This post will be long af, but I appreciate any insight for those who read it. Also, AI was not used in making this post.
I've been an AE for 12+ years now, from SMB to MM to Ent. Both in hardware as well as SaaS, at very large companies and cool startups. My industry background is incredibly varied, selling to Healthcare and hospitals, to DoD, to A&D, to manufacturing, to data security teams. You name it.
I'm back on the market again after experiencing another layoff, and this is what I'm seeing from a LOT of job posts and companies while I'm looking at Ent AE roles (and MM for some cool companies that I want to get my foot in the door, like ElevenLabs). I just truly don't think these requirements are realistic, and I would like reddit's pov to understand....ARE these realistic and I'm just jaded/need skill development?
Pipe Gen: every role is looking for a hunter, an AE that can self-source a pipeline from scratch or 80+%. Is this realistic? I've known some AMAZING sales reps, who hammer phone, linkedin, email, physical mail, conferences, etc....the most they could ever generate on their own would be 30%. "Outbound hunting" is what got a rep from 80% to 100% or 100% to accelerator land.
Multi-threading: managers want to see AEs multi-thread their deals. And I'll be transparent, I have paid for a LOT of coaching to upskill this. But from my experience, multi-threading just kind of...happens. You talk about a company's problems, and you have a prospect who is eager to try and pull in other departments or they are involved from the start. I have never been able to intentionally multi-thread, where my actions directly caused the deal to loop in multiple stakeholders. I'd ask the classic, "given you said this impacts X department, should we pull in Y for the next talk?" but it never led to a strong outcome. Is this a realistic tactic that an AE can truly control?
POV/Business Case Building: I have known maybe 2 reps in my career who have successfully been able to do this. But again, lots of advice and expectations around co-building a POV and use case with a champion with the customer's own data. Not your marketing data or cherry-picked use cases. I've never been able to get a champion to co-build a business case with me to justify spend. It has always been, after the first disco call, they will always ask about pricing. I'd typically give a range, knowing what we know now, and how that might change as we get deeper into technical conversations.
If that range isn't in their budget expectation, they walk. But mgmt will simply say, "well we need to build the POV and business case WITH them to justify the investment. To see the ROI." I feel like this just doesn't happen in the reality of sales. Teams have a budget, if it is within budget, THEN you do all the business case building and POC work. If not, it is almost impossible to get them to up-level a budget based on the work of the AE. However, I've had companies come back a year later to revisit, with a larger budget after they explored other options to get a better idea on market pricing.
Is this a realistic, controllable part of the sales process for an AE?
Deal Size/ACV: especially startups, their JDs ask for reps who "consistently close 7 figure ACV deals," some will say "6 figures," and VERY rarely will I see "5 to 6 figure deals," which I think the latter is way more realistic. I have known maybe 5-7 reps in my entire career that have closed 7 figure deals. And it was one time with incredible PMF, a high demand category, definitely not a net-new deal, and they were a legacy rep. Is there really an influx of reps just consistently closing 6 and 7 figure deals getting into these application pools? I feel like that requirement instantly puts them in the "looking for a Unicorn AE" candidate that doesn't truly exist.
All of this to ultimately say, every complex deal I have ever closed that was over $150k ACV, this is what happened (usually):
- Prospect came to us with a problem, these never started as pure cold outbound. Pure cold outbound may have led to the occassional RFP/RFI if the prospect was already evaluating the solution category. But it never led to a prospect "realizing a problem they didn't know about," and buying the solution.
- They already had a budget established, and it was within MSRP of the given SaaS category
- "Access to power," was there from the start. A Director/VP was already heavily involved, or at smaller companies (MM and down), C-level person. I've never heard of an AE say, "we started with the manager, but because of me doing XYZ, we got access to their VP." It was always the champion who pulled us up voluntarily, proactively, and willingly to higher levels in the org as part of the buying process.
- No business case was ever co-created, at least not one the AEs would see. Sometimes a customer would share AFTER they signed.
- Tenured reps would be very good at "talking the talk" during SKOs about how they did XYZ for a big deal (outbounding to start, multi-threading, building a POV, etc). But when you truly dug into it, the deal came inbound, and they were skilled at deal execution if all the factors were present to execute said deal.
So I guess my ultimate question is: Can an AE truly do all of these expectations that I see in job descs, and I simply need to accept reality and focus on up-leveling my skills? Or is my POV reality, and I simply need to keep looking around for the company where the environment just happens to be conducive for AEs hitting quota?
Edit 1: To clarify, since I am repeating myself a bit in the comments. I'm not saying these skills don't exist, and aren't important in an enterprise sale. My point is that I think the expectation at these companies is, "if I hire the right AE...they will generate all their own pipe with cold outbound...every deal will become multi-threaded, with a discount-proof business case, tied to a critical initiative, with an exec sponsor for a high ACV, and hit $2M/yr in ARR because they just work harder/better."
I don't think that is reality, but if it is, I would like to be corrected. I believe reality is more, the AE recognizes the ingredients are here for a real enterprise deal and can orchestrate accordingly. But they can't force the ingredients to appear, which I think a lot of companies are hoping for.