Every product marketing tool promises to save time, which is great because we all love more free time. The problem is a lot of those promises seem great during a 30-minute demo, but don’t hold up when you have actual work to do.
So rather than give you a list of things you could do with GetWhys, here’s what I see product marketers are actually doing to get value from it. Across our customer base, three use cases show up more than anything else — ranked below by actual usage (not just what looks cool and demoes well).
Content creation grounded in real buyer research
The most common and valuable thing product marketers do with GetWhys is create content. They bring in what their company already knows like product specs, positioning docs, messaging frameworks, research, and other internal context, and they combine it GetWhys’ intel of what real buyers have actually said. This is especially helpful when they need to learn from perspectives of audiences they don’t already have access to - even for companies with diligent sales call recording analysis, some of the most valuable market perspectives live outside the funnel. With these information sources as the backbone, PMMs can more quickly create and iterate on blog posts, sales decks, web copy, launch materials, campaigns, and all the other things would otherwise consume 117% of a PMM's available time.
The important part isn't that AI can write the content. We know there are lots of AI tools and skills that can do that. The difference is what the AI has to work with. Without real buyer research, even a good model is ultimately making a guess about what matters to your buyers. That's how you end up with homepages drenched in things being “AI-powered” and copy with perfectly good-enough paragraphs about "empowering teams to unlock value and drive meaningful outcomes." It’s technically English, but 99 of 100 times, the person you need to connect with doesn’t care.
One PMM at a security-software company took a different approach. Before working on a major category campaign, they uploaded the company's positioning documents into GetWhys. That gave our system both sides of the equation: how the company wanted to position itself and how real buyers talked about the problem. They then connected GetWhys to Writer through the GetWhys MCP and did the actual drafting there. The output was actually something that aligned with the company’s positioning AND resonated with buyers, because it was based in the actual language of real humans evaluating a purchase.
A fintech marketer used a similar workflow to help create material supporting an entire launch. Product specs went in first, then became talking points, and eventually turned into finished launch content. Instead of bouncing between Google Docs, HubSpot, research repositories, messaging docs, and the other 46 tabs that accumulate during a launch, the underlying research and content creation stayed connected via GetWhys throughout the process.
That's the pattern we see most often. The value isn't only getting AI to help write faster, but also giving AI enough real context that the first draft isn't starting from a guess.
You may be thinking to yourself is, “But wait - I’ve always had to wait for insights from market researchers or analysts to create the strategy and build content for launches.” Well, dear reader, that leads me to the next use case!
Accessing buyer intelligence without starting another research project
Product marketers ask a lot of questions that sound simple until you actually try to answer them. Why are buyers churning? What does this persona care about? Who's really involved in the buying committee? Why does a competitor keep winning? Would this message resonate with a VP in this industry?
Historically, a question like that could quickly turn into a very time-intensive and expensive research project (or projects) in which you have to define the research question, recruit participants, schedule interviews, conduct the interviews, analyze everything, build the deck, present the deck, then watch someone ask a slightly different question five minutes later before you proceed to bang your head against the wall — hopefully gently.
Our customers are increasingly doing something much simpler: they ask the existing research first. With thousands of interviews already in our database (and growing daily), more often than not, GetWhys already has robust buyer intel that can answer most questions. The data backs this up: across GetWhys chat activity, requests for net-new research account for less than 3% of usage. In other words, the overwhelming majority of questions are being answered using buyer research that's already available.
That tells us something important about where the value of GetWhys comes from. The reaction of a PMM using our system is far more often "Oh, so we already have access to research that can answer this" instead of "We need more research."
One team, for example, successfully used existing interviews to understand buyer sentiment and buying-committee dynamics for a specific target account. They didn't commission another study or wait weeks for new fieldwork. They queried what buyers had already told us and used that evidence to build a much faster picture of the account.
A veteran B2B researcher uses GetWhys as a triage layer. When a new question comes up, he can get a fast, sourced first pass using the existing interview database. Then he can decide whether there's enough uncertainty left to justify a full custom study. Sometimes there is (and he can take advantage of his unlimited research requests in GetWhys), but more often the answer is already sitting there.
The point isn't that companies should stop doing new research - markets change and new questions emerge, and sometimes, you genuinely don't have the evidence you need. The point is to make existing insights more discoverable to avoid commissioning new research for questions your existing research can already answer.
And increasingly, that doesn't require living inside GetWhys itself. Through MCP, the same buyer intelligence can show up inside tools PMMs already use, including Claude, Writer, and Glean. Instead of remembering to go check the research repository, you can ask the question where you're already working and pull the evidence into the task at hand.
Buyer intelligence becomes less of a destination and more of a layer underneath the work, which is much more useful than another tab you have to remember to open and check.
Validating and improving content before it ships
Buyers are under information overload - so it’s more critical than every that every piece of content that lands in front of them hits the mark the first time. That's why the third major use case is validation. Product marketers use GetWhys to check whether claims, messages, and their overall content actually hold up against buyer scrutiny before they make their way into a campaign, sales deck, website, or customer conversation.
But validation isn't very helpful if it stops at pass or fail. If a tool tells you, "THIS MESSAGE DOES NOT RESONATE," that's technically information, but it leaves you with the fairly important follow-up question: “So what should I change?”
The more useful version of validation is part of the writing itself. It shows where a claim is weak, points back to the evidence, and helps revise the content so it better reflects what the research actually says.
A veteran B2B researcher I work with takes this further by running copy against persona-based rubrics. Instead of getting a generic thumbs-up or thumbs-down, he can see which parts of the message are likely to land with their specific target audience, which aren't, and the buyer evidence behind the assessment. The result isn't just, "This isn't working." It's, "This part isn't working, here's why, and here's what you should reconsider."
We're also seeing this become more valuable as content creation moves beyond the PMM team. One director of product marketing pairs GetWhys with her company's own Digital Asset Manager. GetWhys helps make sure the words are accurate and supported by buyer evidence, while the internal system makes sure the resulting materials are buildable and on-brand. Sellers can generate proposals in Claude, while PMM still has what she calls "quality assurance" over what sales is promising customers.
Another PMM set up the company's messaging frameworks inside GetWhys once and then made that intelligence available to the entire sales org through Claude. Sales can generate customer-facing decks without needing direct GetWhys access, while the output still stays consistent and grounded in the company's messaging and buyer research.
That's where validation becomes really useful. It doesn't have to become another approval gate where PMMs personally inspect every slide and paragraph before someone is allowed to hit send. Instead, the guidelines travel with the work, so more people can create content on their own without the underlying message slowly turning into a game of telephone.
Three use cases that are really part of the same thing
At first glance, these may look like three separate things, but they actually build on each other. Buyer intelligence from people you can’t easily access gives you something worth saying, content creation turns that intelligence into something useful, and validation makes sure it still holds up once more people start creating, editing, and using it.
Then the cycle repeats. A question comes up, the research helps answer it, that answer becomes content, and the content gets checked against the evidence before it goes out into the world.
That's ultimately what we're seeing most product marketers build with GetWhys. It’s not a giant research machine, or an AI content factory helping you spray "unlock transformative value" across your website and sales collateral. It’s also not another repository everyone promises they'll remember to check.
It’s a way to put valuable buyer truths directly into the work PMMs are already doing, and increasingly into the tools where they're already doing it.
There’s no bigger team required, and we promise fewer guesses.