The State of Sales in 2026: AI Raises the Bar, but People Still Win

 

The State of Sales in 2026: AI Raises the Bar, but People Still Win

Michelle Davidson

January 29, 2026

 

Share

Most people begin the new year fresh. Not sales organizations. In 2026, they’re carrying forward economic uncertainty, aggressive growth expectations and a wave of AI that has already reshaped how sellers work.

“The new norm is uncertainty,” said Erik Fowler, chief revenue officer at Allego, provider of a sales enablement platform, during a recent webinar on the state of sales. “We still have aggressive growth expectations, we still have economic pressures and budget concerns, and we have AI that we all need to rapidly adopt and figure out how it changes our business.”

AI has raised the bar across sales organizations. Buyers arrive more informed thanks to increased use of AI engines. And sellers are expected to respond faster, personalize outreach, and demonstrate value earlier in the cycle.

AI has helped sellers with that, improving productivity and efficiency. However, performance gains have been uneven. The reason, according to both sales leaders and new research, is straightforward: Technology can scale activity, but people still determine outcomes.

AI Has Changed Expectations for Everyone

Sales leaders largely agree that AI is already influencing day-to-day execution. In live polling during the webinar, about half of participants said AI had improved efficiency or increased sales activity, while a smaller share said it had elevated seller performance.

That gap reflects what many organizations are experiencing. AI tools can draft emails, analyze calls and surface insights faster than any human team ever could. But higher activity doesn’t automatically translate into better selling.

“With AI, sales cycles and self-paced buying are increasing. The customer can get further and faster” on their own now, said Lauren Bailey, founder of the sales training company Factor 8, during the discussion. As a result, she noted that sellers are being held to a higher standard much earlier in the sales process. What used to be entry-level selling has shifted up a level, putting pressure on organizations to upskill their teams faster.

The result is pressure at every level of the sales organization. Sellers must add value beyond what AI can provide, managers are expected to coach more effectively, and leaders must prove ROI from increasingly complex tech stacks.

Efficiency Is Up. Effectiveness Is Not.

Despite record investment in sales technology, Fowler and Bailey described growing frustration with results. Training programs are in place, but adoption is inconsistent. Tools are deployed, but meaningful behavior change has been harder to achieve.

That frustration, Bailey noted, stems from a lack of impact. When training doesn’t stick or translate into behavior change, organizations struggle to justify continued investment.

Part of the challenge is structural. Frontline managers are being asked to do more coaching, enforce process discipline, and support skill development. Often, they must do that without receiving formal training themselves. At the same time, hybrid work has reduced informal learning. When sellers work remotely, they can’t see and learn from one another. That makes coaching even more critical, but at the same time more difficult.

AI promises to help, but understanding how it helps matters. That’s where recent neuroscience research offers some clarity.

What Neuroscience Reveals About Coaching

In a 2025 neuroscience study, neuroscientist Dr. Carmen Simon examined how sellers responded to feedback delivered by either an AI coach or a human coach following simulated sales conversations. The findings were instructive. Sellers who received feedback from an AI coach remembered 50% more information after 48 hours than those who received human feedback. The structured, written nature of AI feedback appeared to improve memory retention and consistency.

At the same time, sellers who expected human coaching experienced greater relaxation, motivation and emotional well-being during training. They spoke more during simulations – an indicator of engagement – though that increased verbal activity did not translate into stronger recall.

Fowler emphasized that the takeaway isn’t about choosing one approach over the other. AI excels at delivering consistent reinforcement at scale, while human coaching plays a critical role in motivation, trust and development.

The research underscores a critical point for 2026: Learning is both cognitive and emotional. AI excels at reinforcing structure and consistency. Humans excel at motivation, trust and confidence, all of which drive behavior change over time.

Why People Still Win

As AI becomes embedded across sales workflows, the differentiator is shifting. Tools can raise the floor by standardizing best practices and accelerating learning. But they can’t replace the human elements that define great selling.

Bailey emphasized that customer experience is ultimately shaped by people. As buyers rely more heavily on AI-driven research, sellers must be able to deliver insight, judgment and empathy that technology cannot provide.

