Latest / Closing the Deal with Fexingo: Sales, Negotiation, and Revenue Conversations for Operators / The Rep Who Won by Asking the Buyer to Write the RFP
Transcript
- Lucas: So there's a sales rep named Carla — I'll use a pseudonym, but the case is real — who was up against two incumbents in a mid-market SaaS deal. She had basically zero relationship with the buyer, and the incumbents had been in the building for years. Luna: Classic late-entrant situation. How far behind was she? Lucas: Far enough that the buyer didn't even return her first two emails. She finally got a five-minute call, and on that call, instead of pitching her product, she asked the buyer to do something unusual: she asked them to write the RFP. Luna: Wait — she asked the buyer to write their own request for proposal? That sounds like handing the pen to the other side. Lucas: It does, until you think about what actually happens in procurement. Most RFPs are written by a committee that's already biased toward the incumbent. Their criteria are designed to validate what they already use. Carla's move was to say, 'You know your needs better than I do. If you could wave a magic wand and describe the perfect solution — no constraints — what would it look like?' Luna: And the buyer actually did it? Lucas: Yeah. The buyer sent back a one-page document — not a formal RFP, just a list of ten criteria ranked by importance. And that document became Carla's entire blueprint. Luna: So she let the buyer define the game, then played exactly to those rules. Lucas: Exactly. But here's the thing — the incumbents never saw that document. They kept pitching against their own assumptions. Carla built her entire demo around those ten points. She literally showed slides in the order the buyer had ranked them. Luna: I love that. It forces the buyer to see their own criteria being met. Did she win? Lucas: She closed the deal in three weeks. From zero pipeline to signed contract. The buyer later told her that her demo felt 'like it was built for me' — which, of course, it was. Luna: But I have to ask — doesn't this only work if the buyer is willing to engage? What if they just say, 'No, send me your standard proposal'? Lucas: Then you're no worse off than you were. But Carla's insight was that a buyer who won't even spend ten minutes helping you understand their criteria is probably not going to buy from you anyway. So the ask is itself a qualification filter. Luna: That's smart. It's a low-cost way to test if the buyer sees you as a potential partner or just another vendor to check a box. Lucas: Right. And there's a psychological layer too. When someone writes down their criteria, they're implicitly committing to evaluating against them. If you then meet them, you've got a built-in consistency pressure — they have to either admit you're a fit or explain why their own criteria were wrong. Luna: So it's a commitment device disguised as a collaborative exercise. Did Carla actually use the exact wording the buyer used? Lucas: She did. She mirrored their language exactly. One of the criteria was 'integration with existing CRM without custom development.' Carla's slide said literally that: 'Integration with existing CRM — no custom development required.' The incumbents' slides said things like 'robust API ecosystem' and 'seamless connectivity.' The buyer later said those felt vague. Luna: That's the power of letting the buyer write the test. You're not just answering the question — you're showing you listened. So the move isn't really about the RFP document itself. It's about getting the buyer to articulate their own decision framework. Lucas: Exactly. And once you have that framework, you can prioritize your resources. Carla didn't waste time on features the buyer didn't care about. She didn't spend budget on competitor research or custom proof of concept for criteria that ranked low. She went all-in on the top three. Luna: Which is another reason incumbents lose in this scenario — they spread their effort across everything, assuming everything matters equally. So when does this tactic backfire? Lucas: Two scenarios. One: the buyer hands you a list that your product genuinely can't meet. Then you've just accelerated your own rejection. But honestly, that's better than discovering it three months later. Luna: And the second? Lucas: If the buyer is using it to stall. They give you a list, you build a perfect response, and then they say, 'Great, now we need to go through formal procurement.' You've just handed them your strategy and they'll shop it around. Carla avoided that by asking for a meeting to review her response together — she never sent the document unattended. Luna: So the move requires a joint review, not a handoff. That protects your intellectual property and keeps the buyer engaged. Lucas: Exactly. Carla presented her response in a live session. The buyer took notes, asked questions, and by the end, they were co-creating the solution. That's a completely different power dynamic than submitting a PDF. Luna: I want to bring this back to something you said earlier — about the buyer committing to their own criteria. There's a cognitive bias here, right? The IKEA effect — people value things more when they've put effort into creating them. Lucas: That's exactly it. The buyer wrote the blueprint. They're now invested in seeing it succeed. Carla wasn't selling against the incumbents anymore — she was helping the buyer realize their own vision. The incumbents were selling features. Luna: So the takeaway for any rep facing a competitive eval — especially when you're the underdog — is to ask the buyer to define the criteria before you pitch. Not after. Lucas: Right. And don't just ask once. Ask them to rank, to weight, to add examples. The more specific they get, the more locked in they are. Carla's buyer even gave her a 'nice to have' list that she used to differentiate without over-delivering. Luna: I'm thinking about how this scales. Is this only for complex SaaS deals, or could a B2B product with shorter sales cycles use it? Lucas: I think it works anywhere the buyer has a choice. Even a $10,000 sale. The principle isn't about the RFP format — it's about asking the buyer to articulate their decision criteria before you compete. You can do that in a five-minute email. Luna: It's really a pre-negotiation move. You're negotiating the rules of the game before the game starts. Lucas: Exactly. And honestly, if today's episode helped you think about one deal in your pipeline differently, that's the kind of thing that makes this show worth doing. If it was worth a coffee to you, you know the link — buy me a coffee dot com slash fexingo. That's it. No upsell. Luna: Yeah, listener support is what keeps this ad-free and focused on the actual tactics. Appreciate everyone who's chipped in. Lucas: So back to Carla — she also used the buyer's criteria to negotiate her own pricing. Because she knew exactly which features were must-haves versus nice to haves, she could unbundle the nice to haves and offer them as add-ons later. Luna: That's another layer I hadn't considered. The RFP criteria become a negotiation map. You know where the buyer values most, so you can anchor there. Lucas: Right. Carla's base price was actually higher than the incumbents' — but she hit every must-have dead-on. The buyer later said the incumbents were cheaper but missed three of the top five criteria. So the buyer paid more for a solution that fit better. Luna: Which is the ultimate win for a rep: not just closing, but closing at a premium because you understood the buyer better than anyone else. Lucas: That's the whole episode in one line. So next time you're late to a deal, don't pitch. Ask the buyer to write the test. Luna: And then ace it.