# B2B Messaging Director Playbook

Reference playbook for the b2b-messaging-director skill. Read the relevant section before producing any messaging artifact.

## Table of Contents

1. Messaging Hierarchy - Build Process
2. Persona Card Development
3. Value Proposition Frameworks
4. Competitive Battle Card Methodology
5. Sales Content Architecture
6. B2B Copy Formulas
7. Talk Track Design
8. Case Study Framework
9. Messaging Audit Process
10. Testing and Validation

---

## 1. Messaging Hierarchy - Build Process

### Step 1: Establish the Company Narrative

Before persona-level messaging, lock the company-level story. Every downstream message should be a specific instance of this narrative.

**Category Definition Exercise:**

| Question | Purpose |
|----------|---------|
| What market are we in? | Grounds the buyer's mental model |
| Are we creating a new category or entering an existing one? | Determines whether to educate or differentiate |
| What label would a buyer use to search for us? | Tests whether the category is recognized |
| What adjacent categories do we overlap with? | Maps competitive perception |

**Point of View Statement:**

Formula: "We believe [the world should work this way]. Today, [it doesn't because of this problem]. [Company] exists to [make it work the way it should]."

This is not a tagline. It's the philosophical foundation that guides every piece of messaging. It should feel opinionated - a company with no point of view has no positioning.

**Promise Statement:**

Formula: "For [persona/company type] who [situation], [Company] is the [category] that [key differentiator]. Unlike [alternatives], we [unique value]."

This is the classic positioning statement. It should pass the "so what" test - if a prospect reads it and doesn't feel it's about them, it fails.

**Proof Pillars:**

Identify 3-4 pillars that support the promise. Each pillar should be:
- Defensible (competitors can't credibly claim the same thing)
- Provable (supported by customer evidence, data, or product architecture)
- Relevant (addresses a real buyer concern)

Example structure:
```
PILLAR 1: [Short name - e.g., "Open by Design"]
  Claim: [What we assert]
  Evidence: [Customer quote, metric, architectural fact]
  Competitor gap: [Why they can't credibly claim this]

PILLAR 2: [Short name - e.g., "Cross-Platform Visibility"]
  ...

PILLAR 3: [Short name - e.g., "Deploy Your Way"]
  ...
```

### Step 2: Build Solution-Level Messaging

For each major use case or product area, create solution messaging that connects the company narrative to specific buyer problems.

**Problem-Solution-Outcome Framework:**

```
PROBLEM (in the buyer's words - not your words):
  "Right now, [persona] at companies like [type] are dealing with [pain].
   This means [business impact]. The status quo is [what they're doing today
   and why it's not working]."

SOLUTION (how, not what):
  "With [product/feature area], teams can [capability]. This works by
   [brief architectural explanation - enough to be credible, not enough
   to be a product tour]."

OUTCOME (quantified and specific):
  "[Customer type] typically see [metric improvement] within [timeframe].
   For example, [customer name] achieved [specific result]."

DIFFERENTIATION (why us, not them):
  "Unlike [alternative approach/competitor], [product] [key difference].
   This matters because [buyer implication]."
```

### Step 3: Build Persona-Level Messaging

For each buying committee member identified in the ICP framework, create targeted messaging.

**Persona Message Development Process:**

1. Interview 3-5 customers in this role. Ask:
   - "What was happening that made you start looking for a solution?"
   - "What words would you use to describe the problem to your boss?"
   - "What were you most worried about during the evaluation?"
   - "What would have made you say no?"
   - "How do you describe [product] to colleagues?"

2. Interview 3-5 AEs who sell to this persona. Ask:
   - "What do they care about most in the first meeting?"
   - "What objections do they always raise?"
   - "What language do they use that's different from what we use?"
   - "What proof point closes them?"

3. Synthesize into the Persona Card format (see section 2).

4. Write messaging variants:
   - Awareness stage: Problem-focused. "Are you dealing with [pain]?"
   - Consideration stage: Solution-focused. "Here's how [approach] works."
   - Decision stage: Proof-focused. "[Company like them] achieved [result]."

---

## 2. Persona Card Development

### Enterprise B2B Persona Archetypes

Most enterprise B2B deals involve 5-7 stakeholders across these archetypes. Map each to specific titles at your target companies.

