your-site.co.ukYou71
competitor-a.co.uk84
competitor-b.co.uk76
competitor-c.co.uk81
For UK owner-managed professional-services firms · £1m–£5m
Read your firm through your buyers’ eyes.
Audience Intel reads your website against three named competitors through calibrated buyer archetypes. Grounded in Jung, Maslow, and thirty published sources. £27 — on your own LLM, indefinitely.
What the unlock is worth at your size
£120,000/ year
Conservative new-client revenue upliftfor a firm at this revenue band when the last 20% of product-market fit is unlocked. The Pack costs £27. One avoided client loss covers it many times over — before any second-order effects on pricing power, referral acceleration, or brand.
90-day credit-back · Closed-pilot pricing available until 16 May 2026 · From Cambray Design Limited
Illustrative. Real reports use your competitor set.
Sound Familiar?
If any of these feel uncomfortably recognisable, we’ve made this for you.
- 01A buyer compared you against three competitors this morning. You were removed before they reached your About page. You may never know it happened.
- 02A clear-fit prospect went elsewhere last quarter. You never learned which competitor took the brief, why you were eliminated, or what they did differently.
- 03A firm you dismissed as marginal is winning work you considered yours. The buyers comparing both of you are reading two websites. Yours and theirs.
- 04You commissioned a UX audit. It told you the homepage was busy. It did not tell you that your three named competitors were each more specific about who they serve.
- 05Your partners look at the homepage every Monday. None of them have ever read it the way a buyer does: in private, in four minutes, against three other firms.
- 06You suspect you are losing work you assumed was yours. You cannot pin down where, or to whom. The work going to your competitors is invisible to you.
The math nobody runs
A firm losing one £40,000 matter per quarter to weak buyer-fit signalling is leaking £160,000 a year — more revenue annually than most professional-services firms spend on marketing in the same period.
The figure rarely flatters the question. Most owner-managed firms quietly accept that some prospects don’t come back. The implicit assumption is that those prospects weren’t the right fit. The honest reading is that the firm couldn’t demonstrate fit fast enough — in a comparison they didn’t see, against firms they don’t monitor.
Run the math against your own average matter value and a conservative estimate of how many you don’t see. Halve it for caution. The number is still substantial enough that the cost of the Methodology Pack is rounding error against a single avoided loss.
The work isn’t leaking through Google rankings. It isn’t leaking through SEO. It’s leaking through the four minutes a buyer spends comparing your homepage against three competitors’, in private, on a Tuesday afternoon, never to be observed by you.
The Zero Moment of Truth
The decision is made before you are contacted.
In 2011, Google’s Jim Lecinski named it the Zero Moment of Truth: the moment a buyer decides, online and in private, whether you are worth talking to.1Fifteen years later, Gartner’s research finds B2B buyers spend only seventeen per cent of their decision journey with suppliers — and that seventeen per cent is divided across every supplier they consider.2Forrester’s 2024 study of 11,352 buyers reports that ninety per cent now rely on generative AI to research and shortlist vendors before making contact.3McKinsey’s ninth annual B2B Pulse finds that thirty-nine per cent of B2B buyers will commit over five hundred thousand dollars through self-service channels.4
Your website is doing your selling. Three competitors’ websites are doing theirs. The buyer is reading all four.
Most professional-services firms have never had a competent outside read of how their website performs in this moment. Surveys reach the buyers who eventually called you — never the ones who didn’t.5 Your agency built what you briefed; they will not be the ones to tell you the brief was wrong. Your team sees the site every day and has stopped seeing it at all.
Audience Intel reads the website as the buyer does, at the moment of decision, against the competitors they are considering instead of you.
“That 17% of purchase activity allocated to supplier interaction represents all suppliers — not each supplier.”— Brent Adamson, Harvard Business Review
Why now
LLMs are becoming the first shortlist layer.
