Posts

Why 90% of CPQ Projects Fail (And How to Ensure Yours Doesn't)

Image
The Hidden Tax Of Perfect CPQ Models Let’s be honest. Your CPQ project isn’t slow because of the tool, the data, or the integrations. It’s stuck on the last 10% of the model—the part that looks easy on a slide but burns quarters in reality. I’ve seen teams waste months polishing edge cases while the core portfolio stays in Excel and tribal knowledge. The outcome is always the same: low adoption, shadow quoting, and a system nobody trusts. This pattern is everywhere. Leadership demands a complete model. The team warns that completeness costs a fortune. Deadlines slide. And the field keeps selling the old way because they can’t wait for perfect. Completeness is optional. Correctness is not. If you want CPQ to actually do its job, you have to stop designing for the exception. Start designing for the money. Why 90 Percent Is Good Enough To Launch I saw a turbine team at Siemens do what most CPQ projects only talk about. They identified the parts that drove 90% of the cost and configured o...
Post a Comment
Read more

AI Will Not Replace CPQ. It Will Finally Clarify It

Image
The Wrong Debate Every few weeks, someone asks if AI makes CPQ irrelevant. It’s the wrong question. The real question is simpler: what is the configurator's job now that AI is in the room? Here's what I see working on actual projects: AI handles the fuzzy start of the conversation. CPQ guarantees the back-end is correct. One reasons. The other controls. You need both. AI should explain the why. CPQ must guarantee the what. If you've seen a good seller shape a solution in 15 minutes while your configurator takes 45, you know the problem. AI closes that gap. But if you've ever shipped the wrong variant because a rule was missing, you also know why a deterministic control layer is non-negotiable. Guessing vs. Guaranteeing AI is probabilistic. That’s not a bug. It’s how it interprets intent, turns vague requirements into smart questions, and finds paths without a rigid script. It works with messy information and moves forward. CPQ is deterministic. Also not a bug. It’s how...
Post a Comment
Read more

The Three-Layer CPQ Architecture Most Teams Overlook

Image
If your top seller keeps a private spreadsheet, you don’t have a quoting tool. You have a detour on the way back to email. I’ve seen too many CPQ rollouts that look finished on paper but are fragile in the field. The pattern is always the same: one monolithic system tries to handle dialogue, logic, and product storytelling all at once. It bogs down when questions get messy, and your people quietly find a way around it. Why Monolithic CPQ Fails in a Real Sales Room Traditional CPQ wants perfect inputs. Real sales conversations don't provide them. The system asks for a part number. The buyer describes a problem. The deal stalls in the gap between. Teams try to fix this with more rules. It works, until it doesn't. Rules breed more rules. Ownership gets blurry. Updates become major projects. All the seller wants is a defensible recommendation now, not a maze of drop-down menus. B2B buyers do their own research. They show up with context. Your system has to meet them there, not wai...
Post a Comment
Read more

Generative AI and CPQ: Obsolescence or Evolution?

Image
Someone in a workshop last week asked the question out loud: if AGI happens, do we still need CPQ? The room went quiet. It’s the right question. I’ve been in CPQ since 2000, mostly with Tacton. I’ve seen the same story play out. CPQ is great at validation. It builds a valid structure. Then it stops, right at the point where a deal moves forward. The salesperson is left alone to answer the real question: Why this configuration? For me? Now? Large language models can handle the “why.” They can talk about trade-offs, compare scenarios, and make complexity feel simple. This isn’t a threat to replace CPQ. It’s a threat that exposes where CPQ has always been weakest. Stop Asking if AI Will Replace CPQ The question isn’t replace or not replace. That misses the point. Your CPQ is built for correctness and governance. It’s deterministic. Same inputs, same output. Every time. It ensures what you quote can be built, and for how much. In manufacturing, that’s the line between profit and chaos. Bu...
Post a Comment
Read more

Why a Sales Configurator Is More Than Just a Quoting Tool

Image
Every company selling complex equipment has a Sarah. She knows the products cold. Turns a customer's messy problem into a clean, buildable spec while everyone else is still fumbling with spreadsheets. She’s a hero. She's also a single point of failure. I was on a global rollout once where every big quote had to queue for one specialist’s review. Deals waited. Approvals stacked up. Product management was begging sales to stop selling anything tricky. The tools themselves were fine. The traffic pattern was not. When your growth depends on one person’s brain, you don’t have a sales process. You have a bottleneck with a name. We don’t need a bigger calculator. We need a translator. The usual reaction is a giant CPQ project to encode every last rule. It sounds safe. In my experience, it becomes slow, expensive, and brittle. You spend months modeling every exception, only to find the sales team has already invented new ones. The real problem isn’t the math. It’s the translation from...
Post a Comment
Read more

Don't Let a Blank CPQ Stall Your Deals

Image
The call ends. Your rep opens CPQ. The screen asks for product family, base model, voltage, throughput, certifications, and 20 other fields. The cursor blinks. Nothing moves. I’ve watched this moment for years. The rep knows the customer’s problem. They don’t yet know the product. So they stall, hop to Excel, or ping engineering “just to be safe.” That first 60 seconds decides whether CPQ accelerates the deal or gets bypassed again. Here’s the truth I see on every complex sale: the hardest part isn’t validation, pricing, or approvals. It’s starting. The system you hesitate to open is the system you won’t use. Why the first minute decides adoption We blame slow CPQ adoption on training or bad data. But the real friction is earlier. Most tools assume the user already knows the right product path. Many salespeople don’t. They think in problems and outcomes, not in product hierarchies and rules. That gap creates what I call the blank page problem. No one is arguing with CPQ’s logic. They’...
Post a Comment
Read more

To Scale Your Business, Design Your CPQ for Trust

Image
Your best Sales Engineer just spent 10 hours building rock-solid trust with a customer. Clear discovery. Smart trade-offs. Everyone nodding. Then the quote arrives: a 12-page spreadsheet of SKUs. The momentum vanishes. I’ve seen it a hundred times. The SE earns trust, but the tools we give them break it. The quote is correct, but now the customer doesn't trust the deal. Trust is built in conversations, then lost in spreadsheets. This isn’t a training problem. It’s a system design problem. The Hidden Cost of Handoffs Most companies think CPQ is just for quoting. It enforces rules, calculates price, and spits out a proposal. That sounds fine, until you see what actually happens between the sales call and the contract. The customer walks away from a meeting clear on what they need: “Option X has to fit here, give us Z throughput, and we need low energy costs.” Then they get a document that talks about none of it. Instead, they get a parts inventory. No anchor to the business problem....
Post a Comment
Read more