The same principle applies internally. While AI can analyze calls, identify trends and suggest coaching priorities, it cannot replace the manager’s role in developing people.

“Let your AI coach the deal. Let your manager coach the rep,” Bailey said. “Rep coaching is about engagement, skill development and career growth. It’s the human side. AI isn’t going to do that very well.”

The neuroscience research reinforces this division of labor. AI reduces social pressure and supports recall. Human coaching provides emotional resonance and connection. Together, they create more durable learning.

The Winning Model for 2026

Sales leaders heading into this year face a clear choice: They can continue to layer tools onto already stretched teams, or they can redesign how people, process and technology work together.

The most effective organizations are doing the latter. They use AI to scale insight and consistency, analyzing conversations, reinforcing frameworks, and shortening ramp time. At the same time, they invest in human coaching to ensure those insights translate into behavior change.

Leadership ownership is critical to making that happen, Fowler noted. Adoption, he said, starts with visible commitment from senior leaders.

“If leaders don’t sponsor it … it’s going to fail,” Fowler said. You can have the best technology in the world, but if leadership doesn’t show it’s a priority, it won’t stick, he added.

Looking Ahead

AI has become table stakes in sales, as with other areas of business. But in 2026, the organizations that stand out won’t be the ones that simply use it or the ones with the most AI-powered tools. They will be the teams that use technology to elevate their people.

The science is clear: AI improves memory and consistency. Humans drive motivation, trust and performance. Sales leaders who design for both will be better positioned to meet rising expectations, both internally and with customers.

Bailey summed it up simply: “The winning team will not just have the best systems. Their people will be the differentiator.”

 

Nielsen Kicks Off New Co-Viewing Effort On Super Bowl Sunday

• by Wayne Friedman , 7 hours ago

Looking for better co-viewing measurement of TV shows -- especially live TV events -- Nielsen is starting up a “new methodology enhancement.”

A pilot program will begin with the biggest single annual viewership program of the year -- live or otherwise -- Super Bowl LX on February 8, airing on NBC.

The pilot program will include high-profile sports and entertainment live events in the first half of the year. Results will be released a few weeks after the delivery of Nielsen final Big Data + Panel ratings.

“This co-viewing pilot builds on that mission, alongside our recent enhancements with Big Data + Panel, out of home expansion, live streaming measurement and our wearable devices,” said Karthik Rao, CEO of Nielsen, in a press release.

Key to better co-viewing measurement is the use of Nielsen’s proprietary wearable measurement devices, which are worn on the wrists of Nielsen panelists and resemble a smart watch.

Wearable devices record audio from TV events, shows and movies, allowing for more passive measurement that does not require a formal log-in process.

Since it is a pilot program, the co-viewing data will not be immediately included in Big Data + Panel ratings from Nielsen. This data will not be considered “currency” -- says Nielsen -- that advertisers transact on.

Nielsen says these initial co-viewing estimates from the pilot program will not be immediately included in Big Data + Panel ratings from Nielsen. As such, they will not be considered “currency” that advertisers transact on,

Nielsen says the goal is for co-viewing methodology to be incorporated into “currency” measurement for the 2026-27 season.

 

Commentary

Why Big Station Groups Could Survive - And Thrive

• by Wayne Friedman , Staff Writer, January 28, 2026

TV station groups -- especially dominant large ones -- will continue to thrive in years to come.

But they need to be aggressive in growing -- something the Trump Administration has increasingly hinted it will help with.

This continues to be good news for the largest owner of U.S. TV stations -- Nexstar Media Group.

Nexstar’s proposed $6.2 billion deal to buy TV station group Tegna will almost certainly get go ahead from the Trump Administration -- perhaps as early as next month.

The merger deal was announced in August 2025.

This will come with the lifting of the station ownership cap. The Federal Communication Commission prohibits a company from owning or controlling TV stations that in total reach more than 39% of all U.S. television homes.

“We expect FCC Chairman [Brendan] Carr to proceed with a cap elimination on the agenda in the next 1-3 months, potentially as soon as February, with enough rationalization and backing to counter the inevitable lawsuits that will follow,” writes Daniel Kurnos, media analyst for Benchmark Equity Research, in a recent note.