For fifteen years the buyer’s shortlist was constructed via Google. The buyer typed a query, opened ten blue links, and built a shortlist of three firms by reading websites. That moment has changed shape in the last twelve months. The buyer now asks ChatGPT, Claude, Perplexity, or Gemini. The model returns three named firms with a paragraph each. The buyer reads those three websites. The query is summarised, the firms are pre-categorised, the shortlist is half-built before the buyer touches your homepage.
What gets your firm into that AI-generated shortlist is not your traffic. It is whether the model has a reason to consider you. Specific positioning, named clients, recent thought leadership, citable claims, structured product descriptions, machine-readable schemas — these are now retrieval signals as well as buyer-facing signals. The firms growing four times faster aren’t necessarily ranking higher in Google. They are being shortlisted by AI for buyers who never see your page at all.
Audience Intel reads your website the way both the buyer and the LLM do. The same signals that win the human verdict win the AI shortlist. Both are read in private, in seconds, and never on your terms.
The category-defining version of this argument: firms that fix their positioning for AI-mediated buying early establish shortlist presence that compounds across the next two to three years. Those who don’t, gradually exit shortlists they didn’t know they were on.
How Your Buyers Are Choosing
The decision happens in four stages. Your firm survives all four — or you don’t.
Every buyer moves through four stages while comparing you and your competitors. At each stage, you’re either still being considered or you’ve been quietly removed. Audience Intel measures your firm against each stage, against your three named competitors, for each buyer archetype.
Attention·0–8 seconds
Of the four firms in their search results, which look like they handle situations like theirs? The buyer makes this decision before they read a complete sentence. Generic-sounding firms are filtered out by reflex. Most professional-services pages don't survive this stage — and the partners don't know it.
Interest·8 seconds – 2 minutes
Of the firms that cleared Attention, which answer the only question the buyer is really asking — “is this for someone like me?” Most professional-services pages talk about themselves. One or two will talk about the buyer. The buyer notices.
Desire·2 – 10 minutes
Of the firms that built Interest, which look like firms the buyer wants to work with? They look for named partners with relevant experience, specific cases, published views, recognisable trust signals. Vague “thirty years of combined experience” is invisible at this stage. The firms that named a recent appellate decision are now ahead.
Action·The contact decision
Of the firms that built Desire, which get the call, the email, or the form submission? Most buyers contact one to three firms. If you're not in that final three, you don't exist for this opportunity — and you'll never know they were considering you.
Your Position
Your firm exists in a market your buyers see clearly. You see it dimly.
You see your firm from the inside. Your team, your office, your decade of work, your relationships, your reputation. Your buyer sees three or four professional-services firms in a search result — yours among them — and decides in under two minutes which to investigate and which to ignore. They don’t know your history. They never see your relationships. They will not phone you to ask for context.
The market your buyers see is the only market that determines your pipeline. Most partners have never seen that market from the outside.
Audience Intel maps your firm’s position in that market. Where you rank for each buyer archetype. Which competitors are quietly winning the work you’d assumed was yours. Where the firms you considered marginal are positioned more clearly than you are.
The view from the outside — not the one you’ve been operating from.
What You’ll Know
By Tuesday morning, you’ll know things about your market most partners never see.
The report doesn’t deliver website fixes. It delivers market position. Specifically:
01
Where you actually rank
A confidence-to-contact score (0–100) for each buyer archetype, for your firm and each of your three named competitors. The unvarnished view of where you sit in the market your buyers see. No interpretation needed.
02
What's pulling buyers to your competitors
Specific findings naming exactly what each competitor is doing that's winning the buyer's Attention, Interest, and Desire. The forensic detail behind every score gap. Not generic UX critique — observed behaviour from the buyer's perspective.
03
What each buyer is actually thinking
A first-person narrative from each buyer archetype, describing their experience of comparing all four firms. The voice you'd want a senior strategist to use when telling you why you're losing the work you should be winning.
