A contract is not agreement.
In complex IT and software initiatives there are always two sales. One is visible: the proposal, the negotiation, the signature. The other is invisible and happens every day afterwards: in team meetings, in hallways, in the question of a case worker asking why she should change a way of working that has served her well.
The first sale brings the project in. The second decides whether it works.
Most organisations invest considerable energy in the first and practically none in the second. That is exactly where the gap opens between a technically successful project and an initiative that actually changed something.
The internal sale: stakeholder alignment is sales work
For people inside a company, a new system almost always means loss before it means gain. Loss of routine, of fluency in their own tools, sometimes of interpretive authority. Ignoring that means mistaking resistance for laziness — and treating a sales task as a training problem.
Selling internally means: for every relevant group, it must be clear what concretely gets better for them. Not for "the company", not for "efficiency", but for the person working with it on a Tuesday morning.
Useful questions before planning a rollout:
- Who loses something because of this system, and what exactly?
- Who visibly gains, and does that become visible early enough?
- Which person gets asked internally when somebody has doubts — and is that person convinced?
- What is the first moment where somebody thinks: that really was easier than before?
- Who owns this after go-live — by name, not as a role?
The last question is the hardest. In many initiatives the role that carries the system after rollout simply does not exist in the org chart. Then it is orphaned, regardless of its quality.
Adoption is not a change-management afterthought. Adoption is sales pointed inwards.
The external sale: selling complexity without dumbing it down
Outside the company the task is different. Complex software and IT services are hard to buy because the buyer is purchasing a risk they cannot assess themselves. They cannot evaluate the code, review the architecture or judge the team. So they evaluate substitute signals: clarity, structure, honesty, traceability.
That leads to an uncomfortable insight: sales does not improve by listing more capabilities. It improves by reducing risk.
What reduces risk:
- A clearly cut offer. Scope, duration, outcome, price range. Open-ended time and material shifts the entire risk to the buyer — and is signed accordingly hesitantly.
- A small first step with a real result. Not a workshop that ends in a presentation, but a finished piece of work that has value on its own.
- Nameable limits. Saying what an initiative will not solve makes you more credible, not weaker.
- Traceable decisions. Being able to explain why an architecture was chosen sells competence. Merely asserting outcomes sells hope.
Sales enablement: the difference between knowing and being able to say it
In many IT companies all the convincing knowledge sits with two or three people — usually technical minds who rarely attend sales conversations. The company can do something, but it cannot say it.
Sales enablement is exactly that translation work: turning distributed expertise into an argument that somebody who did not build the system can also make. It includes a robust articulation of value, a way to handle the four or five objections that really always come up, and reference situations that have not been anonymised into meaninglessness.
The goal is not to turn engineers into salespeople. The goal is that the value of an offer does not depend on who happens to be in the meeting.
Why the two belong together
Internal and external selling are the same discipline pointed in two directions. Both are about making the real benefit graspable for a specific person and lowering risk far enough for a decision to become possible.
Sell only outwards and you win projects that quietly stall inside. Sell only inwards and you have a well-adopted system and too little business to keep developing it.
What follows from this
Plan the second sale with the same seriousness as the first. It has no budget, no date and no owner — which is why it does not happen.
A good starting point is one question: who inside the company will defend this system when it gets uncomfortable? If the answer is unclear, the initiative has not been sold yet — regardless of what the contract says.
If you want to sharpen the outside story, the frame is marketing and positioning — and the thinking behind it is in positioning in tech.
← Back to insights