But it is a bit more than just gaining added U.S. market reach.

He says: “Nexstar will successfully acquire Tegna, creating massive synergies and an in-market juggernaut.”

This will come from benefiting from connected TV (CTV) related businesses, quickly gaining higher automotive advertising share, and big benefits from sporting events on its CW network. Nexstar also owns NewsNation, a cable TV news channel, and its around 200 TV stations.

Overall, there is a benefit that the strongest of the strong -- including possibly Sinclair Inc., second to Nexstar in terms of U.S. stations ownership -- will also make gains down the road with their own merger TV station group deals.

“We think there is ample evidence to suggest that new market definitions are likely to prevail with regards to one of the oldest, most outdated group of rules and regulations in the media industry.”

Competing cable TV network Newsmax is worried that eliminating that the 39% would harm smaller-to-midsize TV news platforms -- those owning national cable TV channels and TV stations.

Key for TV stations groups are their nonstop efforts around local -- and in some cases, still growing -- TV news coverage. This is live content that continues to be deemed highly valuable when it comes to viewer engagement for national and local TV advertisers.

Those gaining sizable market share then would also seem to be more competitive as live, premium video platforms against continuously growing, local digital players.

TV stations continue to see sharply higher political ad revenues every two years, with the midterm elections and Presidential election cycle.

Is all this enough to give thumbs up to legacy TV stations -- as an industry as a whole?

No doubt bigger players will create more competitors to digital-first local media platforms. Watch your big screens for answers.

 Something t share with local-direct businesses when it comes to proper media marketing: Phili Jay LeNoble, Ph.D.

Commentary

The End of The Middle Funnel

• by Phil Case , Yesterday

For decades, marketers have designed strategies around the middle funnel: the consideration phase where consumers research, compare, and slowly warm up to a decision. It was assumed that buyers needed time, repetition, and education to move forward. That assumption is beginning to break down.

Across industries, the customer journey has become shorter. AI-driven discovery is compressing the time it takes for consumers to decide what to buy, which brands to trust, and whether something is worth their attention at all. Answers that once required weeks of research now take seconds. As a result, the traditional consideration phase isn’t shrinking; it’s collapsing.

AI has effectively automated much of the middle. Product education, feature comparisons, reviews, and alternatives are increasingly surfaced, summarized, and prioritized by algorithms before a consumer ever visits a brand site. That doesn’t eliminate nurturing or retargeting, but it does change their role. Rather than driving decisions, these tactics now work best when they reinforce relevance, familiarity, and trust that has already been established. Still, much of the consideration and research phase is either outsourced to AI or skipped entirely.

Instead, purchases are happening in one of two extremes:

On one end is impulse. These decisions occur in seconds, not days. A single product card, an AI-generated recommendation, or a moment of hyper-relevance is enough to trigger a yes or a no. There is little room for extended persuasion. In this world, visibility, clarity, and immediacy matter more than explanation. If a brand’s value isn't instantly understandable and desirable, the opportunity disappears.

On the opposite end is trust.

Trust-based decisions are reserved for brands consumers already feel emotionally safe with. These are the brands people return to automatically, often without comparison. In these cases, consumers don’t ask AI what to choose. They already know. The decision was made long before the moment of purchase, built through a brand’s consistency in communicating value propositions. Trust collapses the journey entirely, because the brand has already earned permission.

What’s diminishing is everything in between.

Traditional consideration tactics such as education-heavy content, side-by-side comparisons, long nurture sequences, all still exist, but their influence has been redefined. When AI can summarize “the best option” instantly, consumers have little patience for prolonged evaluation. Brands either need to win fast, or be remembered deeply. Therefore, mid-funnel tactics should focus on accelerating impulse or deepening trust.

Impulse requires simplicity through clear positioning, unmistakable value, and immediate relevance. Trust requires long-term investment: showing up consistently, delivering reliably, and building emotional equity over time. Both demand focus, and neither leaves much room for vague messaging or incremental persuasion.

