Metric Monday: Buyers Say They’re Open to Switching—But Are They Really?

saraboostani

Hey all,

In early readouts of data we’re collecting now, it appears buyers seem open to considering other vendors after group consensus has been established on a preferred winner. However, the data also tells us (and has for years) that, in actuality, most often (over 80%) they do not. It's fascinating, and it brings me back to my graduate school days, where we studied many behavioral phenomena that I think may be playing a role in what we're seeing here:

Status quo bias/default effect – Once a preferred vendor is identified (especially if they've already been contacted) it becomes the psychological “default,” making switching feel riskier, costlier, or unnecessarily effortful.

Sunk cost fallacy – Reaching out to a vendor and building internal consensus on them takes time and effort. Walking away can feel like losing progress.

Confirmation bias – Once a team leans toward a vendor, they may (often unintentionally) seek out information that supports that choice.

Relational lock-in – If the team has existing familiarity or past experience with the preferred vendor, it creates a sense of trust and ease that’s hard for others to disrupt, even when buyers claim they're open to switching.

Decision defensibility – When buyers anticipate needing to defend their vendor selection to others internally (finance, legal, leadership), they may subconsciously lean toward the safer, already-validated option—even if others might be better. Sticking with the preferred vendor is easier to justify.

@Kerry

Kerry

I really love that you're talking about this. These cognitive biases explain a lot of what we see in our data, but also a lot of what we see in the world in general.