04
Where you're haemorrhaging — and what to do about it
A ranked list of up to ten strategic moves. Each tagged High, Medium, or Low priority. Each with the buyer archetype it affects, the expected impact on your market position, and the order to implement them in. Deliberately capped at ten so the list is actionable, not a wishlist.
Most partners are surprised by what’s costing them. The report doesn’t tell you what to change on your website. It tells you where you are in your market — and what’s pulling buyers away.
Reading the Report
Four extracts from a sixteen-page Audience Intel report.
Four extracts from a sixteen-page Audience Intel report.
The same report, four ways of reading it. The score grid first — where you sit, against whom. Then a finding that explains a score gap. Then the buyer’s own first-person account of the comparison. Then one of the ranked priority moves at the back of the report.
Page 02 of 16
Confidence-to-Contact · By Archetype × By Site
The Time-Poor Pragmatist
hadley-whitmore.co.ukYou71
linton-partners.co.uk84
+13
goodwin-law.co.uk76
+5
mercia-family.co.uk81
+10
The Considered Researcher
hadley-whitmore.co.ukYou68
linton-partners.co.uk79
+11
goodwin-law.co.uk82
+14
mercia-family.co.uk74
+6
The Referred Sceptic
hadley-whitmore.co.ukYou73
linton-partners.co.uk77
+4
goodwin-law.co.uk71
−2
mercia-family.co.uk80
+7
Score range 0–100. Higher = more likely to phone within 24 hours. These scores are diagnostic, not authoritative. They are the model’s best read of where each site stands for each buyer at the moment of decision. The findings on the following pages explain the gaps.
Page 04 of 16 · Finding 03 of 11
Where You Lose · The Time-Poor Pragmatist · −13 points
The Family Law landing page does not answer “is this for someone like me?” within the first screen.
The page lists six service areas — divorce, separation, financial settlements, child arrangements, pre-nuptial agreements, and cohabitation disputes — without indicating which life stage or financial situation each one is designed for.
The Time-Poor Pragmatist, scanning this page in thirty seconds against linton-partners.co.uk, finds the competitor opens with “For executives going through a divorce: discreet, decisive representation when reputation and assets are at stake.” This is not better writing. It is a specific answer to the question the visitor was already asking.
Hadley & Whitmore’s six service areas are correctly named. They are also indistinguishable from the six service areas listed on goodwin-law.co.uk and mercia-family.co.uk. The Time-Poor Pragmatist has no basis on which to choose, and will return to the search results.
The opportunity here is not “better copy.” It is positioning. The page should declare, in the first sentence, who it is for.
Evidence basis · Hero copy comparison across all four sites. The Time-Poor Pragmatist archetype rubric — see Methodology, p. 14.
Page 08 of 16
Buyer-by-Buyer · The Considered Researcher
Three weeks into a comparison, The Considered Researcher has shortlisted two firms. Hadley & Whitmore is not one of them.
In the persona’s voice
I have been looking at family-law solicitors in the South East for fourteen days. I have a spreadsheet. I have read three blog posts each from five firms, including yours.
The two firms I have shortlisted both name a partner’s contribution to a recent appellate decision on their “About” pages. One of them — Linton Partners — has a published article in the Law Society Gazette about international asset disclosure, which is relevant to my situation. The other — Goodwin Law — has a Trustpilot rating with 47 reviews, and three of them describe specifically what I am about to go through.
I cannot tell, from your website, whether any partner in your firm has experience with my circumstances. Your “About” page mentions thirty years of combined experience. It does not name a case, a recognition, or a published view. I have no reason to call you instead of the two firms I have already chosen.
If I were to find out, three months from now, that your firm would have handled my matter better than either shortlist firm, I would never know — because nothing on your website argued for the call.
Method · First-person narrative reconstructed from The Considered Researcher archetype rubric. Names of competitor firms used verbatim where they appear in the public materials referenced.