The consideration phase isn’t gone, it’s just no longer where decisions are made. In an AI-compressed world, brands will increasingly live at the edges: chosen instantly, or chosen instinctively. Everything else risks being skipped.<

 

Commentary

Your Brand's Audience Isn't Who You Think It Is

• by Caitlyn Banowsky , January 27, 2026

Here’s the reality marketers need to acknowledge: The audience you’ve defined in your targeting models is likely not the audience that will deliver impact. Traditional demographic inputs (age, gender, income, ZIP) don’t reflect how people actually make decisions anymore. What drives results isn’t the segment they fall into, but the motivation that shapes what they do.

Today’s consumer doesn’t respond because she’s “35 and female.” She responds because something in her life is shifting: a need for control in moments of change, a desire to reconnect with what matters, a craving for escape, or a search for belonging.

Values, motivations, and emotional states are far better predictors of present and future behavior than demographics alone. Once you speak to someone’s need state, you transcend the labels. Two people with nothing in common on paper (different ages, incomes, ZIP codes) can share the same emotional reality: feeling stuck, craving belonging, needing escape. And when you tap into that, you don’t just reach people. You connect with them.

Many campaigns fall apart because the media buy defaults to demographics. Or media targets one group, while the creative was built for another. The result is predictable: misalignment. The message doesn’t land. The audience doesn’t respond. And suddenly you’ve wasted media dollars, creative energy, and production spend on work that never had a fair shot.

The audience in the brief should match the audience you buy. Achieving that takes real alignment between brand strategy, creative strategy, and media. Your targeting signals (behavioral, affinity, contextual, psychographic) must map back to the same need states and values expressed in the work. When creative speaks truthfully and media reaches the right people, the payoff isn’t just consistency, but stronger, faster performance.

Here are three ways to align your brief with your audience:

-- Start at the insight stage by going beyond demographic research. Lean into ethnography, social listening, need-state mapping, and psychographic segmentation. Ask: What emotional or functional tension is driving this person?

-- As you move into audience development, define your audience in terms of need states: “people who feel their life is accelerating and want tools to slow down,” not “women 30–44.” And when the media plan comes together, make sure it reflects those same need states. Do your partners offer signals or proxies for these motivations? Can you target content or behaviors that reflect them?

That means having those perspectives in the strategy room, the creative room, and the media planning room. If you’re targeting “first-gen professionals seeking more stability,” you need someone on your team who has lived some version of that reality. It’s the only way to guide work that truly connects.

-- Start by measuring resonance, not just reach. Don’t stop at impressions or vanity metrics. Look at relevance, sentiment, emotional connection, and shared intent. Track how the audience you intended to reach actually behaves, not just who happened to see your ad.

A brand’s audience isn’t defined by demographic labels. It’s defined by what people need, what they feel, and what motivates them. And when you combine those insights with authentic lived experience and a media buy aligned to real motivations, you don’t just reach people -- you make an impact.

 

AI And the Age of the Marketing 'Pinball Machine'

• by Toby Southgate , January 28, 2026

More than one billion people now use standalone AI tools like ChatGPT, Claude and Perplexity every month, according to a recent We Are Social report. Adoption has been rapid, global and irreversible. For marketers, the most important question isn’t how fast AI is spreading; it’s how that adoption is rewiring the way people move between channels we know and rely on.

The traditional funnel has finally collapsed, and in place of the linear consumer journeys we’re familiar with, we now have something that better resembles a pinball machine. We might begin with broad, conversational AI prompts, ricochet into social feeds for validation, bounce to search for comparison, consult creators for reassurance -- and often end up somewhere entirely unexpected.

Each interaction is a bounce. Each channel plays a distinct role. AI has simply added  new ramps, flippers, and alarms, accelerating the movement between touchpoints and increasing the unpredictability of the path to purchase.

So while AI is often the beginning of the journey -- whether we realize that or not, given the integration of AI into search -- it’s almost never the end.

When we use AI tools, queries are usually exploratory rather than transactional. Around 18% of conversations with AI focus on information-gathering, while the top three use cases are “therapy and companionship,” “organizing my life,” and “finding purpose.” These moments are about orientation and sense-making, not commerce.

