This article is part of The Buyer Group Intelligence Playbook – an 8-part series on why realigning B2B go-to-market around buying groups is the most impactful change a company can make, and how to do it. This is where the series begins.
Buyers make decisions in groups. Most go-to-market is built for individuals. The research shows what that gap is costing.
By 2030, Gartner predicts that 75% of B2B buyers will prefer sales experiences that prioritise human interaction over AI. This might seem contradictory in an era where every vendor is racing to deploy agentic AI, chatbots, and automated outreach at scale.
But the real contradiction is not buyers rejecting technology. It is B2B brands fundamentally misunderstanding how modern purchase decisions actually happen.
The received wisdom in B2B marketing and sales is built on a foundation that no longer reflects reality: the belief that individual "leads" make purchase decisions, and that optimising for MQLs and SQLs is the path to growth.
The data tells a different story.
The Buyer Journey Mismatch
Gartner's research on the B2B buying journey reveals a complex, non-linear process involving multiple stakeholders, countless digital touchpoints, and extensive peer consultation, most of which happens without vendor involvement.
According to Gartner, buyers spend only 17% of their time engaging with potential vendors, and that time is split among all suppliers being considered. The other 83% is independent research, internal discussions, peer recommendations, and consensus-building across buying committees.
Yet most B2B go-to-market operates as if the buying journey looks like this:
- Someone downloads a whitepaper (MQL)
- Sales qualifies them (SQL)
- Demos happen
- Deal closes
This linear, individual-focused model ignores three realities that research has consistently documented:
Reality 1: Buying groups, not individuals, make decisions
Forrester's 2026 research shows that on average, 13 internal stakeholders and 9 external participants influence a B2B purchase decision. For complex solutions, buying groups range from 6 to 16 people across multiple departments.
When go-to-market efforts focus on engaging one contact, the other 5 to 15 people who will influence the decision remain unengaged.
Reality 2: 80% of deals fail because of internal consensus
Gartner found that 80% of B2B deals fail not because of the external sales process, but due to internal consensus problems within the buying group. The real decision happens in conference rooms, Slack channels, and internal meetings where vendors are not present.
This is the lead finding for a reason: it means the majority of deals are lost because the buying committee could not align internally. If the full buying group has not been engaged and equipped with the information they need early, the champion cannot build the internal case alone.
Reality 3: Buyers form preferences before formal evaluation
Forrester revealed that 92% of buyers start with at least one vendor in mind, and 41% already have a single preferred vendor selected before formal evaluation begins.
By the time a "lead" enters a funnel, the buying committee has likely already formed a view about which vendors are in contention. Building relevance across the full committee early, before intent signals appear, is what determines whether you are part of that consideration.
The Structural Gap
Most B2B go-to-market is organised around broad audiences at one end (brand awareness, demand generation, category marketing) and individual leads at the other (MQLs, SQLs, contact-level outreach). There is little structural connection between the two.
The buying group sits in the middle of that gap (the 6 to 16 people who actually make the decision together), and in most organisations, it is invisible.
This gap has been amplified as the digital technology industry has expanded. The volume of tools, channels, and data points available to marketing and sales teams has grown enormously. But much of that technology is designed around individual targeting and contact-level measurement. The infrastructure reinforces lead-based thinking:
Programmatic and digital advertising is optimised for individual clicks, impressions, and conversions. These platforms are designed around volume. Buying committees do not convert through display ads, but the measurement frameworks treat individual engagement as the signal of progress.
CRM architecture is built around individual contacts progressing through stages: MQL, SQL, Opportunity, Closed Won. Most CRM systems do not have native buying committee structures. Sales teams optimise for what their CRM measures: individual lead progression. The result is that teams measure activity rather than buying group engagement.
Content and campaign measurement typically tracks individual touchpoints: downloads, form fills, email opens. These metrics capture who is willing to engage with vendor content, which is a useful signal but a heavily biased one, skewed toward the roles that consume content and away from the roles that make decisions.
