Analyst Brief: The Outcomes Gap
- The Finding: A significant gap exists between traditional analyst evaluations and the real-world priorities of RevOps teams. Analysts reward feature breadth; operators demand user adoption, low TCO, and operational agility.
- The Evidence: Market-wide data reveals a usability crisis. According to a 2025 DealHub*-sponsored survey, only 1% of legacy CPQ users are “extremely satisfied.” While this is a vendor-sponsored study, it aligns with broader market sentiment: Nucleus Research* reports on the “The Opportunity Cost of Inaction, while G2 user reviews and Gartner Peer Insights frequently cite usability and adoption as persistent challenges,
- The Impact: This misalignment leads to what operators call the “Formula 1 Problem”: acquiring a sophisticated tool that fails to deliver daily value, driving up the true Total Cost of Ownership (TCO) by a hidden 35%.
*Source: DealHub, “State of the CPQ Market 2025” (vendor-sponsored, not independently audited). Nucleus Research, “The Opportunity Cost of Inaction”. See also G2 CPQ Software Category and Gartner Peer Insights for Configure, Price, Quote category.
For years, a persistent tension has defined the CPQ market: a deep divide between analyst-driven evaluations and the outcome-based priorities of Revenue Operations teams. While frameworks from firms like Gartner and Forrester steer procurement toward vendors with the most exhaustive feature sets, RevOps leaders are fighting a different battle, one for user adoption, operational speed, and tangible ROI.
This isn’t an academic debate. Our analysis, informed by independent interviews, a recent market study from DealHub, and corroborating data from Nucleus Research, G2 and Gartner Peer Insights, reveals a systemic misalignment where enterprises report low satisfaction and significant cost overruns for the very solutions crowned as “Leaders.”
The Two Scorecards: How Analysts and Operators Define Success
The core of the problem lies in two different definitions of success. Analysts reward theoretical capability, measured by feature checklists and vendor vision. Operators, however, measure success by quantifiable outcomes: active user adoption, quote-to-cash velocity, and margin integrity.
| Metric | Operator-Led Weighting | Analyst-Led Weighting | Why It Matters |
|---|---|---|---|
| Active User Adoption (%) | 25% | (Often secondary) | User adoption drives ROI, signals real value |
| Admin TCO (incl. rework) | 20% | (Often understated) | Shows true cost, not just license |
| Quote-to-Cash Cycle Time | 20% | (Often secondary) | Direct impact on revenue velocity |
| Integration Fit & Agility | 15% | 10% | Ecosystem lock-in vs. flexibility |
| Analyst Rank & Vision | 10% | 50%+ | Useful for planning but not a proxy for value |
“We learned the hard way: analyst rankings don’t close deals, rep adoption does.”
Director of Revenue Operations, Manufacturing
The Usability Crisis: When “Leader” Platforms Go Unused
The most significant failure of the traditional model is its blind spot for usability. According to a DealHub study they found that only 1% of legacy CPQ users are ‘extremely satisfied’ and 71% of organizations suffer from sales rep adoption rates below 60%. While this is a vendor-sponsored survey, it echoes broader market sentiment: ‘The opportunity cost of inaction: State of the CPQ market 2025’ and G2’s CPQ usability scores, which consistently show that usability and adoption, not feature breadth, are the strongest predictors of ROI.
The Hidden 35%: Uncovering the True TCO
Analyst models often understate the true Total Cost of Ownership. Our research confirms that the real cost is consistently inflated by a hidden 35% premium driven by professional services, integration work, and the significant, often untracked, cost of internal labor and rework.
Case in Point: A $500M SaaS company in the FinTech sector spent 18 months and over $200K implementing a “Leader” CPQ platform recommended by analysts. Despite meeting all technical requirements, only 40% of reps used the tool due to poor usability and slow quoting workflows. Within two years, they replaced it with a more agile, user-centric solution, achieving 90% adoption and a 30% reduction in quote-to-cash time, with far lower ongoing support costs.
The Analyst-Induced Features Race: The “Formula 1 Problem”
Vendors, competing for high analyst rankings, are incentivized to build more features, leading to what operators call the “Formula 1 Problem”: a supercar that is powerful in theory but too complex for daily use. This feature bloat creates a vicious cycle of operational drag and technical debt.
Quick-Start: Operator-Led CPQ Evaluation
To break this cycle, leaders must shift to an operator-led evaluation process.
- Run a real-data pilot, not just a canned demo.
- Track weekly user adoption and admin hours.
- Calculate all-in TCO (licenses + services + internal labor).
- Measure quote-to-cash cycle time before and after.
- Score integration fit with CRM, billing, and CLM.
- Gather user feedback at every stage.
“We finally stopped chasing analyst checklists and started measuring what actually moved the needle —adoption, cycle time, and user feedback. That’s when we saw real ROI.” VP, Sales Operations, SaaS
When Analyst-Led Selection Still Matters
In highly regulated, global, or ultra-complex environments, analyst frameworks can help ensure compliance and scale. But even here, operator outcomes, adoption, TCO, and cycle time, must be part of the equation.
Analyst Takeaway
The traditional, feature-checklist approach to buying CPQ is increasingly misaligned with the needs of modern revenue teams. The most successful organizations are those that put operator outcomes first, building their business case on measurable metrics, not solely on a vendor’s position in an analyst graphic.
What’s Next? As AI, API-first, and composable architectures reshape the CPQ landscape, the gap between analyst checklists and operator outcomes will only widen. The organizations that thrive will be those that continuously measure, adapt, and put user outcomes at the center of every technology decision.
The CPQ Integrations Team shares expert insights on revenue operations, CPQ, and quote-to-cash innovation. We explore how connected systems and AI-driven automation transform CPQ from record-keeping tools into revenue-accelerating engines for modern B2B companies.