Brands may surface through AI -- a gift idea, a shortlist, a recommendation --  but discovery is just the beginning. What follows is verification and sense-checking, where consistency and authenticity become critical. If your brand doesn’t show up coherently across touchpoints, trust erodes as quickly as attention.

Which brings us to social. Despite the AI hype cycle, social media’s role in the marketing mix has intensified. There are now 5.66 billion active social media user identities worldwide. Roughly two thirds of the global population uses social platforms every month.

Advertising on social remains the #3 source of brand awareness globally, just behind search and TV. And more than 30% of consumers say they discover new brands through social. Looking at younger audiences only, for 16- to 34-year-olds social remains the single biggest driver of awareness.

Any suggestion that social is being replaced should be put firmly to rest. But it’s not a silver bullet, either. The real shift marketers need to navigate is that the mix matters more than ever, so ideas and creativity become increasingly valuable.

AI doesn’t simplify marketing, it compresses timelines: decision cycles shorten,  channel-hopping accelerates, so brands influence across moments rather than unfolding in sequence. Planning for neat, linear journeys isn’t just outdated, it’s a misunderstanding of fundamental behaviors.

This demands a different mindset: less obsession with attribution, more focus on coherence and narrative. Marketing rewards those who design for movement rather than control, those who expect verification, friction and detours, and who build systems that can withstand them.

In the age of the pinball machine, success doesn’t come from watching the ball spin, or slowing it down. It comes from understanding the angles, and playing accordingly.

 

Commentary

Why Big Station Groups Could Survive - And Thrive

• by Wayne Friedman , Staff Writer, January 28, 2026

TV station groups -- especially dominant large ones -- will continue to thrive in years to come.

But they need to be aggressive in growing -- something the Trump Administration has increasingly hinted it will help with.

This continues to be good news for the largest owner of U.S. TV stations -- Nexstar Media Group.

Nexstar’s proposed $6.2 billion deal to buy TV station group Tegna will almost certainly get go ahead from the Trump Administration -- perhaps as early as next month.

The merger deal was announced in August 2025.

This will come with the lifting of the station ownership cap. The Federal Communication Commission prohibits a company from owning or controlling TV stations that in total reach more than 39% of all U.S. television homes.

“We expect FCC Chairman [Brendan] Carr to proceed with a cap elimination on the agenda in the next 1-3 months, potentially as soon as February, with enough rationalization and backing to counter the inevitable lawsuits that will follow,” writes Daniel Kurnos, media analyst for Benchmark Equity Research, in a recent note.

But it is a bit more than just gaining added U.S. market reach.

He says: “Nexstar will successfully acquire Tegna, creating massive synergies and an in-market juggernaut.”

This will come from benefiting from connected TV (CTV) related businesses, quickly gaining higher automotive advertising share, and big benefits from sporting events on its CW network. Nexstar also owns NewsNation, a cable TV news channel, and its around 200 TV stations.

Overall, there is a benefit that the strongest of the strong -- including possibly Sinclair Inc., second to Nexstar in terms of U.S. stations ownership -- will also make gains down the road with their own merger TV station group deals.

“We think there is ample evidence to suggest that new market definitions are likely to prevail with regards to one of the oldest, most outdated group of rules and regulations in the media industry.”

Competing cable TV network Newsmax is worried that eliminating that the 39% would harm smaller-to-midsize TV news platforms -- those owning national cable TV channels and TV stations.

Key for TV stations groups are their nonstop efforts around local -- and in some cases, still growing -- TV news coverage. This is live content that continues to be deemed highly valuable when it comes to viewer engagement for national and local TV advertisers.

Those gaining sizable market share then would also seem to be more competitive as live, premium video platforms against continuously growing, local digital players.

TV stations continue to see sharply higher political ad revenues every two years, with the midterm elections and Presidential election cycle.

Is all this enough to give thumbs up to legacy TV stations -- as an industry as a whole?

No doubt bigger players will create more competitors to digital-first local media platforms. Watch your big screens for answers.