Sr. Growth Manager @ ActiveCampaign | Institutional Consultant | Founder

Casey is a growth veteran, with over a decade of experience in helping software companies scale fast. 

Whether it's garnering 28,000,000+ views across Linkedin, Reddit and Quora, or pioneering new growth levers (like booking his team on hundreds of podcasts), Casey is always looking for creative and value-led ways to grab attention and break from the mold. In his current role leading marketing at DoWhatWorks, he is looking to reshape how brands split test and experiment online. 

On the consulting side, Casey has worked with some of the world's biggest firms including places like McKinsey, Blackrock, Colemans, GLG, Guidepoint, etc., where he provides institutional guidance to PE/VC teams around topics such as: SMB marketing vendor selection, SaaS pricing, SaaS marketing/CRM tool differentiation, market analysis, inbound marketing, conversion rate optimization and marketing automation.

Casey also teaches classes at UCSD and Stanford extension around demand creation, email marketing and content marketing.

I run a Substack that does analysis on the world's top websites based on our proprietary database of A/B test results: https://dowhatworks.substack.com/

Current areas of extensive experience...

-> B2B SaaS / B2B Enterprise SaaS / SMB SaaS

-> CRO (Conversion Rate Optimization) / Website optimization

-> Email marketing

-> Content marketing (especially LinkedIn and Reddit)

-> B2B Influencer marketing

-> Pricing optimization

Casey Hill

I looked at over 50 competitor comparison pages. PostHog had the best ⬇️

Let me start by saying that most competitor comparison pages are dreadful.

They are dishonest (like factually inaccurate about the competitors).

They are misleading. They don’t build trust. They treat the prospect like they are dumb.

And here is the kicker… they don’t convert. 

I have worked with a handful of marketing teams (startups to at-scale orgs) who have shifted retargeting budget away from competitor comparison pages because the CPA was just too high (one spent $800k/m for a quarter and had just 7 sales at a 5-figure ACV)

It makes sense to educate prospects about your strengths (and even mention competitor weaknesses), but the framing is what is killing all these pages.

With Posthog, they do several things that build trust and buck the trend:

1) When describing a competitor, they quote how the competitor describes themselves. No misrepresenting or trying to paint them into a certain box. Just be straightforward.

2) They include a “what people like about [competitor]” and “What people don’t like about [competitor] and then include quotes from reviews (I think they pull from G2). And the real part that builds trust is that they include honest positives. Not weird, fake compliments, “this is a perfect software if you are an enterprise org with 5,000+ employees and a $12 million a month budget for all the consultants you will need”. Just actual strengths. It then makes the weaknesses that they bring up next feel way more realistic. 

Ultimately, the most effective competitor comparisons start with honesty.

That in and of itself is so rare, it’s disarming, and builds trust and confidence in whatever you say next. 

Have you read a competitor comparison that really resonated (or created one that converted really well)?

Chief Marketing Officer @ DoWhatWorks | Institutional Consultant | Founder

I lined up a call with a top executive to talk through their A/B testing learnings. 

Then it went completely off course…

Them: “Yeah I ran a bunch of tests this quarter. Nothing works. Headline tests, section tests, button tests. None of it moved the needle. Not a focus area any more”.

I listened and took it all in. I had all these notes. 

All this data to compare against their test results. These follow up questions lined up to get into the “why it won”. 

But none of it worked for them. It wasn't even that the variants "lost", they just were the same. They didn't matter.

We still had a nice chat, but after I got to analyzing his situation.

I realized the experience of this exec is actually exceptionally common. 

Optimizely published data saying that 90% of A/B tests "lose" (as in the variant doesn’t show any statistical difference so they stay with the control).

A big part of the problem stems from how we approach testing. 

1. Do we really understand where our traffic comes from and how that impacts positioning? If your traffic comes from paid retargeting ads or if it comes from dark social, what resonates will be very different.

2. Do we design A/B tests with a specific, unified problem we are trying to solve for? Many brands just do a dozen homepage hero headline variants and try and see what wins. But the question always has to be what problem are you solving for? Everything should ladder up to that.

3. Are you testing things that are meaningful? A big gap I found from my chat with that executive was a lack of “meaningful testing”. This means you try 10 copy variants but none of them a) introduce new information or b) provide new direct value. 

I am teaming up with the incredible team from GrowthX AI this Thursday (9AM PST) to do a workshop, where we will get deep into how to better convert your web traffic in 2026. 

Not only will we look at specific A/B tests from dozens of the top brands in the world, but we will address what to test, and how to think about your website in an age of AI discovery.

There is a major problem across AI companies selling agentic products ⬇️

They are unbelievably vague in their messaging. 

I curated a list of 30 top companies selling agents. 

