Business Case is More Important Than Budget

In sales organizations that still use BANT as their primary qualification framework, salespeople are encouraged to primarily qualify sales opportunities based on Budget, Authority, Need and Timeframe. BANT may indeed sometimes be an appropriate and sufficient way of looking at some types of simple, high-volume, low-value, fast-to-close deals.

However, whilst it is generally true that - at some stage in their development - all successful opportunities must be funded, be sponsored by a champion in a position of authority, satisfy a genuine business need and require urgent action, BANT is a horrible basis for qualifying or disqualifying early-stage opportunities in complex B2B buying environments.

Research by Gartner and others has demonstrated that 50% or more of ultimately successful B2B buying decision journeys start off as unfunded projects. So naively disqualifying an early-stage opportunity because it does not (yet) appear to have been allocated a budget will inevitably result in rejecting opportunities you could have won.

Why Change?

It’s far more important to assess whether the prospect has - or could have - a compelling business case for taking action. And this is closely related to the costs and consequences of remaining on their current path. If they believe that they could comfortably continue on their current trajectory without undue risk, pain or cost, that is almost certainly what they will decide to do.

They will inevitably have far too many other pressing priorities that demand their attention, their resources and their budget. If all that is motivating them is a general aspiration to do something slightly better, the project will have a pretty low chance of getting approved. It’s no wonder that such projects tend to reach a certain stage and then drift, stall, or get abandoned.

The "Outcome Gap"

That’s why the extent to which your prospect recognizes and acknowledges the costs and consequences of inaction is such a powerful factor in opportunity qualification. And it’s why successful salespeople do all that they can to help their prospects to recognize the “outcome gap” between their current situation and their desired future state.

If this outcome gap appears to be small and stable, the prospect is unlikely to do naything. But when they see the outcome gap as large and (preferably) growing, they are far more likely to decide to take urgent action.

The more salespeople can do to amplify their prospect’s perception of risk, pain and urgency, the better. Even more powerful if their prospect has confidence in the vendor’s ability to help them achieve a meaningfully better desired future state.

Contrast Drives Action

Recognition of the full costs and consequences of inaction is the essential foundation of any effective business case. And when contrasted with the benefits of reaching their desired outcomes this becomes a compelling reason for change - and to take urgent action.

When you are able to develop a powerful, enthusiastic influential champion who believes in the case for change - and is capable of persuading their fellow stakeholders of this - they typically know how to navigate the politics of reallocating funding to previously unbudgeted projects.

Budgets Have a Habit of Disappearing

Very often, of course, this funding gets taken from previously budgeted projects that are now seen to be less important and urgent. So even if you are told that your customer “has the budget”, if their internal business case isn’t strong enough, then that funding will always be at risk of being taken away to spend on a more deserving cause.

That’s why, in my view, establishing a compelling business case is far more important than asking if there is a budget. But that’s just my opinion. What do you think?

By the way, if you want a more robust approach to opportunity qualification, I suggest you download our guide to Mastering MEDDPICC+.

An earlier version of this article was first published on LinkedIn.