Strawberry vs Glean for Prospect Research

Glean and Strawberry both show up when teams shop for help with prospect research. They do not solve the same problem. Glean is an Enterprise search and AI; Strawberry is an AI browser that lives in your real browser tabs and connected apps. This page is the head-to-head on prospect research specifically - where each one wins, what the output actually looks like, and the price you pay either way.

The short answer

For prospect research, pick Strawberry when the work needs to read logged-in pages and act across multiple apps in your real browser. Pick Glean when internal knowledge search across a large enterprise is the primary need. If your workflow looks like "open three tabs, judge what matters, write something back into a CRM", Strawberry will close it faster. If it looks like "answer this clean question", Glean is the cheaper tool.

What prospect research actually requires

The job is to decide whether a prospect is worth a calendar slot and prepare a personalised first touch. Success is measured as: first reply rate above 8% and a meeting booked in under 14 days from first touch. To do it well, the workflow needs these signals: role tenure and seniority on LinkedIn; recent funding rounds or M&A activity; headcount growth or layoffs in the last 6 months; tech stack and procurement signals. Most of those signals live behind logins or scattered across the open web - which is exactly where the tool choice starts to matter.

How Strawberry handles prospect research

Strawberry runs inside your real browser. It reads the tabs you have open, pulls context from your connected apps (CRM, email, sheets, Slack, Notion, calendar), researches missing signals via the open web, and synthesises a draft in the shape your team uses. A human reviews before any external write. Because the agent sees the same pages you do, you can ask follow-up questions referencing what's on screen and get answers grounded in that context.

Concrete workflow with Strawberry

1. Open the prospect's LinkedIn profile and their company website in tabs.
2. Ask Strawberry to pull role tenure, last 3 posts, and any recent press the company published in the last 90 days.
3. Have it cross-check the company against your CRM for prior conversations and current owner.
4. Request a one-page brief: ICP fit yes/no with reason, 3 talking points anchored to real signals, suggested first message.
5. Review the draft, fix anything that does not match your ICP, then save the brief to the deal record.

Use this exact prompt in Strawberry to start the workflow:

I have [tab/app] open. Help me research a prospect for [name/company]. Read what's on screen plus any connected CRM and email context. Return: A one-page brief: name, role, company, ICP fit (yes/no with reason), top 3 talking points, suggested first message, 1-2 source links. Anchor every claim to a real signal from role tenure and seniority on LinkedIn or recent funding rounds or M&A activity. Do not invent facts. Stop before any external action - I'll review.

How Glean handles prospect research

Glean's strength is indexed search and AI across enterprise apps (Slack, GDrive, Confluence, GitHub, etc.). For prospect research, that pays off when the inputs are already clean and the output is text - drafting messages, summarising notes, answering questions about pasted material. Where it slows down is exactly what prospect research demands at scale: Glean retrieves and answers. Teams using Glean for this end up copy-pasting screenshots, re-typing CRM fields, and switching context every few minutes.

Honest tradeoffs

Pick Strawberry when the work needs to act, not just search and summarise.

Pick Glean when internal knowledge search across a large enterprise is the primary need.

Use them together when Glean owns the drafting step and Strawberry owns the browser-side gathering and CRM write-back. Many teams keep both in their stack.

What a real prospect research output looks like

Specific, not generic:

• Anna Lindqvist - VP Marketing, Voi Technology
• ICP fit: yes (Series D scooter co, EU expansion, 1500 employees)
• Talking point 1: hired 4 paid-acquisition managers in last 90 days - clear shift toward performance marketing
• Talking point 2: spoke at SuperVenture last month on scooter unit economics
• Talking point 3: company just announced Germany pull-out - retention focus is likely a priority
• Suggested first message: short, references the SuperVenture talk, asks one specific question, no calendar link

Strawberry produces this by reading the relevant tabs and apps, then drafting. Glean produces this only if the inputs are already pasted into the chat.

Pricing in context

Glean: enterprise pricing, $15-40/user/mo typical. Strawberry: free tier, Intern $20/mo, Part-Time $100/mo, Full-Time $250/mo, with team plans available. The honest comparison is hours of work saved per seat per week against list price, not list price alone. Teams that lean on prospect research weekly usually hit payback in the first month on either tool.

Three mistakes to avoid in prospect research

These bite regardless of which tool you pick:

• Researching prospects who don't match ICP - the brief is wasted
• Generic talking points ("impressive growth") that don't reference any real signal
• Copying public bio text instead of synthesising fit

Caveats

Strawberry holds back on sending email, updating CRM records, or changing shared systems until a human approves the action. Treat the agent as a fast first-draft author, not an autopilot.