Everyone in sales wants growth. But they do not buy growth the same way

This table draws directly on the source audience cards: primary pain, greatest fear, proof required, preferred contact route and time preference. It describes broad role profiles, not every person holding a particular title.

The sales manager carries the visible pressure of monthly and quarterly targets. The head of sales must explain forecasting errors and why a new sales process is still used after the launch. The CRO is accountable for the ratio between revenue growth and investment to leadership or investors. The commercial director protects pricing, relationships and long-term commercial resilience.

This is why a revenue uplift alone is incomplete evidence. A rise in conversion does not automatically prove CRM adoption, profitability or retention of strategic accounts. The relevant case must address the outcome for which that particular role is responsible.

The source profile identifies inconsistent target attainment and overreliance on a few strong sellers as the central pain. Uneven skills, too little coaching time and incomplete CRM records make the problem harder. The emotional pressure is personal: the manager is visible when the numbers slip.

A proposed solution must fit everyday sales routines. Show what reps will do differently tomorrow, how much work it adds and which early indicators suggest improvement. The card asks for quick results in comparable teams, references from other sales managers and a trial. A lengthy one-off training day or an unused dashboard is not persuasive evidence.

The recorded objections are equally specific: “no time”, “the team will not use it” and “we already have a CRM or trainer”. Selling the impact means proving that impact can be achieved without yet another administrative burden.

The head of sales faces a different failure: the pipeline is unpredictable and forecasts repeatedly miss. According to the source, sales has grown around individuals rather than a common process. Tools accumulate, good sellers leave and another rollout risks ending as shelfware.

The buying question therefore moves from an immediate conversion boost to a dependable operating model. How quickly can new hires ramp up? How are playbooks embedded in CRM and coaching? What indicates forecast accuracy is improving? The desired benefit is control over the commercial engine, not an isolated revenue spike.

The head of sales expects method and operational reinforcement. Lead with forecast accuracy, growth outcomes and evidence of adoption. The objection “we have bought tools before that never stuck” is not solved by a more impressive feature demo.

The source CRO profile owns overall revenue and focuses on the funnel, customer acquisition cost, collaboration between sales and marketing and repeatable results. Its primary pain is stagnation or rising costs per euro of revenue. The board’s demand for both faster growth and lower costs makes the challenge more acute.

BIS 4, BAS 9 and k 0.30 suggest a strong orientation towards growth opportunities within this broad profile. But this is not permission to pitch unbounded experimentation. The source objection is explicit: “prove it works in our segment; I want data, not assumptions”. A compelling conversation therefore starts with a measurable growth mechanism, a baseline and transparent metrics.

Demonstrate which funnel stage should improve, the implications for CAC and how an observed change can be distinguished from other factors. Offer a measured pilot and an honest dashboard. Lead volume without conversion, cost and retention context will leave the central question unanswered.

The commercial director safeguards market position, margins, strategic accounts and value-based selling. The source card names loss of margin and major customers to cheaper competitors as the greatest fear. Higher order volume with worse terms may therefore make the offer less attractive, not more.

This role has the highest BIS among the four (6), BAS 6 and the lowest k (0.15). The surrounding source fields point to risk management around margins, annual planning and enduring relationships. The commercial horizon extends beyond the next deal to the quality of revenue retained.

Required evidence is specific: cases showing margin improvement and customer retention, supported by peers in comparable sectors. The preferred route is a personal introduction or industry event followed by an executive presentation. Pure volume-growth cases without price quality, retention or relationship risk miss the point.

These values come from rows 44-46 of the original “3 Sales” worksheet. BIS and BAS use the source model’s 0-10 scale. k is a separate delay-discounting parameter, not a percentage or a score on the same axis. The values describe broad roles, not individual test results.

The CRO has the highest BAS yet explicitly asks for a measured pilot and segment-specific evidence. The sales manager shares the relatively low BIS but prioritises this month’s team performance. The head of sales, with BIS 5, needs sustainable adoption. The commercial director, with BIS 6, gives greater weight to margin erosion and customer risk.

Higher BAS is not an automatic yes to a bold pitch. Higher BIS is not an automatic no to innovation. Each score gains meaning when read alongside the pain, greatest fear, failed earlier solutions and proof that the role trusts. The knowledge base explains how BIS and BAS work together and what delay-discounting k means.

k helps describe a relative preference for earlier over later rewards; it does not predict a signing date. The other fields explain why the sales manager wants near-term evidence and the commercial director works with annual plans and relationships.

Imagine a hypothetical platform combining lead follow-up, coaching, CRM hygiene and revenue dashboards. Its promise is “more revenue from the same sales organisation”. No actual outcome or client case is being claimed. The following reactions are editorial illustrations grounded in the profile fields, not quotations collected from research participants.

The sales manager asks: “Will reps close more deals tomorrow without more administration?” The head of sales asks: “Will our forecast become more reliable, and will the process scale?” The CRO asks: “What happens to CAC, funnel conversion and net revenue growth?” The commercial director asks: “Will margins and customer relationships improve, or are we buying volume?”

The product is the same; the business case is not. Different people can watch the same demo and reach different conclusions because the proof each needs is missing.

Start with the decision problem rather than using a job title as a personality label. Use the source role card as preparation, then check whether its pattern matches the actual buying situation.

These are illustrative sales-copy examples, not tested wording or verbatim research responses. The underlying problems and preferred evidence follow the original audience cards.

In a larger buying group, a sales manager may be the daily user and champion, the head of sales the process owner, the CRO the sponsor of the growth case and the commercial director a strategic co-decision-maker. That is an illustration, not a prescribed organisation chart. Actual responsibilities vary by company.

You then need evidence at different levels: a manageable trial with one team, a CRM adoption and enablement approach, a measurement plan for funnel outcomes and CAC, and a margin and retention perspective. Proof in one layer does not substitute for the others.

Ask four questions: who will use this, who defends the budget, who bears the risk if it fails and what needs to improve by when? That moves the discussion from four isolated sales pitches to one decision process.

The source also differentiates channel preferences and tone. Sales managers use LinkedIn daily as readers and networkers, alongside podcasts and YouTube; practical, energetic content respects their time. Heads of sales use LinkedIn, peer communities and webinars, and expect methodical explanations. CROs are more actively posting on LinkedIn and engage with SaaS resources and peers; data-rich analyses can fit their source profile.

Commercial directors use LinkedIn more selectively and also engage with trade publications, industry events and financial media. A measured case about margin and strategic customer retention is closer to the source tone than a loud growth hack. These are broad channel patterns, not verified response rates for each individual.

Job-title targeting is therefore only the starting point. The message, proof and distribution deserve their own tests. See tone of voice in an audience card and handling objections through audience research.

A sales manager buys near-term team conversion. A head of sales buys predictable execution. A CRO wants repeatable growth that withstands scrutiny. A commercial director wants better-quality revenue without sacrificing margin or relationships.

The real question is not whether salespeople like growth. It is what makes that growth desirable, credible and defensible to the person making the decision. Continue with sales manager versus CRO and head of sales versus commercial director, or explore the full B2B audience series.