**The Economic Buyer** (VP/C-level - signs the check)
- Cares about: Business outcomes, ROI, risk reduction, strategic alignment
- Fears: Wasted budget, failed implementation, career risk
- Content: Executive summaries, ROI analyses, peer references
- Meeting style: Wants the bottom line fast. No product demos unless they ask.
- Messaging angle: Business impact and strategic value

**The Technical Evaluator** (Director/Manager/Lead - tests the product)
- Cares about: Architecture, integration, performance, maintenance burden
- Fears: Being stuck with bad technology, undisclosed limitations, vendor lock-in
- Content: Technical docs, architecture diagrams, API references, POC guides
- Meeting style: Wants to go deep. Hates marketing fluff. Respects honesty about limitations.
- Messaging angle: Technical approach and architecture

**The Champion** (Manager/Director - drives the deal internally)
- Cares about: Solving their team's problem, looking smart for recommending the solution
- Fears: Recommending something that fails, losing credibility internally
- Content: Internal pitch materials, competitive comparisons, implementation success stories
- Meeting style: Collaborative. Wants you to help them sell internally.
- Messaging angle: How to win internal buy-in + evidence that de-risks their recommendation

**The User Buyer** (Individual contributor - will use it daily)
- Cares about: Ease of use, daily workflow impact, not making their job harder
- Fears: Learning curve, disruption to current workflow, tool fatigue
- Content: Product tours, user testimonials, ease-of-migration stories
- Meeting style: Wants to see the product. Hands-on. Practical questions.
- Messaging angle: Day-to-day impact and user experience

**The Blocker** (Security, Legal, Procurement - can say no but not yes)
- Cares about: Compliance, risk, contract terms, data privacy, vendor viability
- Fears: Approving something that causes a breach, audit failure, or legal issue
- Content: Security whitepapers, compliance certifications, SOC2/ISO docs, legal terms
- Meeting style: Checklist-driven. Needs specific answers to specific questions.
- Messaging angle: Risk mitigation and compliance

### Persona Card Quality Checklist

Before finalizing a persona card, verify:
- [ ] Goals are stated in their language, not marketing language
- [ ] Fears are real (validated by customer/rep interviews), not assumed
- [ ] Trigger events are observable and actionable by SDRs
- [ ] Value statement would resonate if you read it to someone in this role
- [ ] Proof points come from a company/role they'd identify with
- [ ] Objection responses address the real concern, not a straw man
- [ ] Language section captures genuine terminology differences

---

## 3. Value Proposition Frameworks

### The Value Prop Stack

For each persona, build a stack of value propositions at three altitudes:

**Strategic value** (for economic buyers and executives):
"[Product] enables [strategic outcome] by [mechanism], resulting in [business metric improvement]."
Example: "Fleet enables IT organizations to consolidate their device management stack, reducing tool overlap costs by an average of $200K annually while gaining cross-platform visibility they didn't have before."

**Operational value** (for managers and team leads):
"[Product] helps your team [operational improvement] by [capability], saving [time/effort metric]."
Example: "Fleet gives your IT team a single pane of glass across macOS, Windows, and Linux, eliminating the 10+ hours per week your team spends switching between Jamf, Intune, and manual scripts."

**Technical value** (for engineers and technical evaluators):
"[Product] [technical capability] using [architectural approach], which means [technical benefit]."
Example: "Fleet uses osquery under the hood and manages infrastructure as code through GitOps workflows, which means your device configs are version-controlled, peer-reviewed, and instantly rollback-able - the same way you manage your production infrastructure."

### Value Prop Testing

Before deploying, test each value prop against these criteria:

| Test | Question | Pass/Fail |
|------|----------|-----------|
| Relevance | Would this persona care about this in their first meeting? | |
| Specificity | Could a competitor say the exact same thing? If yes, it's not differentiated. | |
| Credibility | Can we prove this with a customer example or data point? | |
| Clarity | Would someone outside our industry understand this in one read? | |
| Action | Does this create a reason to take the next step? | |

