Reading: 0118 322 4395 | Manchester: 01617 062 414 | Oxford: 01865 479 625 | | Office hours: Monday-Friday 9:00am - 5:30pm

 | Office hours: Monday-Friday 8:30am - 5:30pm

 | Email  | Office hours: Mon-Fri 9:00am - 5:30pm 

Bard Bungles B2B - Bing Better

Bard Bungles B2B – Bing Better

By John Woods  |  June 8, 2023

Last month I looked at how Microsoft’s chatGPT-powered search engine performed for B2B research. I was pleasantly surprised at how useful it was. Read the full blog article here.

This month I’ve applied the same structured research and evaluation process to Google’s equivalent, Bard. 

I can’t sugar coat this. Bard is currently pretty terrible at B2B research – at least, for the types of question I tested.  

Google is up front that Bard is still a prototype, and we can expect it to change and evolve at a rapid pace. But as it stands today, I don’t see much use for Bard in B2B research. Bing Chat is far superior. 

Here are a few examples to show what I mean.  

Google Bard chat - How should I split my budget between Google Search and LinkedIn Ads?
Google Bard response - What's the best coworking space in Oxford?

Top of funnel queries – general information seeking 

Bard did OK with the basics here. I noticed two big differences in comparison with Bing Chat: 

  • Bard doesn’t quote its sources unless you specifically ask for them, whereas Bing Chat often volunteered web links that were its reference material. I found this feature of Bing Chat very useful to build confidence in the answers. With Bard, I found myself having to ask follow-on questions like “what are your sources for that answer?” in order to sense check the results. 
  • Bard doesn’t suggest follow-on questions. You can type in your own, but there’s no guidance. I missed the suggested follow-on questions that Bing Chat provides. 

Bard also had a habit of offering information that didn’t directly answer my question. For example when I asked “How can PV generation be integrated with industrial unit roofing?” Bard gave a good basic answer, but then rambled off to talk about the benefits of solar power. To me, it’s implicit in my question that I already know quite a bit about solar power, and that I’m going to be looking for something specific. So this extra off-topic content doesn’t add value. Bing Chat was typically much more focussed. Here are the Bard and Bing results side by side for comparison: 

How can PV generation be integrated with industrial unit roofing? - Google Bard response continued
How can PV generation be integrated with industrial unit roofing? - Google Bard

Middle of funnel queries – shortlisting suppliers 

Again Bard’s answers weren’t very focussed and didn’t respect the specific context implicit in my question. For example when I asked Bard “What’s the most comprehensive source of construction industry leads in the UK?” it gave me a slightly useful answer, but then suggested I might want to try going to conferences or networking to get leads!  

Comprehensive construction leads sources - Google Bard chat

The Bing response is more concise and actually more valuable: 

What's some other sources of construction industry leads? Google Bard response

Things got a bit weird in places here. When I prompted Bard for more details it gave me a list of suppliers, but the links in the list went to the wrong places. For example a link for the service “Construction Lead Finder” pointed to an article about rogue builders on the Guardian newspaper! This just looked like a bug – fair enough for an experimental service, but it undermined my confidence in Bard as a tool. 

Google Bard chat around construction leads

Bottom of funnel queries – evaluating specific suppliers 

Bard really lost the plot here on several queries. For example when I asked “Is the Curious Lounge a high quality coworking space?” it hallucinated several plausible-looking but completely imaginary reviews. 

Google Bard chat around The Curious Lounge
Bing Chat around the Curious Lounge coworking space quality

Latest score: Bing Chat 1 – Bard 0 

It’s an uneven contest at present. 

Bard rambles, forgets or ignores important context, and – worst of all – Just Makes Sh*t Up when it doesn’t know the answer. Bing Chat, in comparison, stayed focussed and was honest about its limitations. 

I really can’t recommend Bard in its current form as a B2B research tool, and I don’t think we’ll see any great takeup of it in the B2B world unless or until Google improves it. For now: stick with Bing Chat for your B2B research. 

But there is so much at stake here for the search engine giants that I’m sure we WILL see great improvements in Bard and other tools. We’ll keep testing and reporting on progress! 

Given the significance of this technology change you can be sure we’re going to keep a close eye on developments with generative AI-powered search in the future. So sign up for our email newsletter and keep an eye on our blog to stay in the loop!

If you have questions about how Google’s new AI Chatbot might affect your business, or simply want to continue the conversation, please get in touch! 

Thank you for downloading our doc...

Check out our in-depth guide to B2B SEO content using Google's EEAT guidelines

B2B Digital Rocket Fuel
straight to your inbox

Add your email address below to receive our biweekly newsletter and stay up to date with the latest B2B digital marketing news and insights.

You'll also get instant access to our growing catalogue of marketing resources.

    “An invaluable resource for getting the latest and greatest ideas and tips on B2B digital marketing. My students also benefit from the industry insights".

    Louize Clarke, Founder, The Curious Academy