Here are the headlines…

Company A: “We are a frontier research and deployment company providing enterprises with a powerful, cost-efficient, and easy-to-adopt technology to integrate agentic AI directly into their core workflows and processes.”

Company B: “Deploy, orchestrate, and govern fleets of specialized AI agents that work alongside your team”

Company C: “Ops teams can build and manage an entire AI workforce in one powerful visual platform.”

Company D: “[company] is the simplest way for businesses to create, manage, and share agents.”

It took me until company eight on the list that I got one that actually gave me any real information about what it did.

Company H: “Docket's AI agent handles qualification, discovery, and booking while you sleep. Teams see 30%+ more qualified pipeline from the same traffic.”

I understand these brands want the optics of addressing a large TAM, but when you can go to ten sites, and the headlines are almost identical, this isn’t providing any clarity or insight that is helping prospects decide on your product.

What does the data say 💡: I looked at DoWhatWorks database of hundreds of A/B tests around AI messaging. Tests from brands like OpenAI, IBM, Hootsuite, GoDaddy, Notion, and beyond. The takeaway is clear → AI messaging that is clear and explanatory to the capability it solves for (i.e. our support agents provide 24/7 ticket coverage in 42 languages) dramatically outperforms vague or sweeping messaging.

Michael Pedersen

Revenue Growth | Emotion-Based Brand Messaging To 3x Your Revenues | Bridging the gap between sales and marketing

High-pressure phone sales teams lose 30%-40% when recovery takes longer than the next dial.

DecideFast™ Between-Calls Performance Stability Software 
"Tough calls don’t crash the day.”

"DecideFast™ runs alongside your existing tech. 
No integration required.
No coaching.
No training.
No workflow changes.
No IT involvement.

Teams do not fade because of skill or effort. They fade because timing breaks under pressure.

Training happens before the shift.
Coaching happens after the shift.
Dashboards explain the problem once the day is already lost.

Nothing supports recovery in the seconds after a call, when performance actually drops.

That is the gap DecideFast™ fills.

DecideFast™ compresses after-call recovery so each interaction starts clean.

Used in seconds.

No management overhead.

See fast after-call recovery live. 
No slides. No pitch.

CEO & Founder

Does your website convert? When was the last time you gave it a refresh? How does it compare to your competitors?

Your company website is your brand on the Internet. An under-performing and outdated website will cost you revenues. 

Let’s jump on a discovery call to see if we are good fit to work together 

Visit: www.AZNetmarketing.com or 
Email: mike@aznetmarketing.com

How is this even possible?

30–45% annual attrition has become normal in phone sales.

That range shows up consistently across industry benchmarks from Contact Center Pipeline and ICMI, especially in high-volume and BPO environments.

Now put a dollar frame on it.

Research from SQM Group and Gartner estimates the cost to replace a frontline agent typically lands between $10,000 and $20,000 once you account for recruiting, training, ramp time, and lost productivity.

That means a 300-seat operation turning over a third of its workforce each year is quietly absorbing millions in replacement cost alone.

What’s important here.

This didn’t become normal because leaders stopped caring.

Managers are under real pressure. They run WFM, QA, coaching, engagement tools, training programs. They are actively trying to stabilize performance with the systems available to them.

The issue is timing.

Most of those programs work before the day starts or after the damage shows up in reports.

Performance doesn’t usually break in meetings or dashboards.

➡️ It breaks in the moments between interactions.
➡️ Right after a bad call.
➡️ Right before the next one.
➡️ When pressure carries forward and nobody sees it.

So teams adapt.
🚫 They manage averages.
🚫 They absorb churn.
🚫 They normalize something that would feel unacceptable in almost any other function.

This isn’t about blame.

It’s about noticing when something abnormal quietly became accepted as “just how it works.”

At what point did “this is brutal” turn into “this is normal”?

Mike Pedersen

Phone Sales Teams Lose 30%-40% Output After Lunch | Between-Calls Performance Software That Keeps Afternoons From Breaking | No Training. No IT. No Workflow Changes

Can a phone sales rep reset in 10 seconds?

Most leaders have never tested this.
Not because it sounds impossible.
Because nothing has ever been built for that window.

Sales performance is designed around calls.
Measured on calls.
Coached on calls.

But floors don’t drift during calls.
They drift after them.

That small gap between one call ending and the next starting quietly determines the rest of the day.

🚫 No system reaches it.
🚫 No process operates there.
🚫 No tool moves fast enough.

Leaders feel the impact anyway.

⬇️ Energy drops by mid-day.
⬇️ Confidence slips in real time.
⬇️ One bad call spills into the next.

By the afternoon, the floor is still staffed, but performance is uneven.

Most solutions arrive too late.