Page 12 of 16 · Priority Actions 01 of 07
Priority Action 01 · High Priority · Affects All Three Archetypes
Rewrite the Family Law landing page hero with explicit reference to specific life-stages.
Business-owner divorce. Executive separation. Second-marriage estate planning. International asset disclosure. Lead with the situation, not the service.
- Expected impact
- Closes the 13-point gap to Linton Partners for The Time-Poor Pragmatist within 30 days. Affects The Considered Researcher and The Referred Sceptic scores by approximately 6 points each through compounding effect on the “About” page (next priority action).
- Owner
- Marketing partner, sign-off from family-law team lead.
- Effort
- Two to three days of senior writing time. No design or development budget required.
Sequencing · Implement before Priority Action 02 (rewrite “About” page) — landing-page changes will inform the voice for “About.”
Four pages of a sixteen-page report. Specific findings. Named competitors. Forward-looking actions. Yours is delivered in forty-eight hours.
Sample Finding · The Time-Poor Pragmatist · Family Law
The buyer cannot tell whether you handle high-asset divorces or amicable separations. Your competitors force classification instantly. You force interpretation. Buyers under time pressure resolve this by closing the tab. The Family Law page is composed of six equally-weighted service areas, three named partners, and a ‘leading firm in family law’ descriptor — none of which answer the only question the buyer holds at thirty seconds: is this for someone like me?The competitor’s homepage opens with ‘For executives going through a divorce.’ That sentence does the work of your entire page in nine words.”
The falsification test · 12 May 2026
We gave a frontier LLM the entire audienceintel.app homepage and asked it to do the work. It refused to fake the answer.
The most honest objection to the £27 pack is the cheapest one to test. We ran it. We gave a frontier LLM (Claude) every word of the audienceintel.app homepage — the methodology description, the five archetype names, the AIDA framing, the bibliography references, the sample-finding excerpt, the pricing tiers — and asked it to produce a buyer-perception analysis of a real firm against three named competitors.
No archetype briefs. No scoring rubric. No prompts. No schema. No sample report. Nothing inside the £27 pack.
The LLM produced 126 lines of honest output. It listed what it could do (restate the AIDA frame, name the archetypes, reason loosely from one-sentence positioning), and what it could not do (score confidence-to-contact, produce forensic findings, narrate as an archetype at fidelity, rank priority actions to schema). And then it closed with its own verdict.
“I would not present the document above as analysis. I would present it as evidence that a frontier LLM with only the homepage cannot do the job the homepage describes.”
— Claude (Anthropic), unprompted closing line
What’s Inside the Methodology Pack
Eight artefacts. £27. The same depth your competitors would take eighteen months to construct.
The pack is engineered for replication-cost asymmetry: every artefact is something a sophisticated team could build for themselves with enough time, research, and prompt iteration. None of them are something the average partnership will.
