If you’ve ever stalled out trying to build a 1:1 ABM program, there’s a good chance the word “one to one” is part of the problem. It implies something handcrafted – a fully custom experience built from the ground up for every account on your list. And if that’s how you’re thinking about it, no wonder it feels impossible to scale.
The good news: 1:1 ABM doesn’t need to be this way. The goal isn’t a totally custom experience. It’s a relevant one. We talked to a few practitioners who’ve built these programs from the ground up – here’s what they actually found.
1:1 ABM is still segmentation – just smarter
Here’s how Kristen Shaw, Founding Head of Growth Marketing @ BUCKSTOP, describes what’s actually happening:
“We are still using segmentation. We are still using targeting. We’re just doing it in a smarter way – getting down to the individuals within the buying committee, getting to understand them. And then we’re building strong templated versions that can be customized, but they’re still segmented out.”
The way she puts it: depending on industry and role, there are similar parts that get mixed and matched to make the experience feel completely custom to the end user. You talk to people in tech, in ops, in the C-suite very differently – but not that differently across organizations. The patterns are real and repeatable. That means you can build reusable messaging blocks by vertical, role, and pain point and pull from them for every account without starting from scratch.
The experience feels 1:1. The work behind it is smarter segmentation.
There’s a law of diminishing returns on customization
Andrew Reed, Director of ABM at AVEVA, shared a story from his university days about a custom car company that was drowning in demand but making no money – because they were making every single part of every car from scratch. A consultant came in and asked them a simple question: does your customer actually care if every component is hand-built, or do they care about the end result?
The parallel to ABM is direct. As Andrew puts it, there’s a point where customization stops being relevant to the buyer and starts being expensive to you.
The line isn’t about how much effort you put in. It’s about whether the buyer notices – and whether it moves them.
Where to actually draw the line
So if full customization isn’t the goal, what is?
Kristen’s definition cuts through a lot of noise: personalization means relevance in context. Getting someone’s name or job title right is table stakes. The real question is whether what you’re showing someone is relevant to the moment they’re in.
Andrew’s non-negotiable is similar in practice: lead with the account’s objectives, in their language. What are they trying to achieve as a company? That’s the thing worth personalizing around. Everything else – account name, first name – is easy and expected. The lift comes from weaving your message into what they’re actually trying to do.
Kristen’s filter for what to skip is equally useful: if it doesn’t build trust, increase clarity, or drive the behavior you’re looking for, cut it. No matter how creative the idea is.
What a templated approach actually makes possible
The proof that this model works isn’t theoretical. Andrew’s team at AVEVA used to spend roughly six months getting a single account’s campaign off the ground. Now it takes one to two weeks – because the approach is templated, scalable, and repeatable. The research, the value proposition, the messaging, the landing page: it all moves faster because they’re not reinventing it every time.
That’s not a shortcut. That’s what a sustainable 1:1 ABM program actually looks like.
Templated isn’t a compromise
The practitioners who make 1:1 ABM work aren’t the ones building the most elaborate campaigns. They’re the ones who figured out that the buying committee doesn’t know or care how much custom work went into what they’re seeing. What they notice is whether it’s relevant to them.
That’s the shift worth making. Stop measuring success by how bespoke the experience is. Start measuring it by whether it lands.