# Why B2B Events Still Matter in the AI Age — Pontis

> Why B2B events still matter: what a survey of 300 software and AI companies reveals about small gatherings, conferences and GTM investment in 2027.

Canonical: https://pontis.company/common-ground/b2b-events-gtm-2026

This is a plain-text rendition of the live page for AI agents and text tools. The HTML page above is the canonical, authoritative source.

---
1.  [Common Ground](/common-ground)
2.  [AI & industry](/common-ground/topics/ai-industry)

Gatherings and growth Analysis

# Why B2B events still matter in the AI age

A survey of 300 software and AI companies finds a strong appetite for intimate gatherings. For anyone planning a B2B go-to-market strategy, the question is how to turn a place on the guest list into a relationship worth having. [\[1, pp. 4, 28\]](#source-1)

By Pontis · 4 November 2026 · 9 min read

![Illustration: six people in conversation around a white table shaped like a conference badge, its blue lanyard looping across an orange floor.](/assets/build/b2b-events-gtm-2026.DO6GKSrE_Z2igDvw.webp)

Illustration: Pontis

## In brief

-   In a September 2026 survey of 300 B2B software and AI companies, 42% named intimate events among the channels where they plan to increase investment most in 2027. For large conferences, the figure was 12%. [\[1, p. 28\]](#source-1)
-   Both lost ground as core channels compared with the 2025 survey: intimate events by 3 percentage points, large conferences by 13. The evidence points to more deliberate choices; it doesn’t show budgets moving from conference halls to dinner tables. [\[1, p. 17\]](#source-1)
-   Among companies with annual contracts above $50,000, 42% put intimate events among their top three channels and 29% chose large conferences. [\[1, p. 20\]](#source-1) The report gives no measured ROI multiple for either. [\[1, p. 19\]](#source-1)
-   Pontis’s view: decide what a gathering is for before choosing who to invite, and judge it by who is still talking a month later.

The conference is over. The invoice remains. For whoever approved the budget, the awkward question is what survives of the conversations.

One anonymous respondent to the 2026 State of B2B GTM survey offered a blunt assessment of what hadn’t worked: “Attending too many large events, lot of effort (if speaking) and honestly not great ROI, too crowded.” [\[1, p. 18\]](#source-1)

Yet the same report finds that 42% of respondents name intimate events among the channels where they plan to increase investment most in 2027. For large conferences, the figure is 12%. A good conversation still has a claim on the budget. The harder task is creating the conditions for one. [\[1, p. 28\]](#source-1)

Kyle Poyar of Growth Unhinged and Maja Voje of GTM Strategist surveyed 300 B2B software and AI companies in September 2026. Their report, published the following month, examines how those businesses reach buyers and win customers. Its findings suggest a more selective approach to go-to-market (GTM): a company should be able to explain what it needs from a gathering before committing to the guest list. [\[1, pp. 4, 6\]](#source-1)

That makes the case for events more demanding, and more interesting. A gathering has to give people something worth making time for. A useful introduction may do that. So may the chance to question a potential partner properly, with enough time to hear an answer.

## Small events are attracting the next investment bet

Forty per cent of respondents identify intimate events as a core GTM channel, compared with 34% for large conferences. The authors’ channel scorecard places intimate events near the top for likelihood of a big impact, alongside networks and introductions. These are survey-based assessments; the report supplies no measured event ROI multiple. [\[1, pp. 16, 19\]](#source-1)

The appetite for further investment is more revealing. Intimate events rank third among the listed priorities for 2027, behind AI search at 50% and signal-based outbound at 48%. Human contact has a place in a strategy that also takes AI seriously. [\[1, p. 28\]](#source-1)

But the figures contain a wrinkle:

Measure in the 2026 survey

Intimate events

Large conferences

Respondents identifying the channel as core

40%

34%

Change in core-channel adoption versus the 2025 survey

−3 percentage points

−13 percentage points

Respondents naming the channel among their biggest planned investment increases for 2027

42%

12%

Source: Poyar and Voje, The 2026 State of B2B GTM, pp. 16–17, 28. Overall survey N=300. The rows measure adoption, the reported change between surveys and future investment intentions. The last row gives shares of respondents, not percentage increases in their budgets.

Even small events lost ground in core-channel adoption compared with the previous survey. Greater enthusiasm for future investment sits alongside a smaller share treating them as a staple. The evidence points towards more deliberate choices about events. It doesn’t establish that budgets are being transferred from conference halls to dinner tables.

For an organiser, the invitation list is the event’s first editorial decision. It determines whose experience will meet whose questions. A smaller room gives those choices fewer places to hide: the wrong mix of people becomes apparent quickly.

## A conversation before the contract

Among respondents whose annual contract size exceeds $50,000, 51% put networks and introductions among their top three channels. Intimate events follow at 42%, while large conferences receive 29%. These are channel selections within that contract-size group, rather than conversion rates or measured financial returns. [\[1, p. 20\]](#source-1)

One plausible explanation lies in the buyer’s decision. Before committing to an expensive contract, someone may want to find out how the supplier handles a difficult question. Does the answer become more precise under scrutiny? Can a customer explain what happened when implementation went wrong?

A meeting can serve as a rehearsal for the working relationship. The buyer gets to test the conversation before having to live with the contract. That is a reason to make room for unscripted discussion when designing an event.

Poyar and Voje put their own interpretation plainly: “Intimate in-person dinners build trust and seal the deal.” [\[1, p. 39\]](#source-1) Their survey doesn’t test that causal link. It does give companies selling larger contracts a reason to take intimate gatherings seriously.