The result is a go-to-market system that is structurally designed to miss the buying group. Not because the people running it are doing anything wrong, but because the tools and frameworks they are working with were built for a different model.
Buyer Group Intelligence: Closing the Gap
Realigning go-to-market around buying groups starts with intelligence. You cannot engage a committee you have not mapped.
Buyer Group Intelligence (BGI) is Flow State's methodology for identifying, mapping, and understanding complete buying committees before engagement begins.
What BGI reveals for every target account:
- All decision-makers and their roles (economic buyer, technical approver, end users, influencers, procurement, legal)
- Each stakeholder's priorities, concerns, and objectives
- Reporting structures and influence dynamics within the buying group
- Existing relationships and coverage gaps
- Engagement signals that show which stakeholders are active and which are absent
This intelligence foundation means every function in the business is working from the same view of the buying group, rather than disconnected views of individual contacts.
The $1.6M case study
A global data technology brand had strong relationships with end users at a major financial services account, but zero visibility with senior decision-makers. The relationship was single-threaded and at risk.
Flow State implemented a BGI-led program:
- Mapped 400+ decision-makers across 4 countries
- Achieved 35% penetration into target decision-makers globally
- Identified one completely new market opportunity
- Progressed 2 existing deals and generated 4 new sales-qualified conversations
Result: $1.6M in new revenue from one account over 2 years. Approximately $90K investment. 1,678% ROI.
This did not happen by generating more MQLs. It happened by systematically mapping and engaging the buying committee, understanding who mattered, what they cared about, and coordinating engagement across the full group.
What Revenue Leaders Can Do Now
The research is clear on the structural shift that has happened in B2B buying. Here are five practical steps to begin aligning around buying groups:
1. Track buying committee engagement, not just lead volume.
Consider replacing "leads generated" with "stakeholders engaged per target account" as a core metric. Measuring coverage across buying groups provides a more accurate picture of pipeline health than individual form fills.
2. Invest in intelligence before campaigns.
Engaging buying committees that have not been mapped is guesswork. Auditing current intelligence (do you know who all the decision-makers are in your top 20 accounts, what their priorities are, and where coverage gaps exist?) is a practical starting point.
3. Create content for buying groups, not just buyer personas.
Different stakeholders care about different things. The CFO has different priorities to the IT Director. Developing narratives that address role-specific concerns within the broader account context (content designed to facilitate consensus, not just educate individuals) closes a gap that most content libraries have.
4. Align around target accounts and buyer groups.
When marketing and sales share the same account intelligence and coordinate touchpoints across stakeholders, deals move faster. Marketing reaching the CRO with thought leadership while sales engages the VP and a technical workshop brings in the IT Director. That coordination is what buying group alignment looks like in practice.
5. Build attribution around buyer groups.
Connecting campaigns to buying committee engagement rather than individual MQLs shows which programmes drive stakeholder coverage, which content facilitates consensus, and which activities correlate with closed deals. This proves commercial impact in terms leadership cares about: pipeline and revenue.
The Human Connection Paradox, Resolved
Gartner's prediction that 75% of buyers will prefer human interaction over AI by 2030 is not buyers rejecting technology. It is buyers rejecting automated engagement that lacks genuine understanding.
Buyers want human connection at the right moments: when navigating complex decisions, building consensus across stakeholders, and finalising high-stakes commitments.
The answer is better intelligence that enables more relevant human engagement. Buyer Group Intelligence provides the insight that informs who to engage, when to engage them, and what they actually care about, so that human interactions are relevant, timely, and valuable.
AI cannot build buying committee consensus. People can, when they are working from the right intelligence.
In Conclusion
Buying committees make decisions collectively. Most of the journey happens without vendor involvement. Buyers form preferences early, before formal evaluation.
Yet most B2B go-to-market is still structured around individual leads at one end and broad audiences at the other, with the buying group invisible in the middle.
The organisations seeing stronger pipeline and better deal outcomes are the ones realigning their go-to-market around buying groups by engaging the full committee with intelligence-led, human-centred approaches.
The research is clear. The methodology exists. The question is when to start.