The shift from outcomes narrative to outcomes evidence is where alot of vendors are getting exposed right now. Saying we improve adherence doesnt mean much when CFOs want actuarial validation across multiple implementations. The part about vendors trying to sell to both health plans and employers with a single GTM usually underperforming in both channels makes sense too. The proof points are totally different and trying to straddle both withoutheavy customization rarely works.
Yeah the proof bar has gotten real. And on the channel point, the mistake I see is that teams are treating it like a messaging tweak when it's actually a full GTM rebuild. Different buyers, different timelines, different evidence. Most don't scope it correctly upfront (and sometimes never), but usually ONLY after a lot of time and resources have been spent.
The shift from outcomes narrative to outcomes evidence is where alot of vendors are getting exposed right now. Saying we improve adherence doesnt mean much when CFOs want actuarial validation across multiple implementations. The part about vendors trying to sell to both health plans and employers with a single GTM usually underperforming in both channels makes sense too. The proof points are totally different and trying to straddle both withoutheavy customization rarely works.
Yeah the proof bar has gotten real. And on the channel point, the mistake I see is that teams are treating it like a messaging tweak when it's actually a full GTM rebuild. Different buyers, different timelines, different evidence. Most don't scope it correctly upfront (and sometimes never), but usually ONLY after a lot of time and resources have been spent.