LinkedIn engagement in revenue tooling: a Nordic sample
Nordic revenue tooling, pulled on 27 August 2026. Nine vendors, 90 days of their public posts, counted against one named market of 170 people.
Gong takes 13.6 market reactions per post. Attention takes 0 from 24 posts. Both numbers come from the same 170 people in the same window.
Below is the full table, the sample it came from, and what the market did with it.
The count: how this revenue tooling market was built
Pulled 27 August 2026. The window is the 90 days before the pull.
We started with the people who reacted to or commented on posts from the revenue tooling vendors in the Nordics. After the title filter, 642 people. The table uses the 170 most active of them, ranked by how often they engaged anything in the category.
Most active means most engagements over the window. That has a bias and we print it: it favours people who use LinkedIn heavily. A buyer who reads without reacting does not appear.
These 170 are not a buying committee. Their titles look right for the category, and a title is a proxy. When we run this for a company, that company strikes out the fits that are wrong and the table gets rebuilt from what is left.
The attention table: market reactions per post in revenue tooling
Sample: 170 most active of 642. Window: 90 days to 27 August 2026. Region: Nordics. Counted: reactions and comments from those 170 on each vendor's public posts.
| Vendor | Market reactions | Reactions per post |
|---|---|---|
| Gong | 327 | 13.6 |
| Outreach | 264 | 11.0 |
| Salesloft | 99 | 4.1 |
| Clari | 68 | 2.8 |
| Revenue.io | 33 | 1.4 |
| Sybill | 31 | 2.8 |
| Avoma | 27 | 1.1 |
| People.ai | 12 | 0.5 |
| Attention | 0 | 0.0 |
Attention published 24 posts in the window. No qualifying reactions or comments from the 170 were recorded on them.
Clari and Salesloft now post as one company. They hold separate rows here because the posts in the window came from two pages, so the report retains both publishing histories.
Sybill and Clari land on the same rate, 2.8, from different totals. Clari took 68 reactions, Sybill 31. Clari posts more often. The total column shows engagement actions and the rate column shows the average per post, and a vendor can lead on one while sitting near the bottom of the other.
Attention: zero recorded reactions from 24 posts
Attention recorded zero qualifying reactions from the 170-person sample across 24 posts in the 90-day window.
This finding describes observed engagement from those people. It does not establish zero impressions, weak sales or performance in another region. The post count is included so the zero can be interpreted.
Gong's posts about sales practice
Gong's post about sales-call mistakes recorded 74 market reactions from this sample. A post about AI discussions and team size recorded 29.
These examples show which topics attracted responses in the window. The study did not run a controlled test of content formats, so it cannot establish that practical posts always outperform product news or explain the full difference between vendors.
Creator engagement in this revenue-tooling sample
We rank voices by how many of the sampled 170 engaged them. Follower count does not enter the calculation.
| Person | Role | Of the 170 |
|---|---|---|
| Brian LaManna | AE at Gong, writes Closed Won | 29 |
| Abhijit Mitra | CEO, Outreach | 24 |
| Laurie Pratt Ehrbar | CMO, Clari and Salesloft | 20 |
| Amit Bendov | Co-founder, Gong | 17 |
| Steve Cox | CEO, Clari and Salesloft | 16 |
| Nadia Rashid | CRO, Outreach | 16 |
Brian LaManna had the highest recorded overlap: 29 of the 170 sampled people engaged with his posts. That compares observed engagement within this sample, not follower count or total reach. Roles in the table refer to the report period.
Topics beyond product announcements
No single event dominated the most-engaged posts reviewed in this window. Category consolidation and leadership accounts appeared in the research instead.
For event planning, this gives us limited evidence for choosing a conference. The ecommerce customer-service report includes a different pattern, with professional associations appearing prominently.
Method: how these numbers were produced
Full method, including where it is weak: /data/method
Questions
No. It means 13.6 reactions and comments per post from the 170 people in this sampled market. Those people carry titles that fit the category, which is not the same as budget or authority. We write the sampled market for that reason.
Because the posts inside the 90 day window came from two company pages, and the reactions were counted against the page that published them. Merging the rows after the fact would hide how the window actually looked. Their leadership accounts appear once each in the voices table, with the joint role.
It is one sample, one region and one window, so it is not a verdict. A vendor at zero here can be doing well with a US audience, with customers, or with a crowd this pull did not sample. What it does say is that the Nordic market we defined did not react to 24 posts.
We publish the post count where it changes how a row reads, which is why Attention's 24 is on the page. The per post column is produced by dividing each vendor's market reactions by that vendor's posts in the same window. Ask us for the count on any row and we will send it.
Book a demo. Then run it on your own market for 7 days.
The demo is with the founder and shows the loop in action. A work email is enough, no card.