🚫 Dashboards explain yesterday.
🚫 Coaching fixes tomorrow.
🚫 Training assumes calm and recall.

None of those help in the moment that actually bends the day.

Sales performance doesn’t break on calls.
It breaks in the seconds right after them.

When recovery is immediate, performance holds.
When recovery drags, the day compounds in the wrong direction.

That gap has always been there.
Leaders have felt it.
They just haven’t had anything fast enough to stabilize it.

The real question is simple.

What happens in the 10 seconds after a call ends?

That moment decides whether the next call starts clean, or carries residue.

DecideFast™ operates in that gap.
Between calls.
In real time.

We’re running a contained test with sales leaders who want steadier floors without adding training, process, or disruption.

If this matches what you see on your floor, message me and we’ll see if it fits.

Every sales leader I talk to shows the same curve.

Mornings prove the team can execute.
Afternoons make it look like they can’t.

✅ Same reps.
✅ Same scripts.
✅ Same leads.

Most explanations miss the point because they focus on effort, motivation, or skill. None of those change at noon.

What actually changes is the operating condition.

🚫 Calls stack.
🚫 Difficult interactions cluster.
🚫 Nothing clears between one call ending and the next beginning.

So by mid-afternoon, reps aren’t performing worse.
They’re performing under load.

That’s why dashboards lag reality.
By the time the numbers dip, the damage already spread across dozens of calls.

If morning performance exists, the capability exists.
The question isn’t how to train harder.
It’s how to stop degradation from compounding during the day.

Most teams don’t have a way to manage what happens after the call and before the next one.

That gap quietly decides how the day finishes.

If you run a floor, you already know this pattern.

Most phone sales teams don’t struggle because of tools, talent, or effort.

They struggle because daily output isn’t predictable.

Same team.
Same dialer.
Same leads.

One day hits.
The next day misses.

That inconsistency creates real downstream problems.

• Managers spend their afternoons intervening instead of managing
• Clients feel the instability before reports ever show it
• Forecasts become guesses, even with solid activity data

The dialer does its job.
Activity is optimized.

What changes is execution as the day wears on.

Pressure accumulates.
Judgment slips.
Tone changes.
Small drops compound across dozens of calls.

Most systems measure results after this happens.
They were never designed to stabilize performance while it’s forming.

That gap is why output feels harder to control than it should.

Sales performance still drops later in the day.

Even in teams using Gong or similar tools.
That confuses a lot of sales leaders.

Because the calls are recorded.
➡️ The data is there.
➡️ Coaching is happening.
➡️ Yet consistency still breaks.

Here’s why.
Most sales tools explain what happened on the call.
They do not support what happens after the call.

➡️➡️ Insight explains what happened.
What carries forward after a call determines what happens next.

Between calls is where problems stack:
➡️ One bad conversation carries forward
➡️ Confidence dips before the next dial
➡️ Hesitation shows up quietly
➡️ Call blocks lose stability

By the time coaching or reviews happen, the day is already off track.

This isn’t a tooling failure.
It’s a missing layer.

Insight explains performance.
Recovery protects it in real time.

If your team starts strong and fades by the afternoon, what actually happens between calls today?

That’s the question worth looking at.

After Call Work looks fine on dashboards.

It’s killing output in reality.

Reps finish a hard call.
✅ They log notes.
✅ They click dispositions.
✅ They pause.

🚫 That pause turns into hesitation.
🚫 Hesitation turns into slower dials.
🚫 Slower dials turn into crushed afternoons.

Leaders see:
 • ACW implemented
 • Systems configured
 • Activity targets set

But still spend the day reacting.
ACW tracks tasks.
It doesn’t stabilize execution.

If nobody owns what happens between calls, consistency erodes even when everything looks “set up correctly.”

That gap is where performance quietly breaks.

Solution providers sell “performance software.”

Here's my problem with it.

Most of it measures. Almost none of it improves execution/outcomes.
Here’s the line that gets blurred.

What most companies call performance:
➡️ Dashboards
➡️ Reports
➡️ Visibility
➡️ Retrospective analysis

Trends after the outcome is locked.
That is measurement.
Measurement explains what already happened (lagging indicators).

What performance actually is
✅ Execution under pressure
✅ Consistency as conditions deteriorate
✅ Output holding when rejection stacks up
✅ Results changing in real time

I come from an athletic background (a full-ride D1 college scholarship).
Track and field. Javelin, then Decathlon. Attempted to make an Olympic team.

➡️ Performance was never the quality of the data.
➡️ Performance was the clock. The distance. The placing.
➡️ You didn’t win because practice was tracked better.
➡️ You won because execution improved.
➡️ Coaching works, but not in the moment of pressure between calls.