There is no winning seating plan in the data. The report neither defines an attendance threshold for “intimate events” nor compares dinners with roundtables and workshops. Those choices require judgment. A dinner may suit potential partners who need time to get acquainted; a working session may be more useful when the participants have a specific problem to examine.

The host’s job begins well before anyone sits down: decide what deserves their time together.

## Large conferences still have a job to do

The argument becomes less comfortable for advocates of small events when company size enters the picture.

Among respondents at $10 million–$50 million in annual recurring revenue, intimate events and large conferences lead the displayed channel ranking. They receive top-three selections from 38% and 37% respectively, followed by networks and introductions at 29%. That is far too thin a gap to build a sweeping claim of superiority around. [\[1, p. 22\]](#source-1)

A useful analogy is a diplomatic summit. The main programme gives people a reason to converge; smaller meetings allow them to work through questions that would get little attention in a plenary session. A business conference can be designed on the same principle.

Its value might lie in bringing a relevant market together and making worthwhile encounters easier to arrange. That puts a burden on the organiser to understand who needs to meet whom. It also gives participating companies a more concrete brief than simply being visible.

The dissatisfied respondent complained about attending too many large events. An overloaded calendar can conceal a failure to choose. The survey leaves a substantial case for conferences among growth-stage companies, while giving them good reason to be demanding about which ones they attend.

## Good content keeps the discussion open

For Pontis, the practical implication is to plan [gatherings](/events) and editorial content together. Useful published work can give people a reason to pick up a conversation after they have returned to their desks. This is an editorial recommendation drawn from the findings, rather than a model the survey tested.

Consider a proposed roundtable on industrial AI. Its central question could be what evidence an operations director needs before approving a deployment. A briefing published beforehand would define the problem. The discussion could then work through the disputed assumptions, with a reported analysis afterwards examining what participants agreed on and what remained unresolved.

A [content hub](/knowledge) can function like an open case file. The evidence is there to inspect, the claims have names attached, and the unanswered questions can be revisited when something changes. Someone who missed the gathering still has a way into the subject.

That requires editorial work. A recap announcing that an inspiring discussion took place gives the reader little to use. A careful account of why two experienced practitioners disagree gives them something to think about. Only material intended for public use should be published; a confidential dinner needn’t produce a transcript.

Newsletters and editorial content are already a core channel for 34% of respondents. The survey doesn’t measure whether connecting that content to events improves sales or visibility in AI answers. For Pontis, that is a proposition to develop and evaluate. [\[1, p. 16\]](#source-1)

## The event budget needs an answer after the event

The report’s closing argument gives relationships and automation a place in the same GTM strategy. Technology can help a company research an account or prepare for a meeting. The gathering still needs to offer something the participants want to discuss. [\[1, p. 39\]](#source-1)

The event brief should say what commercial progress would look like. A qualified follow-up meeting might be enough at an early stage. An existing relationship might need a specific decision or a serious partnership discussion. Afterwards, record what happened and distinguish an event’s contribution from revenue that can reasonably be attributed to it.

A month later, a company should be able to name the people still talking, the issue they are working on and the next step they have agreed. That would give whoever approved the invoice a much better answer.

## FAQ

### What does the 2026 GTM report say about B2B events?

In a September 2026 survey of 300 B2B software and AI companies, 40% identified intimate events as a core GTM channel and 34% identified large conferences. For 2027, 42% named intimate events among the channels where they planned to increase investment most, compared with 12% for conferences. [\[1, pp. 16, 28\]](#source-1)

### Which events are most relevant to higher-value B2B selling?

Among surveyed companies with annual contract sizes above $50,000, 42% placed intimate events among their top three channels and 29% selected large conferences. The report does not compare dinners, roundtables and workshops separately, so it cannot identify one specific format as the best. [\[1, p. 20\]](#source-1)

### Does the report prove that smaller events generate a higher ROI?

No. Its scorecard presents survey-based impact assessments, while other charts record adoption and future intentions. It gives no measured financial ROI multiple for small events or conferences and does not establish causation. [\[1, pp. 16, 19, 21, 23, 28\]](#source-1)

## Source and research note

\[1\] Kyle Poyar and Maja Voje, The 2026 State of B2B GTM, Growth Unhinged and GTM Strategist, October 2026. Survey conducted in September 2026 among 300 B2B software and AI companies. Official report page: [https://stateofb2bgtm.com/](https://stateofb2bgtm.com/). Page references above use the printed page numbers in the supplied 41-page PDF.

The findings are self-reported and concern the surveyed software and AI companies. The report does not provide a full recruitment methodology, subgroup sample sizes or confidence intervals. Its year-on-year figures compare survey results; it does not establish that the same companies participated in both years. Top-three channel selections, impact assessments and investment intentions are distinct measures. The research does not establish that a particular event format causes revenue growth. Recommendations about event design, follow-up and content hubs are Pontis’s editorial interpretation.

[Back to Common Ground](/common-ground)

## In this article

1.  [Small events are attracting the next investment bet](#small-events-are-attracting-the-next-investment-bet)
2.  [A conversation before the contract](#a-conversation-before-the-contract)
3.  [Large conferences still have a job to do](#large-conferences-still-have-a-job-to-do)
4.  [Good content keeps the discussion open](#good-content-keeps-the-discussion-open)
5.  [The event budget needs an answer after the event](#the-event-budget-needs-an-answer-after-the-event)
6.  [FAQ](#faq)
7.  [Source and research note](#source-and-research-note)

Sector

[AI & industry](/common-ground/topics/ai-industry)

Format

Analysis

## More from Common Ground

-   Gatherings and growth Analysis
    
    ### [Why events matter to OpenAI’s business pitch](/common-ground/openai-events-strategy-b2b-marketing)