For years, ABM has been defined by who you target. In 2026, the advantage is shifting to how early you influence buying groups long before intent signals appear.

Research from Gartner, Google, and the LinkedIn B2B Institute all point in the same direction: B2B buying decisions are increasingly shaped before vendors can reliably detect intent.

Buying committees are getting larger and more distributed. Consensus takes longer. And by the time intent data lights up, preferences have often already formed. In other words, many ABM programs aren’t failing because they’re poorly targeted. They’re failing because they’re late.

Intent data still has value, but it captures activity once buyers are already deep into research, evaluation, and internal alignment.

ABM is expanding beyond precision targeting toward early-stage influence:

Targeting alone doesn’t create preference. Influence does.

ABM programs built purely around intent are now structurally late to the deal.

Strengthening ABM in 2026 means investing earlier in memory, trust, and perception so when intent finally appears, you’re already the obvious choice.

Clear positioning. Creative that earns attention early. Messaging systems built to shape perception long before intent shows up.

That’s the work we do with B2B teams who want to stay ahead of the market.

OK, let’s get the heresy out of the way:

Hyper-personalization is being built into every martech platform, you will feel real pressure to implement it and it will drag down the effectiveness of your ABM strategy.

Now for a slightly more nuanced explanation:

Hyper-personalization has become one of ABM’s most celebrated tactics. The more tailored the message, the thinking goes, the more relevant it feels. The more relevant it feels, the more likely it converts.

That logic isn't exactly wrong. But it is incomplete.

Hyper-personalization isn’t really bad, but how and when it’s being rolled out is. What’s missing is a layer that comes before it: alignment. Without a shared narrative to anchor the buying group, granular tailored stories fragment the understanding of the group, rather than uniting it.

In complex B2B deals, you’re not convincing individuals. You’re enabling consensus.

When ABM jumps straight to role-level or account-level messaging without first establishing a common point of view, three predictable effects show up:

Hyper-personalization works When the buying group already shares an understanding of:

Then it can do what it does best:

The core story stays fixed. The emphasis shifts.

In 2026, strong ABM will be defined by how clearly a buying group can align around a single idea.

Hyper-personalization isn’t the enemy, but starting with it is. Align first. Then personalize.

Most ABM programs are built to convert demand that already exists. The problem is that most of your market isn’t buying.

Roughly 95% of B2B buyers are not in-market at any given time. Some have that number of active buyers as low as 2%. ABM teams know this intellectually, then ignore it tactically. They over-optimize LinkedIn, email, and sales outreach for the small slice of accounts showing intent, while leaving the much larger “future buyers” untouched.

CTV & OTT can generate awareness earlier in targeted segments and geographies, reducing the ever-rising costs of downstream conversion channels like Meta and LinkedIn.

A quick refresher: OTT is the content model. CTV is the big screen.

OTT (Over-The-Top) is streaming video delivered over the internet. Think Netflix, Hulu, Prime Video, YouTube TV.

CTV (Connected TV) is OTT watched on a television screen via smart TVs or streaming devices like Roku or Apple TV.

It reaches buyers before intent exists
CTV & OTT is about shaping memory and perception early, so when intent finally shows up, your brand already feels familiar and credible. In long-cycle B2B deals, that head start matters.

It’s still underused in B2B
While Salesforce (with the help of Woody and Matthew) has taken the leap, most CTV & OTT budgets are controlled by B2C and D2C brands. That leaves space for B2B teams to stand out in high-attention environments where competitors are largely absent. Less noise. More impact.

Targeting is finally “good enough” for ABM
Modern CTV & OTT buying allows account and company-level targeting via first-party data, firmographic and industry layering, as well as tight geo targeting around office clusters.

It won’t replace LinkedIn for precision, but it doesn’t need to. Its job is presence, not personalization.

It strengthens everything downstream
When used properly, CTV & OTT lifts branded search in target accounts, engagement with ABM display and LinkedIn ads, and sales conversations.

When CTV& OTT does make sense in ABM

When it doesn’t make sense

In those cases, CTV & OTT won’t fail quietly. It’ll fail expensively.

CTV and OTT aren’t replacements for ABM fundamentals.

CTV doesn’t close deals. It reduces friction everywhere else. Used intentionally, they help ABM teams do what they rarely do well today: build memory before intent, trust before outreach, and momentum before sales ever picks up the phone.

Every team has access to the same platforms, data, and playbooks. The difference in 2026 will be who shows up early enough to shape perception, not just capture demand. Memory compounds. Late optimization doesn’t.

—Jay