Software buyers are moving faster than software sellers | MarTech

B2B software buyers love how AI lets them make purchasing decisions faster while avoiding salespeople. However, they hate that after that, they are still stuck in a slower, sales-led journey.

More than 80% of buyers used AI chatbots for software recommendations over the past two years, according to G2’s “2026 Buyer Behavior Report,” and nearly half said AI had its greatest influence during shortlisting and evaluation. That influence matters: 80% of AI users bought from their initial shortlist in at least three of their last five purchases, versus 65% of those who didn’t use AI for recommendations.

Unfortunately, everything bogs down once the decision is made. Nearly three-quarters of buyers say software purchases are significantly delayed or abandoned because of internal approvals or back-and-forth with vendors, according to Cleverbridge’s “The Cost of Selling Software.” Waiting for pricing or a quote creates delays for 36%, while 30% cite back-and-forth over terms.

The major causes of delays when dealing with vendors are waiting for a quote (36%) or pricing, and going back and forth with sales over terms (30%). So it’s no surprise that 84% prefer a self-service digital path.

And while 96% of sellers agree routine transactions are moving toward self-service, only 17% have one in operation, according to Cleverbridge.

AI is moving the bottleneck

AI can produce a list of potential vendors in seconds. Figuring out which one deserves the money takes considerably longer.

Forty percent of buyers say evaluation is now the longest part of the software buying journey, up from 36% the previous year, according to G2. Research comes next at 36%, followed by the final decision at 22%. Once a vendor is selected, the biggest delays are security review at 39%, budget approval at 32%, and implementation planning at 25%.

Finance is also entering the process earlier. Its participation in software buying committees rose from 31% to 46% in a year, and 49% of buyers said their CFO had reversed a software purchase the buying team had already approved. Three-quarters of buyers now expect a positive ROI within six months of signing a contract.

That puts more pressure on vendors to make pricing, security, implementation, ROI, and other information available to buyers as they evaluate products. G2 found companies are already moving pricing logic, ROI calculators, case studies, benefits, and trials earlier in the process.

But giving buyers more information doesn’t necessarily give them a faster way to complete the purchase.

Buyers are ready to do more themselves

Only 45% of buyers complete a routine software purchase within three business days, according to Cleverbridge. A quarter wait a week or longer.

Those delays are particularly striking compared to what buyers say they’re willing to do. Ninety-three percent would use self-service digital checkout for routine software purchases if given the option and permitted by company policy.

And “routine” doesn’t necessarily mean inexpensive.

More than half of buyers would be comfortable completing a routine purchase worth at least $25,000 through self-service. Seventeen percent would go to $100,000 or more.

The willingness extends across the customer lifecycle. Two-thirds would use self-service for renewals and upgrades or plan changes, while 54% would use it for expansions. Even for new software purchases, 44% would buy independently.

Human involvement is becoming more specialized

The Cleverbridge research suggests buyers only want salespeople if and when they ask for it.

More than half want human support available for large multi-year agreements, security or compliance reviews, procurement exceptions or special terms, and complex configurations. Nearly half want it for custom pricing and discounts.

So, buyers find sales helpful when negotiating an unusual contract, navigating a security problem, or designing a complex implementation. However, they want to handle things like processing another seat, a standard renewal, or a routine upgrade on their own.

Doing that can also save vendors money. More than half say they spend at least $1,000 internally processing a typical routine transaction, according to Cleverbridge, while more than a third spend six hours or more. Quoting, approvals, billing, payments, support, and coordination consume resources even when the transaction involves little negotiation or customization.

Buying friction becomes a marketing problem

Who is responsible if a buyer abandons a purchase because it takes too long for the seller to take their money? Marketing’s done its job because the buyer is convinced. Sales, if it’s involved, has done its job because the buyer wants to sign.

Ultimately, it’s neither group’s fault. However, marketers do need to understand the transaction infrastructure and what it means for customer experience. The question becomes where buyers encounter friction after demand generation has done its job, and whether the company’s buying process matches the way customers increasingly want to purchase.

Companies that solve only the discovery problem may simply deliver buyers to the next bottleneck faster.