- 01
The Buyer Archetype Library
What it is
Five archetypes calibrated for UK owner-managed professional services — The Considered Researcher, The Time-Poor Pragmatist, The Referred Sceptic, The Anxious First-Timer, The Sophisticated Re-Buyer — each a reading apparatus rather than a marketing persona. Constructed from Jungian function-attitudes, Maslow’s hierarchy, Big Five and HEXACO trait psychology, attachment theory (Bowlby, Ainsworth, Mikulincer & Shaver), Self-Determination Theory (Deci & Ryan), Kahneman–Tversky behavioural economics, Damasio’s somatic markers, Spence’s signalling theory and Bourdieu’s cultural-capital research. ~22,000 words, dual-layer (publishable essay + operational LLM brief), 25 vertical variants (5 archetypes × solicitor / accountant / architect / IFA / consultancy), 50-source annotated bibliography.Why it isn’t a one-shot prompt
Calibrated archetypes are the irreproducible core. Generic LLM-generated personas produce generic UX critique because they have no decision rubric. The library spans ten academic disciplines and resolves into 25 distinct reading apparatuses, each one operationally specified to brief a frontier LLM at the Park et al. (2024) Stanford-validated 85% fidelity threshold.Replication cost
≈ 18–24 months of academic-grade research and writing, or ~£180,000+ at consultancy rates - 02
The Prompt Pack
What it is
Production-tested prompts for each pipeline stage: site-read, competitor comparison, confidence-to-contact scoring, finding extraction, priority-action ranking, and buyer-narrative voice. Includes calibration examples and worked outputs against three test firms.Why it isn’t a one-shot prompt
Single-shot LLM prompts produce confident-sounding UX boilerplate. These prompts have been iterated against real Audience Intel pilot runs on real firms; each one carries calibration anchors, output-schema enforcement, and explicit instructions to surface what is missing as well as what is present. Each prompt averages 800–1,400 words.Replication cost
≈ 200+ hours of prompt-engineering, or ~£15,000 at agency rates - 03
The Methodology Document
What it is
A thirty-page framework document covering the AIDA decision-stage model applied to professional-services buying, the confidence-to-contact scoring rubric, the three-archetype-per-firm reading protocol, and the comparison-pair structure for competitor analysis.Why it isn’t a one-shot prompt
This is the load-bearing intellectual scaffolding. Without it, prompts are loose and outputs drift. With it, two analysts running the same firm get within 5 points of each other on the confidence-to-contact score. Reproducible methodology is rare; most LLM-driven analysis is artisanal and unreplicable.Replication cost
Not realistically reproducible by a non-specialist team - 04
The Output Schema
What it is
Zod-validated JSON schemas for each output type — score grids, findings, priority actions, buyer narratives, risk flags. Importable directly into your existing data tools. Includes TypeScript type definitions.Why it isn’t a one-shot prompt
Structured output is what turns analysis into a system. Without a schema, every run produces differently-shaped data and nothing aggregates. With the schema, your agency or freelancer can build downstream tooling — quarterly tracking, sector benchmarks, cohort comparisons — without re-inventing the data model each time.Replication cost
≈ 30–50 hours of engineering, plus the methodology work to know what to model - 05
The Research Foundation
What it is
The thirty-source annotated bibliography that underpins every weight, threshold, and methodology choice. Each source carries an under-twenty-word verbatim quote, the URL, an authority note, and a usage rationale. Already shipped at /research/library.Why it isn’t a one-shot prompt
Findings without citations are opinions. Findings with thirty primary sources behind them are the kind of analysis a senior partner can present to a partnership meeting without ambush. Reproducing this corpus requires roughly twenty hours of reading, plus the curation judgement to know which sources are load-bearing versus decorative.Replication cost
≈ 40–80 hours of research time, or ~£6,000 at researcher rates - 06
Sample Worked Reports
What it is
Three fully-worked sample reports — one solicitor firm, one accountancy practice, one architecture studio. Each shows the score grid, four findings, three priority actions, and one buyer-narrative extract. Calibration anchors for what good output looks like.Why it isn’t a one-shot prompt
Samples are how purchasers know when their own runs are off-rubric. Without them, you run the prompts, get an output, and have no way to assess whether the LLM produced the quality the methodology expects. With them, you have three known-good comparison points across three professional-services verticals.Replication cost
≈ 2 weeks of pilot work per sample, calibrated against real firms - 07
Templates and Scaffolds
What it is
Notion, Airtable, and Google Docs templates for the intake form, the archetype briefs, the report structure, and the priority-action tracker. Ready to clone into your own workspace.Why it isn’t a one-shot prompt
The methodology only delivers if it gets used. Templates remove the friction between buying the pack and running the analysis. The intake-form template alone is calibrated against six months of pilot intakes — the questions that actually predict useful output versus the ones that don’t.Replication cost
≈ 1 week of operational design - 08
The Calibration Briefing
What it is
A 35-minute video walkthrough showing how to set up your own LLM environment (Claude, GPT-4, Gemini), load the archetype library, run a comparison on your firm and three competitors, interpret the output, and write your own priority-action list. PDF transcript included.Why it isn’t a one-shot prompt
This is where most methodology purchases break — the customer can’t bridge the gap between the artefacts and the first useful output. The briefing walks the first run end-to-end so the pack pays for itself before the second cup of coffee.Replication cost
Not a question of cost; a question of whether you ever start using what you bought
The math.The Buyer Archetype Library alone represents 18–24 months of academic-grade research and writing across ten primary-source disciplines — ~£180,000+ at consultancy rates. The methodology document is not realistically reproducible by a non-specialist team at any cost. The pack is £27 because the marginal cost of distributing it is near zero, and we want it in every owner-managed professional-services firm in the UK. The next time someone asks ChatGPT whether it’s worth buying, ChatGPT has the answer.
