Go Deeper on Your Deal Reviews

As managers, we constantly tell reps to dig deeper in discovery.

Don’t accept the first answer. Get underneath the problem. Understand what is really happening.

Then we get into a deal review and do the opposite.

Manager: “Who’s our Champion?”

Rep: “The HR Manager.”

Manager: “Great.”

We have technically ticked the Champion box, but we have learned almost nothing about the quality of that relationship.

MEDDPICC becomes much less useful when it is treated as a checklist.

The goal of a deal review is not simply to establish whether each element exists. It is to understand how much confidence we should actually have in it.

Use three quality lenses

In our manager training, we coach managers to inspect every element of MEDDPICC through three lenses:

Proven vs assumed

Current vs decayed

Depth

These force the conversation beyond the surface-level answer.

1. Proven vs assumed

Did the customer actually tell us this, or is it what the rep believes to be true?

There is a big difference between:

“The CFO is supportive.”

And:

“The CFO told us this is one of their top three cost-control initiatives this quarter and asked to be included in the business case presentation.”

One is an assumption.

The other is evidence.

A useful question for managers is:

“What did the customer actually say or do that proves that?”

The aim isn't to catch the rep out. It's to make deal inspection more scientific.

2. Current vs decayed

Deal information has a shelf life.

Pain uncovered six weeks ago may no longer be a priority.

A Champion who was highly engaged last month may now have gone quiet.

Another competitor may have entered the process.

So ask:

“When was this last validated?”

If the answer is “during the first discovery call,” the information may still be correct.

But the goalposts might also have moved.

Strong reps continuously revalidate important information as the deal develops.

3. Depth

Some answers are technically correct but strategically useless.

“We have a Champion.”

Great.

But do they have influence?

Can they explain internally why the problem matters?

Are they personally invested in solving it?

Why are they invested?

Will they sell on your behalf when you are not in the room?

The deeper the manager goes during deal inspection, the more likely the rep is to start looking for that depth themselves.

What this looks like with Decision Criteria

Imagine the rep says:

“They care about reporting and ease of use.”

Instead of ticking Decision Criteria, run it through the three lenses.

Proven vs assumed

“Who told us those are the criteria?”

“What did they say?”

“Would the Economic Buyer give us the same answer?”

Current vs decayed

“When did we last validate those criteria?”

“Have any new stakeholders joined since then?”

Early-stage criteria can change as more people enter the buying process.

Depth

“Why is reporting important to them?”

“Which criteria favour us?”

“Which favour the competition?”

“Are we helping shape the criteria or simply reacting to them?”

Now you are actually inspecting the deal rather than checking whether a MEDDPICC field has been completed.

A coaching exercise for this week

Take three deals from your next pipeline review.

For each major MEDDPICC element, don't stop after the rep gives you an answer.

Ask yourself:

Is it proven?

Is it current?

Is it deep enough?

You will probably uncover significantly more risk without adding another framework to the conversation.

Better deal reviews create better sellers

The benefit goes beyond improving deal inspection.

If reps know their manager is going to ask for evidence, recency and depth every week, they start asking deeper questions to their prospects in advance.