Delve.ai - AI Persona Generator for Market Research | WhatAI

mogens_bidata · Jun 27, 2026 Delve AI Research & Knowledge Work

There is a video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w2SZ0Sh21g4 arguing that AI is not killing Business Intelligence and the argument is worth engaging with seriously because it is more nuanced than either the AI-replaces-everything or the dashboards-are-here-forever camps acknowledge. The expected shift by 2026 from manual dashboard creation to automated AI-driven systems delivering direct insights is real in the sense that the tools to do this exist. The question is whether the quality of AI-delivered insights is high enough to replace dashboard analysis for the decision types that actually matter. The BI industry splitting into Traditional BI with dashboards and static reports and Data Intelligence with AI embedded in workflows is a structural change that is already happening. These are not competing approaches so much as different tools for different decision contexts. The emphasis on foundational BI skills remaining crucial because AI relies on good data is the honest constraint that most AI-in-BI enthusiasm glosses over. An AI that summarises patterns from a poorly structured data model is producing confident wrong answers faster than a human would have from the same data. For data teams: where are you currently on this spectrum and what is the specific bottleneck preventing you from moving further toward automated insight delivery?

♥ 0 💬 2 👁 5 View 2 replies →

bjorn_comply · Jun 21, 2026 Delve AI Research & Knowledge Work

Compliance automation is not a glamorous AI application but the funding announcement video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vcDaOsh_mF0 makes the business case clearly enough to understand why Insight Partners led a $32 million Series A. The mission is eliminating compliance busywork. The founding team being AI researchers from MIT, Stanford and Berkeley is the technical credibility signal that distinguishes this from a compliance workflow management tool with AI features added. The AI agents acting as integrated team members rather than tools you invoke is the positioning that matters for evaluating how it fits into existing security and compliance team structures. An agent that handles complex compliance tasks on an ongoing basis is a different adoption decision from a tool you use periodically. The use of funding to deepen AI capabilities, expand the team and launch support for additional compliance frameworks suggests the current platform is genuinely earlier stage than the headline numbers imply. The $32 million is an acceleration of something that works rather than a launch of something new. For heads of security or compliance in regulated industries: what is the specific compliance task where you most wish you had automated assistance? The one that generates the most busywork relative to actual risk management value.

♥ 1 💬 1 👁 5 View 1 reply →

ragnar_bi · Jun 6, 2026 Delve AI Research & Knowledge Work

Maxime Beauchemin's presentation https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xLsxKlvBCa8 is the most useful framing I have found for thinking about where AI belongs in a BI stack versus where it falls short. High-accuracy requirements like text-to-SQL for business decisions where a wrong answer has material consequences sit differently than creative suggestion tasks like charting recommendations where an option that does not quite fit can be corrected by a human. Fully automated driving on a highway is fine. Fully automated navigation through a complex intersection is not. MCP being flagged as a disruptive technology allowing LLMs to interact with applications with user permissions is the architectural shift worth watching. Semantic layers as guardrails for AI navigating messy data are the practical response. The emphasis that foundational BI skills, data models, SQL and data quality, remain crucial because AI relies on good data to avoid delivering faster wrong answers is the honest counter to the AI-replaces-analysts narrative. For data teams thinking about where to introduce AI in their BI stack: what is the first workflow you would automate versus the first one you would never fully automate regardless of capability?

♥ 1 💬 2 👁 7 View 2 replies →

UXResearcher_Padma · May 13, 2026 Delve AI Research & Knowledge Work

If you do qualitative research with more than one coder you know how much of the process is managing the human coordination problem. How do you make sure different team members are applying codes consistently? How do you measure agreement objectively? How do you resolve disagreements without it becoming a version control nightmare? Delve AI is built specifically for collaborative qualitative coding and the Automated Reliability Scoring is the feature I want to lead with. Intercoder Reliability, specifically Krippendorff's Alpha, measures how consistently different coders are applying the same codes to the same material. Calculating it manually is tedious and prone to error. Delve AI calculates it automatically as your team codes. You can see alignment scores in real time rather than running the calculation at the end and discovering your team has been interpreting a code differently for the past two weeks. The Consensus Coding workflow supports independent coding first. The Coded by Me view hides other team members' work during the independent analysis phase so you are not anchoring to each other's decisions. Once everyone has coded independently you switch to a side-by-side comparison view to identify and discuss disagreements. In-Context Memos let you leave discussion comments directly on a specific coded snippet. The conversation about why that segment was coded that way lives with the data rather than in a separate email thread that is disconnected from what you are actually talking about. Full audit trail tracking who applied which codes and when is the kind of governance feature that matters for research that needs to demonstrate methodological rigor. Browser-based with free view-only access for stakeholders who need to see findings without participating in the coding process. The collaborative coding workflow is shown at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_QYbIVAxxYM

♥ 1 💬 3 👁 6 View 3 replies →

SellmeMany · Mar 1, 2026 Delve AI Research & Knowledge Work

I played with Delve.ai and the personas look polished… but I’m stuck on the practical part. **For people who use it seriously:** What do you do after you generate personas? Do you translate them into ad angles, landing page sections, objections, FAQs, etc.? What’s the fastest way to validate them against real customer behavior? Any workflow you’ve found that avoids “persona theater”? Basically: how do you turn Delve.ai personas into measurable growth, not just nice PDFs?

♥ 1 💬 0 👁 7 Reply →

👍 Pro

Interface supports data integration and persona generation through guided workflows, with options for custom inputs and notifications via email or Slack

👎 Con

Setup requires connecting data sources, which may involve initial configuration steps for users unfamiliar with analytics or CRM tools

👍 Pro

Produces personas, journey maps, and insights from data sources in a structured process, with results available after initial processing

👎 Con

Initial data ingestion and persona creation can take time depending on dataset size; updates are monthly or quarterly rather than real-time

👍 Pro

Generates data-driven personas, segments, journey maps, and synthetic research outputs like surveys or interviews, suitable for audience analysis in content planning

👎 Con

Primarily focused on persona and marketing insights; less direct support for text drafting, outlining, or visual creation without additional tools

👍 Pro

Draws from first-party data (e.g., Google Analytics, CRM) and public sources to create detailed profiles, including demographics, behaviors, and ideal customer attributes

👎 Con

Relies on user-provided data quality; does not include built-in general web search or external research beyond integrated sources

👍 Pro

Connects with tools like HubSpot, Salesforce, Shopify, Google Analytics, and others for seamless data import; supports API access on add-ons for further customization

👎 Con

Advanced integrations like API require separate add-ons; workflow may involve manual export of insights for use in content editors

👍 Pro

Plans are customized based on website traffic or number of businesses, with monthly and annual billing (20% discount on annual); add-ons available for specific features like competitors or filters

👎 Con

No public tier details or free trial listed; costs for add-ons start at $39/month, and custom plans may require contacting sales for quotes

👍 Pro

Outputs grounded in actual data sources with high user ratings (4.8 on G2, 5.0 on Capterra), providing consistent insights for audience targeting

👎 Con

Accuracy depends on input data completeness; potential for biases in synthetic research outputs that need manual review

👍 Pro

Supports audience analysis and persona development that inform targeted, relevant sections in articles or guides, enhancing content alignment with reader needs

👎 Con

Best as a preparatory tool for understanding audiences rather than direct content generation; requires pairing with writing platforms for full creation of substantial, original material