It is hard to argue with the idea that a bigger deal is better for technology vendors. Of course, there are some situations where I might disagree (one of my startups closed the biggest deal in our history and it caused us to lose focus on our ideal customers, changed our competitive mix (where our differentiation was less important), and ultimately slowed our growth), but in general it can be a good thing (at the same company, we recognized that we did need to go up market a bit as our sales leader described “having million dollars sales cycles for 50K deals).
But, if you are going after big deals, you have to recognize the added complexity and coordination that will likely be required. In earlier posts, you’ve seen that the size of the buying team grows, substantially, as the spend grows. But that is not the only thing you’ll likely be dealing with. As deal sizes get larger, situational awareness becomes even more critical. In the same study, nearly 50% of all buying efforts that had over $1M in spending involved multiple contracts. And with multiple contracts came multiple opportunities for delays. In every category of activity, the likelihood of a delay was higher for these complex situations.
A bigger deal is alluring, but be aware of the likelihood of complications and the need to help your customers coordinate a number of different activities. You could be doing everything right, but a related buying effort could be the thing that delays or ends your deal.
Train your sales teams to ask questions about coordinated activities and help their customers navigate the waters. Its a balancing act between winning your deal and going nowhere as a result of conflict and confusion.