inaccurate forecasts
• Needs CFO approval for budget
Deal Stage: Evaluation (competitive, approaching decision)
Industry Context: Mid-market SaaS, similar size to DataFlow case study
Concerns/Objections: Evaluating Competitor X
=====================================
CONTENT RECOMMENDATIONS
RECOMMENDATION 1:
Content: DataFlow Inc. - Forecast Accuracy Transformation
Match Strength: Strong
Why It Fits: DataFlow is nearly identical to TechCorp - same size (500 employees), same industry (SaaS), same problem (±20% forecast variance). Sarah's quote about "defending numbers to the board" mirrors the DataFlow VP's situation exactly.
Positioning Guidance:
"Sarah, given what you shared about the ±20% variance and the board pressure, I wanted to send this. DataFlow was in almost the exact same situation - same size, same challenge. They got to ±8% in 90 days. Their VP said something similar about finally feeling confident in board meetings. Thought it might be relevant as you think about next steps."
Best Delivery Method: Email attachment in follow-up (send within 24 hours)
---
RECOMMENDATION 2:
Content: ROI Calculator - Sales Productivity
Match Strength: Strong
Why It Fits: Sarah needs to present to her CFO next month. She'll need to justify the investment with numbers. This gives her a tool to build the internal business case.
Positioning Guidance:
"Since you mentioned the CFO presentation next month, I put together an ROI model you can customize with TechCorp's numbers. Makes the internal sell easier - happy to walk through it together if helpful."
Best Delivery Method: Offer in email, walk through live if she accepts
---
RECOMMENDATION 3:
Content: Competitive Battle Card - Competitor X
Match Strength: Good
Why It Fits: She mentioned evaluating Competitor X. This content won't be sent directly but should inform how the rep positions against the competitor in upcoming conversations.
Positioning Guidance:
[Internal use only - do not send to prospect]
Use the landmine questions in your next call: "When you looked at Competitor X, did they show you how they handle [weakness area]?" Sets up differentiation without bashing.
Best Delivery Method: Internal prep for next call, not shared directly
=====================================
CONTENT GAPS
- No content specific to "board presentation" or "executive communication" use case. Sarah needs to sell this internally. A template or guide for presenting to the board might help.
- No TechCorp-industry-specific content (though DataFlow SaaS match is strong).
=====================================
Creator’s Note: Why this Works
From Library to Action
Day 7 built the system. Day 8 uses it. This is the payoff.
A tagged library sitting in a spreadsheet is potential energy. This prompt converts it to kinetic energy by connecting the right content to the right prospect at the right moment.
The Positioning Guidance Difference
Most content recommendations stop at "send the case study." That's not enough. How you frame content matters as much as which content you send.
"Here's our case study" is weak. "Given what you shared about forecast accuracy, I wanted to send this because DataFlow was in almost the exact same situation" is strong.
The prompt generates positioning language for every recommendation. The rep doesn't have to figure out how to frame it. They just personalize and send.
Match on Multiple Dimensions
The best content matches hit on more than one dimension:
- Persona match (VP Sales content for a VP Sales)
- Pain point match (forecasting content for a forecasting problem)
- Situational match (similar company size, industry, challenge)
When content matches on all three, the prospect feels like it was created for them. Because functionally, it was selected for them.
Not Everything Gets Sent
Notice that Recommendation 3 (the battle card) says "internal use only." Not all content is for the prospect. Some is for the rep to prepare.
The prompt distinguishes between content to share and content to use internally. Battle cards, competitive intel, objection responses - these inform how you show up, even if you never send the document itself.
Gaps Are Features
The "Content Gaps" section isn't a bug. It's intelligence.
When the prompt identifies "no content addresses this need," that's a signal to your enablement team. Track those gaps. When you see the same gap across multiple deals, that's a content creation priority.
Speed Matters
A rep prepping for a call in 20 minutes doesn't have time to search a library, evaluate options, and craft positioning. This prompt does that in 5 minutes.
The output is ready to use: specific content, clear reasoning, suggested language. Copy, paste, personalize, send.
Level up: Advanced Applications
- Build persona-specific mini-libraries. If you sell to multiple personas, create filtered views of your library. "CFO content" becomes a smaller, focused list that's faster to query.
- Create deal-stage playbooks. Different stages need different content. Map your library to your sales process: Discovery content, Evaluation content, Negotiation content. Query by stage.
- Track what gets used. When reps send recommended content, log it. Over time, you'll see which pieces actually move deals. Double down on what works, retire what doesn't.
- Connect to your CRM. If your CRM tracks deal stage and persona, you can pre-filter the library before running the prompt. Less input, faster output.
- Run matching for key deals weekly. For your most important opportunities, run the matching prompt every week as the deal evolves. New information means new content opportunities.
Tomorrow: Day 9—Call Coaching
See What’s Holding Your Revenue Back, And What Activates It
Revenue enablement wasn’t designed for execution in motion. Activation is.