---

## 4. Competitive Battle Card Methodology

### Battle Card Development Process

**Step 1: Competitive Intelligence Gathering**

Sources ranked by reliability:
1. Customer interviews (won AND lost deals against this competitor)
2. AE field intelligence (what they hear in competitive deals)
3. Competitor's own website, docs, and pricing pages
4. G2/TrustRadius/Gartner Peer Insights reviews (filter for recent)
5. Job postings (reveal strategic direction and gaps)
6. Community discussions (Reddit, Slack communities, forums)
7. Analyst reports (Gartner, Forrester - if available)

**Step 2: Structured Analysis**

For each competitor, map:

```
STRENGTHS (honest):
  - [What they genuinely do well]
  - [Where their product/approach has real advantages]
  - [What their customers love about them]

WEAKNESSES (provable):
  - [Documented limitations - from reviews, lost deal analysis, product gaps]
  - [Strategic blind spots - markets/use cases they don't serve well]
  - [Customer complaints that appear consistently]

STRATEGIC DIRECTION:
  - [Where are they investing based on hiring, releases, messaging changes?]
  - [What market shifts threaten or benefit them?]

OUR DIFFERENTIATION:
  - [Where we genuinely outperform - with evidence]
  - [Scenarios where our approach is structurally better]
  - [Customer wins against this competitor - what tipped the deal]
```

**Step 3: Build the Landmine Questions**

Landmine questions are discovery questions that subtly expose competitor weaknesses without naming the competitor:

Formula: "How important is [capability they lack or do poorly] to your evaluation?"

Examples:
- "How important is it that you can self-host?" (vs. cloud-only competitor)
- "Do you need to manage Linux alongside Mac and Windows?" (vs. Mac-only competitor)
- "How do you handle configuration changes today - is version control important?" (vs. GUI-only competitor)

Rules:
- Never mention the competitor by name when setting landmines
- The question must be genuinely relevant to the buyer's needs
- If the answer is "that's not important to us," respect it - not every landmine hits

**Step 4: Build Talk Track Responses**

For each common competitive claim or comparison the prospect might raise:

```
WHEN THEY SAY: "[Competitor] has better [feature/capability]"

ACKNOWLEDGE: "That's fair - [Competitor] is strong in [area]."
  (Never deny a genuine strength. You lose credibility.)

REDIRECT: "The question is whether [related but different consideration]
  matters more for your specific situation."

PROVE: "[Customer in similar situation] evaluated both and chose us
  because [specific reason tied to the redirect]."

ADVANCE: "Want me to show you how that works in your environment?"
```

### Battle Card Maintenance

Battle cards go stale fast. Establish:
- Monthly review cycle (product marketing owns, sales contributes)
- Field intelligence submission process (Slack channel, form, or CRM field)
- Quarterly deep refresh (re-interview customers, re-analyze competitor)
- Trigger-based updates (competitor launches new product, changes pricing, major customer loss)

---

## 5. Sales Content Architecture

### Content Mapping Methodology

**Step 1: Define the axes**

Rows: Personas (from buying committee map)
Columns: Buying stages (Awareness → Consideration → Decision → Post-Sale)
Cells: Content pieces available for that intersection

**Step 2: Inventory existing content**

For each piece of content, classify:
- Target persona (who is this for?)
- Buying stage (when would someone consume this?)
- Format (blog, case study, whitepaper, one-pager, video, etc.)
- Quality (current, outdated, needs refresh?)
- Usage (is sales actually using this? Check CRM content tracking or ask reps.)

**Step 3: Identify gaps and priorities**

Gaps fall into three categories:
- **Critical gaps**: No content exists for a high-priority persona at a key buying stage. Example: no technical documentation for the DevOps evaluator during consideration stage.
- **Quality gaps**: Content exists but is outdated, off-message, or low quality.
- **Adoption gaps**: Good content exists but sales doesn't know about it or can't find it.

Prioritize: Critical gaps > Quality gaps > Adoption gaps.

