Battle Card Teardown: Real Call Language or Consultant Copy?
Objective: Given two synthetic battle cards claiming to be built from Gong-style call data, identify which claims are properly sourced from call evidence and which are unsupported, overreaching, or a compliance risk.
You're reviewing battle cards submitted by two regional PMMs at Go Digit General Insurance ahead of a renewal-season campaign. Both claim to be 'built from call intelligence data.'
A battle card citing revenue-intelligence data needs a call count, a specific quote, and a compliant way of using it. Spot the ones that don't.
Before you start
What you'll need
Free path (everything below is enough to finish)
Free, a simple 2-column scoring table is enough
The process
Specimens to review
Score each of the 4 claims: is it properly sourced from call data, and is it safe to publish externally?
BATTLE CARD: Motor Insurance Renewal vs. [Competitor] Claim 1: 'Customers say our claim settlement is faster.' (source: general market perception) Claim 2: '92% of calls mention our app is easier to use.' (source: Q2 call analysis, 340 calls) Claim 3: Direct quote from a customer call: 'Their app crashed twice during my claim, yours didn't' — [Customer full name], [phone number], March 2026 call Claim 4: 'We win against [Competitor] whenever price comes up first.' (source: Q2 call analysis, deals where price mentioned in first 2 minutes, 61% close rate vs. 38% baseline)
Specimen: synthetic, realistic
Score each of the 4 claims: is it properly sourced from call data, and is it safe to publish externally?
BATTLE CARD: Health Insurance Cross-Sell Claim 1: 'In 28 calls where agents raised pre-existing condition coverage in the first call, 19 converted (68% close rate) vs. 31% baseline across all calls this quarter.' Claim 2: 'Anonymized quote from a converted customer: "I switched because the pre-existing condition waiting period was shorter than my current insurer's."' Claim 3: 'This works because our product is better.' Claim 4: 'Competitor mentioned by name in 40% of these 28 calls; buyers specifically compared waiting periods.'
Specimen: synthetic, realistic
Final deliverable
A scored teardown of both battle cards with every unsourced, overreaching, or non-compliant claim flagged and a one-line fix for each.
See a reference example
Battle card review, Acko General Insurance renewal campaign FLAGGED (3): - Claim 2: no call count, remove or find the source calls - Claim 5: contains customer PII, anonymize before this leaves the internal folder - Claim 7: mention count without outcome tie, reframe or drop CLEARED (4): claims 1, 3, 4, 6 each cite a call count and, where relevant, an outcome delta.
Success criteria
You're done when you can:
- Correctly flags the unsourced claim in Card A
- Correctly flags the PII compliance breach in Card A
- Does not falsely flag Card B's well-sourced claims as defects