Run a focused discovery conversation for procurement software
The Prospecting Show with Dr. Connor Robertson · Editorial sales resource · October 12, 2026
Understand the current workflow before presenting a solution. This guide applies the workflow to selling procurement software, where a useful conversation may involve the procurement manager and finance sponsor and a practical review of purchases delayed by unclear approvals.
The finished result is a discovery summary. Work from information the buyer confirms. The examples below are planning models; replace bracketed fields and unsupported assumptions before using them with an actual account.
Start with the buyer’s operating context
For this selling context, a possible reason to investigate involves a procurement-policy rollout. That event alone does not establish demand. Check whether the team experiences this issue: purchases delayed by unclear approvals. Confirm who owns the workflow and whether a change is worth evaluating.
| Question | Working hypothesis | Evidence to request |
|---|---|---|
| Who should participate? | procurement manager and finance sponsor | The contact’s description of ownership and decision roles |
| What is happening? | purchases delayed by unclear approvals | A recent example from the actual workflow |
| What can be measured? | approval time, exceptions, and supplier-onboarding steps | A dated baseline with definitions and a named owner |
| What constrains a change? | approval permissions, supplier data, and integration scope | Requirements confirmed by the people responsible |
A practical sequence
- Ask how the work happens today.
- Explore one recurring exception and its consequences.
- Identify who owns the problem and what has already been tried.
- Summarize the findings and ask the buyer to correct them.
Apply these steps to the same account rather than changing the hypothesis halfway through the exercise. If new evidence contradicts your starting assumption, update the record and reconsider the next action. The objective is a useful decision, not a completed form.
Worked example: run a focused discovery conversation
Illustrative example, not a report of a client result.
Ask: “Walk me through the last time purchases delayed by unclear approvals affected the team.” Then explore: “How do you currently track approval time, exceptions, and supplier-onboarding steps?” Finish with: “What would we need to learn before a demo of one purchase request from intake to approval would be worth your time?”
Use a concrete artifact
A useful supporting resource in this context is an approval-path worksheet. It should help the procurement manager and finance sponsor assess the current situation without forcing them through a generic sales presentation. Keep the scope narrow enough that the buyer can correct it.
For example, connect the artifact to approval time, exceptions, and supplier-onboarding steps. Identify which inputs came from the buyer, which are public observations, and which remain assumptions. Do not request private operational records before the buyer has agreed an appropriate purpose and handling process.
Build the working record
Complete this worksheet during preparation, then revise it after the conversation. An unknown is a useful finding when it is recorded honestly.
| Field | What to write |
|---|---|
| Account and owner | [Account] · [Rep] · [Review date] |
| Confirmed problem | The buyer’s description of purchases delayed by unclear approvals, or “not confirmed” |
| Baseline | Available evidence for approval time, exceptions, and supplier-onboarding steps, with source and date |
| Deliverable | a discovery summary, including scope and the person who reviews it |
| Open questions | Unconfirmed assumptions, required participants, and unresolved constraints |
| Next decision | Advance, gather evidence, revisit by request, or close the record |
Evaluate the result
Track confirmed problems with agreed follow-up evidence. Define the numerator, denominator, and review window before comparing results. Use comparable accounts and channels; otherwise an apparent improvement may simply reflect a different list or buying context.
For procurement software, pair the workflow measure with the quality of evidence about purchases delayed by unclear approvals. A reply or meeting is useful only if it helps establish relevance. Record declined and unsuitable opportunities so the team can improve targeting as well as messaging.
A common failure to avoid
Do not ask leading questions designed to manufacture pain. Avoid turning the first answer into a full product pitch.
In this context, the practical consequence is spending time on a demo of one purchase request from intake to approval before the buyer has confirmed a reason to do it. Revisit approval permissions, supplier data, and integration scope early enough to discover a genuine mismatch.
When to move forward
Proceed when both sides agree on the problem and the evidence needed for the next decision. A sensible next step may be a demo of one purchase request from intake to approval, but only when it follows from the evidence. If the buyer cannot identify a relevant problem or owner, close or reclassify the record instead of manufacturing urgency.
Continue the workflow
- Set a sales meeting agenda
- Qualify an opportunity
- Run a focused discovery conversation across selling contexts
- Procurement software sales guides
For the wider collection, visit the prospecting and sales library. Learn about the host on the Dr. Connor Robertson profile or explore the published podcast interviews.