And What Sales Leaders Must Do Differently in 2026

As sales teams enter another new year, many organizations are doubling down on strategic planning, pipeline discipline, and forecast accuracy. Yet despite better tools, more data, and experienced sellers, a familiar pattern persists: late-stage deals stall, slip, or are lost for reasons that feel frustratingly difficult to pin down.

In complex B2B sales, breakdowns are often mistakenly blamed on price, gaps in the product offering, or superior offerings by the competition. However, more often, breakdowns occur because sellers misread the buying environment itself; specifically, who is influencing decisions, how priorities are shaped, and where internal risk and resistance actually live.

In today’s B2B sales environment, buying committees are larger, less visible, and more risk-averse than ever. Decisions are rarely made by a single executive or a clear hierarchy. Instead, influence is distributed across clinical, operational, financial, technical, and strategic stakeholders, many of whom never formally appear on an org chart or in a CRM.

For sales leaders and enablement teams, this shift has major implications. Winning in 2026 (and beyond) will depend less on teaching sellers what to say—and more on strengthening how they think, diagnose, and engage complex buying groups.

Below are five common points where deals break down, what’s really happening beneath the surface, and how leaders can coach teams to navigate these realities of complex B2B sales more effectively.

Where Deals Break Down in Complex Sales

Sellers Rely on Assumptions Instead of Discovery

After a few conversations with key influencers, most salespeople start to feel confident that they’ve got a good handle on the situation. Sellers believe they understand the customer’s priorities, decision criteria, and internal dynamics. But in complex environments, those beliefs are often built on partial information or early conversations with a limited set of stakeholders.

We often see situations where a seller anchors on the first executive they meet, assuming alignment across the organization, only to discover later that other stakeholders had very different concerns or veto power.

When assumptions replace discovery, sellers stop asking the questions that surface risk. Influence remains hidden, and misalignment goes undetected until it’s too late to recover.

Leadership implication: Sellers must be coached to treat assumptions as hypotheses, not facts. Strategy reviews should focus less on answers and more on what has been validated versus assumed.

Influence Is Misunderstood or Oversimplified

Influence inside buying committees is rarely linear. The most senior title is not always the most influential voice. Informal leaders, long-tenured employees, compliance teams, or operational gatekeepers often shape decisions quietly behind the scenes.

Deals break down when sellers focus only on title or seniority while overlooking those who influence risk, timing, and internal consensus.

We often see deals progress smoothly until a late-stage objection appears from someone the seller never engaged with, forcing delays, discounts, or outright losses.

Leadership implication: Sellers need a structured way to think about influence, not just authority. Tools like influence mapping help teams visualize how decisions actually happen and prepare engagement strategies accordingly.

Value Is Not Aligned With What Each Stakeholder Cares About

In complex B2B sales, value is not universal. Different stakeholders define success differently. Clinical leaders may prioritize outcomes and safety. Operations teams focus on efficiency and workflow impact. Finance cares about cost, risk, and predictability.

Deals break down when sellers communicate value generically, assuming one compelling story will resonate across the buying group.

We often see sellers articulate strong value to one audience, only to lose momentum because that value never translates to others involved in the decision.

Leadership implication: Coaching must emphasize stakeholder-specific value articulation. Sellers need to learn how to connect solutions to measurable outcomes that matter to each role, not just the primary sponsor.

Consensus Is Assumed Instead of Built

Many sellers assume that if a key contact is supportive, internal alignment will follow. In reality, consensus is rarely automatic. It must be built intentionally across functions, priorities, and risk perspectives.

Deals break down when sellers fail to help customers navigate their own internal decision-making process. Without shared clarity, buying committees default to delay or the status quo.

We often see customers agree in principle, but stall indefinitely because no one has aligned the group around a clear case for change.

Leadership implication: Sellers should be coached to view consensus-building as part of their role—not something the customer handles alone. Strategy conversations should include how alignment is being created, not just whether it exists.

Sales Managers Coach Execution, Not Strategy

Even when sellers struggle, managers often default to coaching activity, tactics, or forecast updates. The deeper strategic issues—assumptions, influence gaps, stakeholder misalignment—remain unaddressed.

As a result, sellers repeat the same mistakes across deals, and managers feel stuck reinforcing behaviors rather than improving critical thinking.

Deals break down not because managers aren’t coaching but because they aren’t coaching the right things.

Leadership implication: Sales coaching must focus more on how sellers think about opportunities. Managers need frameworks that help them challenge assumptions, explore influence, and guide strategic adjustments.

What This Means for Sales Leaders and Enablement Teams

As buying committees expand and decision-making becomes more distributed, sales effectiveness depends less on mastering sales methodologies and more on developing strategic clarity.

For sales leaders, this means:

  • Shifting deal reviews from status updates to strategic diagnosis
  • Reinforcing discipline around discovery, validation, and influence mapping
  • Holding sellers accountable for how well they understand the buying environment

For sales enablement and L&D leaders, it means:

Some organizations use structured approaches— such as influence mapping frameworks or visual planning tools— to help sellers and managers surface blind spots and align around smarter engagement strategies. When used well, these tools create a shared language for strategy without overwhelming sellers with complexity.

Starting The Year With Fewer Surprises

In complex B2B sales, deals don’t fail randomly. They break down in predictable ways: when assumptions go unchecked, influence remains hidden, value is misaligned, and consensus is left to chance.

The organizations that win will be those that help their teams slow down strategically, think more critically, and engage buying committees with intention.

That starts with recognizing where deals actually break down, and coaching sellers to see what they’ve been missing.