Migration Guide · CI

Klue → PYRAMYD. Substrate change in 30 days.

A practical playbook for moving competitive intelligence from a document-centric Klue (or Crayon) deployment to a graph-grounded PYRAMYD workspace. Library port, integrations, KPIs, and the 30-day timeline.

30-day cutoverLibrary imports cleanlyHighspot / Seismic compatibleFrom $50K/yr

Start the migration call Read the CI substrate argument

Why teams move

Hand-curated battle cards in document-centric tools age faster than the competitive landscape they describe. By the time PMM curates the next refresh, pricing pages, hiring patterns, and shipped features have already moved on. PYRAMYD's substrate is a live graph, not a document library.

The freshness gap is a structural property of any document-centric CI tool · live-graph retrieval eliminates it by design.

Side-by-side

Where the two approaches diverge.

Dimension	Klue (document-centric)	PYRAMYD (graph-grounded)
Battle-card refresh cadence	Hand-curated; staleness depends on PMM bandwidth	Continuous via live signal graph + on-demand re-assembly
Competitor coverage	Formal cards for the named-competitor list a PMM team can maintain by hand	252K+ products typed in the graph; coverage extends beyond the named-competitor list
Source of competitor data	Analyst input + manual web research + customer-uploaded docs	1,000+ live sources auto-ingested: G2, TrustRadius, GetApp, Capterra, SEC, Crunchbase, vendor changelogs, press, hiring
AE deal-stage query	Search the battle-card library for the closest pre-written content	Ask APEX: "In this deal vs Competitor B in Inventory Management at Acme Corp scale, what do I need to know?" · cited multi-hop answer in seconds
Win/loss feedback loop	Separate win/loss tool, manual entry, separate analytics layer	Win/loss is an entity type in the same graph; patterns surface in the same workspace
AI substrate	Vector search over the document library + LLM summarization	GraphRAG over typed knowledge graph · Microsoft Research (arXiv:2404.16130) shows substantial improvements over vector RAG on multi-hop sensemaking
Annual contract value	$50K-$100K typical	From $50K · and replaces RFX + Product Ops tools at the same time

The 30-day timeline

Four weeks. Four phases.

Conservative timeline assumes existing Klue deployment with 5-7 named competitor cards and a Salesforce + Highspot integration footprint. Faster cutovers are routine on smaller deployments.

Week 1 · Discovery

Export current Klue battle-card library, competitor list, and stakeholder taxonomy
Map your top 25 named competitors against PYRAMYD's graph entity model
Identify the 3 highest-leverage categories where battle-card staleness is hurting deals most
Joint scoping call with PYRAMYD design partner success team

Week 2 · Library port

Import Klue battle-card library into PYRAMYD workspace (CSV or JSON export)
Tag library content against graph entities · competitor, product, capability, category
Wire HubSpot / Salesforce push so battle cards surface in deal stages where they currently surface in Klue
Train 3-5 power users on graph-grounded query patterns

Week 3 · Live graph cutover

Activate live signal feed across your top 25 competitors · releases, pricing, hiring, press, review sentiment
Build the first graph-grounded battle card for the most-deployed competitor (replaces the Klue-source equivalent)
Wire Slack alerts for material competitor changes (replaces the Klue 'newsfeed' Slack integration)
Run side-by-side test: AE queries the same deal-stage question in Klue and PYRAMYD; compare quality and recency

Week 4 · Cutover + Klue sunset

Migrate remaining named-competitor battle cards (typically 5-7 per program)
Disable Klue auto-publish to enablement tools (Highspot, Seismic, internal wikis)
Cancel Klue renewal at next contract date · typical 30-day notice clause
QBR alignment: Sales, CI, and Product Marketing on the new substrate; measure 30-60-90 day deal-stage win lift

Migration FAQ

What teams ask before they switch.

Do we lose our existing battle cards if we move?

No. The library imports cleanly into the PYRAMYD workspace. The cards become baseline content; the graph layer adds live signal-grounded supplements that don't go stale. Most teams keep their existing cards as 'human-edited' canonical positioning and let the graph layer generate the freshness-sensitive sections (recent releases, current reviews, last 30 days of news).

What if Klue is wired into our enablement tools (Highspot / Seismic)?

PYRAMYD ships connectors for both Highspot and Seismic. The migration replaces Klue as the upstream content source; the surfaces your sellers see (battle cards inside Highspot, etc.) keep working · they just point at PYRAMYD instead.

How do we measure success at 30/60/90 days?

We recommend three metrics: (1) battle-card freshness · median time-since-update on cards your sales team actually opens, (2) deal-stage CI usage · frequency of AE queries against live competitive context, (3) win rate against named competitors. The Loopio 2026 RFP Trends & Benchmarks Report shows industry-average win rate at 45% with top performers above 60% · graph-grounded competitive context is one input to closing that gap.

What happens to our CI team's role?

It changes. Document-stitching work · building and maintaining battle cards manually · disappears. Strategic CI work · disruption-curve analysis, win-loss pattern identification, executive-level briefings · expands. Most teams see this as a positive transition. Some need to re-hire against the new job description.

Does this work for Crayon too?

Yes. The Crayon migration playbook is functionally identical · same library export pattern, same enablement-tool connectors, same 30-day timeline. We've run both with design partners. Reach out for the Crayon-specific brief if it applies.

Ready to start the cutover?

Book the 30-minute migration call. We'll walk through your Klue deployment, scope the library port, confirm enablement-tool compatibility, and set the cutover date.

Start the migration call See the CI use case