Recently I was talking with Harish Mohan, president of Narvar* and former Battery executive-in-residence about the rise of AI agents. We riffed that it seems at many B2B vendor websites we visit, we’re met with the companies’ AI agent—Jack, or Missy or Sam.

We both find these agents great. They collect all the necessary information from visitors like questions about the product, use cases, pricing, competitors and so on. While the AI agent is fielding my inquiries and collecting information for the vendor, it’s providing me with answers back while training itself to do these tasks better. Some agents then initiate actions: Do I want to see a demo, get pricing, or speak to a live person? And some queue all that up within the chatbot or interface I’m in.

I love this!

As a potential buyer, I really don’t want to go through the onerous process of contacting three vendors to get a demo, which starts with filling out a form and then waiting for an SDR to contact me. That initiates the old/current process in which I’m 1) placed into a nurture campaign, 2) forced into an inquisition by the SDR, and then 3) passed to a sales rep. But it doesn’t end there: 4) The sales rep then cross-examines me, asking many of the same questions that the SDR did previously, then 5) introduces a sales engineer to the mix, and 6) finally schedules a demo.

This experience stinks. I don’t want to go through the “buyer’s journey” that the vendor decided was right for me. I want to go through my journey and get the information I want, when I am seeking it. AI agents are the gateway to enabling such customization, so bring it on. I’m a fan.

And yet, there’s still something missing here. Companies and vendors are creating agents or personas that represent the company’s side of things. But what about me? What about the other side of the equation, the individual buyer?

INDIVIDUAL AGENTS
This was the discussion that Harish and I had. He posited that the next logical step in this wave of AI agents was individual AI agents—the Harish agent, the Bill agent.

Visualize this: I want to learn about three different vendors’ software. Instead of starting the old, previously described process (times three!!), how about I train MyBill agent? Or as Harish nailed it, “Mini Me”.

In this situation, I feed Mini Me with my needs. It could be a requirements document, an RFP, my specific challenges, my workflow documents . . . you name it. Now that my agent is trained, it goes to a group of vendors and initiates a knowledge transfer. Included in my AI agent could be a whole bunch of demographic information that I elect to share: my role, my contact information, my background, my contact preferences, my calendar and availability. I could even prime it with my current buying stage: I am still evaluating, I am ready to buy, I have budget or don’t have budget, I am the decision maker or I’m an influencer to the decision. I can share whether my company is starting a new project or looking to replace a current provider. I can allow my individual agent access to publicly available information about my past buying behavior (i.e. I worked at Pendo* and we used Salesforce on the sales team).

In digital marketing, we talk about first-party vs. third-party cookies. We talk about intent. We talk authentic, personalized outreach. I’d submit that aside from talking with me live directly, an individualized agent is the next most personalized form of engaging me. As I lamented above, talking with me personally is getting harder to do. First, like many buyers I no longer have a work phone, so just ringing me is getting harder. Plus, with branded caller ID, I can see who you are and ignore your calls. Email is a fine alternative to phone, but we all know how noisy inboxes can get. And then alternative channels like LinkedIn are spotty depending on which tools I utilize. Most importantly, as a buyer I neither want to engage nor have time to spend with three vendors and go through that difficult “journey” outlined above.

Let’s return to my hypothetical scenario above. I’ve dispatched my individualized agent to do the heavy lifting for me. Why does this concept appeal to me so much?

As a buyer, I want to get as well educated on a potential purchase as possible. I want to scour the vendor’s data and product. I want to know what their customers are saying. Likewise, I want them to understand me and my project as best they can—really zero in on my business problem and prove how they solve it.

Once I’ve dispatched my agent, I can apply the human touch. I can review the details my agent gathered and evaluate what it’s found for me.

In this scenario, I’ve provided a bunch of data about me, my company, my project and my preferences to potential vendors. I gave them this information, instead of having them purchase data and tools and commission sales teams to stalk me. Meanwhile, the vendor receives this detailed data in exchange for giving me what I want: knowledge. That knowledge can be in the form of videos, proposals, data sheets, demos, etc. These are all items that I can roll up into a business case. I can achieve a fairly informed position, all without needing multiple humans to educate me (and waste precious human time on both sides).

PERSISTENT AGENTS
Before we close, let’s take this imagined scenario one step further. Once my agent has visited the vendor site, maybe it keeps a connection to that site so my data stays updated and keeps information flowing. The vendor releases a new version. Or a new product. The company shares its new roadmap, so I can now incorporate that into my knowledge base. The positioning changes for how the company sells its product. They run a promotion on pricing. These are all valuable inputs for me as a buyer and worth keeping a consistent connection. Data could similarly flow from me back to the vendors in play. What if there is a budget freeze? What about an economics change for the buyer? Valuable inputs to share yet again.

THE BIG QUESTION
I get asked a lot: Do I think AI is the gateway to sales reps’ extinction? No, I don’t believe so. But I do think the current sales model is quickly ceding to a new agentic-fueled model.

We’ve already seen in transactional business arrangements that technology and software can eliminate the person. I used to visit a store and deal with a person at the checkout to buy laundry detergent; Amazon changed that forever. But in a considered and substantial purchase with a long-term relationship at stake, I still believe humans need to be involved in the sale. What if I’m buying a software that requires implementation, integration or setup? What if this is a multi-year project or purchase? Sales reps will still do what they do best: show their product, prove its value and close the deal. Agentic sales are accelerating this process while increasing its efficiency, and they’re only getting started.

Today, we know sales reps waste a tremendous amount of their time doing non-sales work. The rise of AI agents in the go-to-market function will help eliminate some of that work, which allows sellers to spend more quality time with buyers, handling the stuff the agents cannot.

Look, I’m somewhat self-aware. Is the individualized-agent scenario I just imagined above easy to implement? Will it work the way I played it out? These and many other questions are still unknown. But I do see large changes to the selling model we’ve used for 30 years ahead.

The information contained here is based solely on the opinion of Bill Binch, and nothing should be construed as investment advice. This material is provided for informational purposes, and it is not, and may not be relied on in any manner as legal, tax or investment advice or as an offer to sell or a solicitation of an offer to buy an interest in any fund or investment vehicle managed by Battery Ventures or any other Battery entity. The views expressed here are solely those of the author.

*Denotes a Battery portfolio company. For a full list of all investments and exits, click here.

The information above may contain projections or other forward-looking statements regarding future events or expectations. Predictions, opinions and other information discussed in this publication are subject to change continually and without notice of any kind and may no longer be true after the date indicated. Battery Ventures assumes no duty to and does not undertake to update forward-looking statements.