Talking with our sales team yesterday, a recurring theme was the experience they’re having with sellers using “summarise” functions in AI tools. Especially the one‑click, buttonised versions baked into platforms. On paper, these are great for speed as sellers don’t have to type notes, they just hit “Summarise” and move on.
The pattern we’re seeing, though, is that a lot of nuance gets lost. When a seller presses a generic summarise button, they’re usually not adding any context about the opportunity, stakeholder dynamics, methodology (MEDDICC, SPIN, etc.), or what “good” looks like in their environment. Unsurprisingly, we end up with summaries that are fast but shallow.
From an enablement perspective, that creates some interesting challenges:
-
If sellers and managers start operating primarily off AI summaries, any distortion in those summaries becomes a second‑order enablement problem as coaching is based on partial reality, pipeline reviews miss key context, and training content calibrates against noisy data.
-
At the same time, summarisation clearly has upside in as much as call notes synced to CRM, quick recap emails, digestible deal histories – so “turn it off” doesn’t feel like the right answer either.
I’ve written a LinkedIn piece on this, but I’d really like to hear what other enablement leaders are doing in practice.
Would love to hear specific practices, policies or even horror stories if you’re willing to share them. It feels like one of those areas where enablement has to actively shape how AI is used, not just accept whatever the tools ship by default.