Phone sales work the same way.
If execution doesn’t change between calls, performance doesn’t change.
If nothing stabilizes execution during the day, afternoons break.

If tools only explain losses after the fact, they are not performance tools.
Measurement tells you what happened.
Performance determines what happens next.

This is why DecideFast™ sits in performance stability.
We operate where execution actually breaks.
Between calls. Under pressure. In real time.
✅ It does not measure outcomes after they fall.
✅ It stabilizes execution while work is happening.
That distinction is the whole point.

It's time companies focus on outcomes, not just measurement.

If you’re an inside sales leader and output is still off, you fix it. You don’t keep buying dashboards.

Phone-based sales operations lose 30% of daily output after lunch.

The pattern appears across teams, industries, and tech stacks.

What operations leaders see:
✅ Strong morning dial rates.
🚫 Declining afternoon production.
➡️ Same reps. Same leads. Same hour count.

What the metrics show:
✅ First-half call volume: 12-13 per hour
🚫 Second-half call volume: 8-9 per hour
🚫 Conversion rates: drop proportionally
✅ Manager intervention: increases 3 PM onward

What this represents operationally:
⬇️ 30% of capacity unused every afternoon.
⬇️ Full payroll expense. Reduced output delivery.
⬇️ Forecast misses despite effort increases.

Standard fixes don't address it:
🚫 Better list quality doesn't prevent the decline.
🚫 Script improvements don't maintain afternoon pace.
🚫 Incentive adjustments don't change the pattern.
🚫 Additional coaching doesn't stabilize output.

Because the constraint isn't in those areas:
➡️ Training builds capability over weeks.
➡️ Coaching refines execution over days.
➡️ Dialers optimize connection rates continuously.
➡️ CRMs track activity after it occurs.

None operate in the moments between calls when one difficult interaction affects the next four attempts.

That's where the 30% disappears.

That's the operational gap costing seven figures annually.

It's time to stop normalizing 30% drops and fix it.

Inside Sales Leaders:

Your dashboard is red. Again.

12 calls/hour this morning. 8 calls/hour right now.
Same reps. Same leads. Different output.

You know exactly when it started.

That brutal rejection at 1:47 PM. The one where the prospect hung up mid-sentence. Your rep stared at the screen for 12 seconds. Dialer queued the next call. Rep wasn't ready.

That call tanked the next four.

You watched it happen. You couldn't stop it.

Every. Single. Day.

DecideFast™ operates in those 8 seconds.

Between one call ending and the next connecting. Where your rep either clears what happened or carries it forward.

Pilot teams: Afternoons now match mornings.

If you're done watching 30% disappear daily, let's talk.

DM me. 10 minutes.

The One Moment No Phone Sales Tech Stack Covers

Between-Calls.

These moments during the phone sales day explain why performance breaks even when everything appears to be in order.

It is the only moment no system owns.
Dialers move the next call. CRMs log the last one. Nothing is responsible for what carries from one interaction into the next.

It is the only moment managers cannot scale into.
A manager can step in after the damage is visible. They cannot be present in the seconds between every call across dozens of reps.

It is the only moment dashboards cannot see.
Dashboards show outcomes after execution already changed. They never show the hesitation, tone shift, or pace decay forming between calls.

It is the only moment where one interaction affects the next.
A harsh rejection does not stay isolated. Without clearing, it alters the next conversation, then the next, then the next.

It is the only moment that explains same-day instability without blaming reps.
The capability is proven in the morning. The breakdown happens later because carryover compounds, not because reps forgot how to sell.

That moment sits between calls.

DecideFast™ is a between-calls stability performance software for phone-based sales teams, designed to prevent output decline throughout the day. 
Not training. Not coaching. No IT lift. No workflow change. 

Used in the seconds after a tough call to clear the carryover fast and maintain dial pace and next call success.

We are executing low-risk, 14-day, 25-rep contained tests to stabilize afternoons for phone sales teams. 

Let's talk if you want to hit your afternoon numbers and have your managers intervene less.

taplio

The Battle

Casey Hill

Michael Pedersen

Followers

Posts

Engagements

Likes

Performance ScoreCasey Hill's LinkedIn Performance

Performance ScoreMichael Pedersen's LinkedIn Performance

Ready to grow your LinkedIn presence?

taplio

The Battle

Casey Hill

Michael Pedersen

Followers

Posts

Engagements

Likes

Performance Score.css-goub6s{font-size:var(--chakra-fontSizes-md);font-weight:500;color:var(--chakra-colors-gray-600);display:block;margin-top:var(--chakra-space-1);}Casey Hill's LinkedIn Performance

Performance ScoreMichael Pedersen's LinkedIn Performance

Ready to grow your LinkedIn presence?

Performance ScoreCasey Hill's LinkedIn Performance