### Content Format Selection Guide

| Stage | Best Formats | Why |
|-------|-------------|-----|
| Awareness | Blog posts, reports, community content, webinars | Education-focused, ungated, shareable |
| Consideration | Case studies, technical docs, comparison pages, ROI tools | Evaluation-focused, detailed, credible |
| Decision | Proposals, security docs, implementation guides, reference calls | Commitment-focused, risk-reducing |
| Post-Sale | Onboarding guides, best practice docs, community access | Adoption-focused, value-delivering |

### One-Pager Template

```
[HEADLINE - Outcome-focused, 8 words or fewer]

[SUBHEAD - Who this is for and what problem it solves]

THE CHALLENGE
[2-3 sentences describing the pain in the buyer's words]

THE APPROACH
[2-3 sentences on how your solution addresses it - mechanism, not features]

KEY OUTCOMES
• [Quantified result #1 - from a real customer]
• [Quantified result #2]
• [Quantified result #3]

CUSTOMER PROOF
"[Quote from a customer in a title the reader respects]"
- [Name], [Title], [Company]

[CTA - Next step: demo, assessment, resource link]

DESIGN NOTES:
- One page, front only (or front and back for technical audience)
- Company logo top-left, customer logos bottom
- Designed to be forwarded by the champion to internal stakeholders
- PDF format, under 2MB (so it doesn't get blocked by email filters)
```

---

## 6. B2B Copy Formulas

### Pain-Agitation-Solution (PAS)

Best for: Cold emails, ad copy, landing page headlines

```
PAIN: "[Persona] teams at companies like [type] are dealing with [pain]."
AGITATE: "This means [consequence]. And it's getting worse because [trend]."
SOLUTION: "[Product] solves this by [mechanism]. [Customer] saw [result]."
```

### Before-After-Bridge (BAB)

Best for: Case study intros, transformation narratives, proposal openings

```
BEFORE: "Before [product], [customer] was [situation]. They were [specific pain]."
AFTER: "Now, [customer] [improved state]. They've achieved [specific metric]."
BRIDGE: "The bridge was [product capability]. Here's how it works."
```

### Problem-Promise-Proof-Proposal (PPPP)

Best for: One-pagers, executive summaries, pitch openings

```
PROBLEM: "[The market/buyer] faces [challenge]. This costs [quantified impact]."
PROMISE: "[Product] [what it enables]. [Differentiation statement]."
PROOF: "[Customer] achieved [result]. [Second proof point]."
PROPOSAL: "[Next step]. [Timeline/effort expectation]. [Risk mitigation]."
```

### Feature-Advantage-Benefit (FAB) Translation

Use this to convert feature-speak into benefit-speak for each persona:

| Feature | Advantage | Benefit (IT Director) | Benefit (CISO) | Benefit (CFO) |
|---------|-----------|----------------------|-----------------|----------------|
| GitOps workflow | Config changes are version-controlled | Full audit trail; instant rollback if something breaks | Every change is peer-reviewed and traceable for compliance | Fewer incidents = less downtime cost |
| Cross-platform | One tool for Mac/Win/Linux | Eliminate 2-3 redundant tools | Consistent security posture across all OS | Consolidate tool spend |
| Self-hosted option | Customer controls data location | Meets air-gapped and sovereign data requirements | Data never leaves your infrastructure | No surprise cloud cost escalation |

---

## 7. Talk Track Design

### Discovery Talk Track

```
OPENING (set the frame):
"Thanks for making time. My goal for the next 30 minutes is to understand
your situation well enough to know if there's a fit - and to be honest if
there isn't. Sound fair?"

CURRENT STATE (understand what exists):
"Walk me through how your team manages devices today."
"What tools are you using?"
"How's that working? What's going well?"

PAIN IDENTIFICATION (find the gaps):
"If you could change one thing about your current setup, what would it be?"
"What's the business impact of that?"
"How long has this been a challenge?"

IMPACT QUANTIFICATION (make it tangible):
"Roughly how much time does your team spend on [pain area] per week?"
"What happens when [pain scenario] occurs? What's the blast radius?"

VISION (paint the better future):
"What would it look like if [pain] were solved?"
"How would that change things for your team / your leadership's confidence?"

QUALIFICATION (confirm fit):
"Who else would need to be involved in evaluating something like this?"
"Is there a timeline driving this, or is it more exploratory?"
"How are initiatives like this typically funded?"

NEXT STEP (advance the deal):
"Based on what you've shared, I think it's worth [specific next step].
Here's what that would look like: [describe]. Does that make sense?"
```