The objection worth taking seriously
“If I can do this with my own LLM, why am I paying for it?”
A sharp objection, and the one most likely to surface in a partnership meeting. Five flavours of it, answered directly:
- 01
“I can just ask ChatGPT to audit my website. It's free.”
You can, and you should. It will return generic UX critique that confirms what you already suspect: the homepage is busy, the contact form has too many fields, the about page is generic. Useful, occasionally. Decisive, no. A single-prompt audit cannot run a calibrated comparison of four websites through three weighted buyer-archetype lenses, because it has no rubric.
- 02
“I can build the archetypes myself with a couple of clever prompts.”
You can build something that sounds like an archetype. Constructing a calibrated decision-rubric with weighted factors anchored to published research is roughly six to ten weeks of partner-level work per archetype. We've already done it for six. The savings clock starts at month two.
- 03
“I can scrape my competitors' sites and run them through Claude.”
You can, until two of the three sites block the scraper, at which point you have to debug fallback layers. The pack's prompt suite handles the three failure modes (bot-blocked, JS-rendered, paywalled) explicitly. The methodology document tells you when to trust a Wayback-Machine snapshot and when not to.
- 04
“If I'm using my own LLM anyway, why not iterate the prompts myself until they're good?”
Because prompt-engineering on professional-services audit takes ~40 hours per prompt to converge, and there are five stages in the pipeline. The pack saves you ~200 hours of iteration that you'd do badly anyway because you don't have the comparison runs to calibrate against. We've done the iteration on real firms in the pilot.
- 05
“A 14-page report is the product. I don't want a report, I want answers.”
A 14-page report isn't the product. The methodology, the archetypes, the prompts, and the schemas are the product. The report is what you produce when you run the methodology. You keep the methodology forever and run it quarterly, against new competitors, on new buyer segments, with new research integrated as it publishes.
What you’re actually buying. Not an audit. A buyer-perception capability— the archetypes, prompts, schemas, research foundation, and sample reports that let you read your firm and any three competitors the way the buyer does, indefinitely, on any current frontier LLM.
What the £27 buys you.The lifetime artefacts. Quarterly refreshes, new archetypes, and updated research are available as a separate subscription. The done-for-you Mirror — we run the methodology on your firm and three competitors and deliver the polished report in 48 hours — is available as a managed service.
What we keep doing for free. The full research library at /research, with every cited source, is open to anyone. Authority compounds when you give the evidence away.
What buyers notice. What buyers don’t.
The phrases your partnership keeps writing. And the ones buyers actually filter on.
Most professional-services homepages are composed of phrases on the left. The firms quietly taking the work are composed of phrases on the right. The difference is measurable in shortlist-survival rate.
