top of page
Most Sales teams believe they know their competitors. They don’t.
 |  |  |  |  |
|---|---|---|---|---|
 |  |  |  |  |
 |  |  |  |  |
 |  |  |  |  |
 |  |  |  |  |
 |  |  |  |  |
 |  |  |  |  |
 |  |  |
.png)
Understand
Prospects
Closely
-
Identify competitors’ weaknesses in current deployments.
-
Learn customers' requirements and future plans.
-
Map key stakeholders and decision-makers.
Customer Insights
Case Study: CSP
Customer: Tier 1 Communications Service Provider
Interviewee: SVP Marketing
Call topic: Business plans and vendors’ perceptions
Business and Tech goals and plans
-
Domains in focus (ordered by importance): Network operations, automation and assurance, Monetization , Digitalization and Customer Experience.
-
Tech priorities: AI for adaptive journeys, "Infinity loop" sequential multi-channel measurement, flexible monetization beyond rigid plans.
-
Focus on ROI outcomes: net adds, churn reduction, multi-product convergence, loyalty-rewarding personalized pricing/offers
-
Build multi-layered "data spine" for household/family/individual dynamics to enable predictive trigger campaigns.
Feedback on existing vendors
Vendor 1: Described as "extremely disappointing" in delivering integrated AI for personalized marketing, “Struggling and not innovating, despite its large market share”
Lacking true omni-channel orchestration across care, retail, digital, SMS, email, and push notifications
Vendor 2: “Can’t still can’t give us a reference case... I told the regional vice president I didn’t want to see him again."
"Too big, too fragmented, and too distracted."
Expectations from vendors
-
Proven metrics/case studies over roadmaps; references in safe peer forums; transparent data vs. "black box."
-
Ability to measure sequential "Infinity loop" campaigns over time (e.g., quarterly cohorts comparing primed vs. offer-only groups)
-
“Vendors should support holistic measurement across channels and provide clear timing of data availability. The ambition should be to measure sequential, multi-format, multi-channel campaigns over time, not just one-off impacts”
Customer Insights
Case Study: Open-source
Customer: AI‑powered application platform
Interviewee: VP IT
Call topic: Insights on Open Source Support providers
Selected insights on vendors:
Vendor A was selected over Vendor B due to superior technical depth and stronger community connections
Vendor A
-
Factors that led to being selected: deep technical expertise, robust SLAs for vulnerability response, and direct access to former Angular engineers.
-
Demonstrated consistent SLA adherence, rapid patch delivery, and zero new bugs, leading to improved ROI
-
Commercial model: annual per-seat license fee of $6,000 per developer, adjusted yearly based on developer count, with discussions underway to shift toward a consumption-based model
-
ROI continues to improve annually, as Vendor A’s support mitigates business continuity risks and operational costs technical capabilities, patching process, and operational issues
-
Detailed information was provided on Vendor A.
Vendor B
-
Provided a more generic offering with less engagement.
Insights on the vendor selection process and needs from vendors going forward:
-
Decision makers: representatives from engineering, security, legal, and finance, with compliance requirements
-
Security, legal, and finance representatives were key decision makers in the process due to compliance needs
-
Vendors are expected to introduce consumption-based licensing that allows software costs to scale elastically with company revenues.
bottom of page