A founder walks in certain:
"We're plateaued."
Revenue’s flat. Close rates dipped. Sales just isn’t closing like they should.
"We need better closers."
Confident. Frustrated. Ready to invest.
This is where most companies spend money.
New reps
New training
Maybe a new VP
Before you do any of that — slow down! Just.. walk me through the last 10 deals. (Not summaries. The actual deals.)
Where did they stall?
What objections came up?
What changed six months ago?
Problem being, here’s what usually happens at this stage:
Revenue flattens.
Close rates dip.
Frustration builds.
And the finger points at Sales.
"It's always Sales, right?"
Well... maybe. But here’s the pressure question:
Are you solving friction, or funding a narrative?
What are you assuming is broken? And what evidence makes that assumption investable?
Yeah. Now the room shifts, am I right?
We look at the calls.
Not dashboards.
Not summaries.
Not vibes.
Actual transcripts.
And something starts to surface: Prospects aren’t pushing back on price. They’re confused about scope.
They’re expecting features that don’t exist.
They’re solving a slightly different problem than the one being sold.
Interesting...
So we zoom out: What changed upstream?
"Hey! Take a look at this..."
Six months ago, marketing widened the message.
The positioning softened.
The promise broadened.
Top-of-funnel volume ticked up.
More leads.
More conversations.
More activity.
Sales didn’t break. Sales absorbed the tension.
Now reps are spending half their calls reframing expectations instead of advancing deals. Yes, more conversations, but conversions? Close rates dip.
Founder sees:
“Sales can’t close.”
Reality? The story drifted.
And the pipeline followed.
Here’s where this gets expensive.
If you hire two more reps right now, what happens?
You multiply the misalignment.
If you retrain the team without tightening positioning?
You accelerate waste.
If you invest in headcount before pressure-testing narrative?
You compound drag.
This is the real danger of plateau-stage decision-making. It’s not that founders "guess wrong." It’s that they invest confidently in the wrong corner.
There’s a difference.
Plateaus rarely originate where they appear.
They propagate.
Marketing shifts positioning.
Sales absorbs friction.
Close rates dip.
Founder funds Sales.
The pattern looks obvious in hindsight. But... it never feels obvious in the moment.
That’s why the first move isn’t investment. It’s diagnosis.
What changed?
Where did tension move?
What friction are we actually observing?
And is the corner we’re blaming the one that created this?
If the answer is “we’re not sure,” you don’t spend yet.
You pressure-test.
In our scenario here, the decision shifted:
Not to new headcount.
Not to performance plans.
Not to sales scripts.
It shifted upstream.
Clarify the offer
Tighten the ICP
Re-segment messaging
Align promise with delivery
Watch what happens to close rates... and then decide whether Sales was the problem. Wrap a timeline, some KPIs, and clear objectives around this approach, too, or you:
Won't know where you're headed, and you
Reality is, most founders don’t need better instincts. They need better diagnostic discipline.
Spraying capital into the corner that feels least comfortable (or seems to be a quick fix) is pretty typical. But it's not strategy.