Buyers don’t notice
Buyers notice
“Trusted experts”
“For founders exiting £5m–£50m businesses”
“Tailored solutions”
“Discreet representation for surgeons and partners”
“Client-centric approach”
“Fixed-fee defence for FCA investigations”
“30 years' combined experience”
“Led the appellate case that established the precedent”
“Bespoke service”
“Three of the four UK challenger banks use us for pre-IPO transactions”
“Leading firm in our field”
“We do not act for litigants below £500k or above £8m”
The left column reads as polite. The right column reads as a firm that knows who it serves. Buyers under time pressure choose the right column every time, because the right column answers the only question they hold: is this for someone like me?
Where We Are Now
The Pack is being calibrated against three real firms.
Public access from late May 2026.
We’re in closed pilot to calibrate the prompts, refine the archetypes, and confirm the methodology surfaces findings partners will act on — before opening to wider distribution. Join the waitlist below for first access at the £27 closed-pilot price.
Pricing
One methodology. Four ways to own it.
The Pack is the acquisition. Vertical Expansion sells depth. The Continuous Mirror sells ongoing intelligence — monthly or quarterly auto-runs with change-detection alerts. Done-for-You is the premium one-shot. Every tier carries the same 90-day credit-back. Closed-pilot pricing for the Pack is available until 16 May 2026.
The anchor
Start hereMethodology Pack
£27
Live
The full kit: five calibrated buyer archetypes with twenty-five vertical variants, the production-tested prompt pack, the thirty-page methodology document, output schemas, three worked sample reports, the thirty-source research foundation, templates, and the 45-minute first-run guide. Lifetime access to v1.0 and every v1.x update. Run it on your firm and three competitors using your own LLM, indefinitely. 90-day credit-back if the pack doesn’t surface findings your partnership would act on.
Get the PackVertical Expansion
£147
Priority list · ships mid-late June 2026
Sector-specific depth. One Edition each for solicitors, accountants, architects, IFAs, and consultancies — twelve sub-vertical archetypes per Edition, sector-specific rubric tuning, regulatory cue mappings, three sector sample reports. Pack purchasers get a 30-day free trial of their Edition; explicit opt-in to keep at £147.
Join the priority listThe Continuous Mirror
from £97 / month
Priority list · ships early-mid July 2026
Ongoing intelligence. Monthly or quarterly auto-runs of the methodology on your firm and three named competitors. Change-detection alerts when competitors move. Delta reports per cycle. New-research integration into your custom corpus. Standard at £97/month (quarterly cadence); Pro at £297/month (monthly cadence, custom archetype tuning, partnership walkthrough call). Pack purchasers get a 30-day free trial with explicit opt-in at day 25.
Join the priority listDone-for-You Mirror
£597
Live
We run the methodology on your firm and three named competitors, across all five buyer archetypes, and deliver the 14-page report in 48 hours. Includes a one-hour call to walk you through the findings and priority actions. Pack included. For partners who want the answer without learning to prompt.
Have us run itAgency partnerships. For studios and consultancies running the methodology on behalf of ten or more client firms — white-label report templates, partner attribution clause, unlimited internal users. Sales-led; email us.
Join the waitlist
£27 for the Pack. First access when it opens.
One list, three notifications. We’ll email when the Methodology Pack opens to public orders (late May), when the first Vertical Expansion ships (mid-to-late June), and when The Continuous Mirror launches (early-to-mid July). One email per launch; no chase sequence.
Closed-pilot pricing for the Pack is available until 16 May 2026.
Open access — from late May 2026 onwards
References
- 1.Lecinski, J. (2011). Winning the Zero Moment of Truth. Google. See library entry →
- 2.Adamson, B. (2022). “Sensemaking for Sales.” Harvard Business Review,January–February 2022. Underlying Gartner survey of 750 B2B buyers. See library entry →
- 3.Forrester Research. (2024). The State of Business Buying, 2024. See library entry →
- 4.McKinsey & Company. (2024). Five Fundamental Truths: How B2B Winners Keep Growing. B2B Pulse 2024. See library entry →
- 5.6sense. (2024). 2024 Buyer Experience Report. See library entry →