### Competitive Talk Track

```
WHEN ASKED "WHY NOT [COMPETITOR]?":
"[Competitor] is a strong option, especially for [their genuine strength].
Where our customers tend to choose us is when [differentiation scenario].

For example, [customer name] was evaluating both, and what tipped the
decision was [specific differentiator]. They've since [outcome].

The best way to see if that applies to you is [next step]."

WHEN ASKED "HOW ARE YOU DIFFERENT FROM [COMPETITOR]?":
"The biggest difference is [approach/philosophy difference, not feature].

In practice, that means [concrete capability difference]. For your
situation - [reference what you learned in discovery] - that matters
because [connect to their specific pain].

Want me to walk through a specific comparison for your use case?"
```

---

## 8. Case Study Framework

### Structure

```
HEADLINE: [Quantified result - e.g., "How [Company] Reduced Device
  Incidents by 60% While Cutting Tool Costs by $180K"]

CUSTOMER SNAPSHOT:
  Company: [Name, industry, size]
  Challenge: [1 sentence]
  Solution: [1 sentence]
  Result: [Key metric]

THE CHALLENGE (2-3 paragraphs):
  - What was the situation before?
  - What pain were they experiencing? (Specific, quantified)
  - What triggered the search for a new solution?
  - What were they using before?

THE EVALUATION (1-2 paragraphs):
  - What options did they consider?
  - What criteria mattered most?
  - Why did they choose you? (In their words)

THE IMPLEMENTATION (1-2 paragraphs):
  - How did rollout work?
  - Timeline and effort required
  - Any surprises or challenges (honesty builds credibility)

THE RESULTS (2-3 paragraphs):
  - Quantified outcomes (at least 2-3 metrics)
  - Qualitative improvements (team satisfaction, confidence)
  - Unexpected benefits

CUSTOMER QUOTE:
  "[Compelling quote from a senior title]"
  - [Name], [Title], [Company]

SIDEBAR: KEY METRICS
  [Metric 1]: [Before] → [After]
  [Metric 2]: [Before] → [After]
  [Metric 3]: [Before] → [After]
```

### Case Study Selection Criteria

Prioritize case studies that:
- Feature a company your target personas would recognize and respect
- Involve a competitive displacement (strongest selling tool)
- Include hard metrics (not just "we're happy")
- Have a champion willing to be named and quoted
- Cover your top 1-2 ICP segments

---

## 9. Messaging Audit Process

### How to Audit Existing Messaging

**Step 1: Collect everything**
Gather: website copy, pitch decks, email templates, one-pagers, battle cards, case studies, demo scripts, proposal templates, social media messaging.

**Step 2: Score each asset**

| Dimension | Question | Score 1-5 |
|-----------|----------|-----------|
| Persona alignment | Is it written for a specific persona or "everyone"? | |
| Stage alignment | Is it clear what buying stage this serves? | |
| Differentiation | Could a competitor say the same thing? | |
| Proof | Is there evidence supporting the claims? | |
| Freshness | Is the content current (within 6 months)? | |
| Usage | Is sales actually using this? | |

**Step 3: Categorize**
- Keep (score 20+): Asset is effective and current
- Refresh (score 14-19): Core is good, needs updating
- Replace (score 8-13): Fundamentally off, rebuild from scratch
- Retire (score <8): Delete - it's doing more harm than good

**Step 4: Gap analysis**
Map surviving assets to the Content Map (persona × stage). Identify critical gaps where no usable content exists.

---

## 10. Testing and Validation

### Message Testing Hierarchy

| Method | Speed | Reliability | Best For |
|--------|-------|-------------|----------|
| Sales team gut check | 1 day | Low-medium | Quick filter - does this feel right? |
| A/B test in outreach | 2-4 weeks | Medium-high | Subject lines, email angles, CTAs |
| Customer interviews | 1-2 weeks | High | Value props, positioning, language |
| Win/loss analysis | Ongoing | Highest | Which messages actually win deals |

### Quick Validation Process

Before deploying new messaging:
1. Show it to 3 top-performing reps. Ask: "Would you use this? Would your buyer recognize themselves?"
2. Show it to 2 recent customers. Ask: "Does this describe your experience? What would you change?"
3. If both groups say yes, deploy. If not, iterate.

### Ongoing Message Optimization

Track these metrics to measure messaging effectiveness:
- Email reply rates by message variant (A/B testing)
- Meeting conversion rate by talk track used
- Competitive win rate changes after battle card deployment
- Content usage by sales (are they actually using the assets?)
- Win/loss reasons that cite messaging factors
