A small sale can take just as long as a large one. So why do we treat customers the same?

In this article, I examine one of the most important, yet often overlooked decisions in B2B sales: Which customers are actually worth investing our commercial resources in? The next article addresses the other side of that decision — when a few large customers become so important that the business loses its commercial independence.

A sales team has spent six months developing a potential customer.

There have been meetings, presentations, technical clarifications, proposals, negotiations and involvement from several employees.

Finally, the order arrives.

The customer is satisfied. The salesperson is happy. A new customer can be added to the CRM.

But one question is missing.

Was the customer even worth winning?

Not whether the customer is interesting, likeable or has a genuine need.

But whether the total commercial effort bears a reasonable relationship to the value the customer relationship is expected to create.

In my view, that is a question far too many businesses only ask once the deal has already been won.

B2B sales take time. Even when the order is small.

We know that many B2B buying processes are complex.

The decision often involves multiple stakeholders, financial priorities, professional assessments and internal approvals.

In 6sense's 2026 Buyer Experience Report, the average buying journey is 10.3 months among the B2B buyers surveyed.

The study also shows that the customer's own research and internal decision-making process typically begin long before the first direct contact with a salesperson.

Naturally, there are significant differences between industries, purchase types and customer groups.

A major strategic purchase may require far more stakeholders and more extensive negotiations than a smaller standard order.

But an order's financial value does not necessarily correspond to the time it takes to get the customer to make a decision.

A small customer can easily have an extensive procurement process.

Proposals, legal clarification, technical documentation, supplier approval and negotiations may still be necessary.

It is not only the size of the order that determines how much work lies behind it.

And that is precisely why customer prioritisation matters so much.

We measure revenue. But what did it cost to win it?

Most sales organisations have a relatively clear picture of their pipeline and expected revenue.

Fewer have the same precision when it comes to the costs of developing and winning different types of customers.

This is where Customer Acquisition Cost, CAC, becomes interesting.

CAC describes the costs a business incurs to acquire new customers. It is typically calculated by relating total sales and marketing costs to the number of new customers within a defined period.

In complex B2B sales, we should also understand the specific resources used on each individual opportunity.

How many hours does the salesperson spend?

How much time does management spend?

How many specialists become involved?

How much work goes into proposals, demonstrations, workshops and contract negotiations?

And what is the actual probability of winning the customer?

The total effort is not necessarily fully visible in the CRM.

But it is very real in the company's finances.

The numbers should make us think

Benchmarkit's 2025 B2B SaaS benchmark shows that the typical company in the study spent around 2 dollars on sales and marketing for every dollar of new annual recurring revenue from new customers.

That is a CAC ratio of 2.0, measured according to the report's methodology.

It is not a universal norm for all B2B businesses.

But it illustrates how substantial the investments associated with generating new revenue can be.

Benchmarkit also highlights that CAC efficiency and payback periods should be assessed in relation to the customer's annual contract value.

Larger contracts are not automatically more efficient either. They may require extensive sales resources, customisation and expensive implementation.

That is an important point.

We should not only assess how large a customer is. We should assess what the customer relationship can economically sustain.

Customer economics go beyond the first order

I would therefore consider more than the customer's expected revenue in the first year.

First, we need to understand the contribution margin.

A large customer with low margins, extensive support needs and significant customisation is not necessarily more attractive than a smaller customer with a standardised need.

Second, we need to understand the customer's potential over time.

Can the relationship be developed? Is there scope for repeat purchases, additional services or access to more business areas?

Third, we need to know the costs of serving the customer after the sale.

A customer can be expensive to win and expensive to retain.

In 2024, Harvard Business Review described how the substantial costs of B2B customer acquisition and product development make it necessary to work systematically on the health and retention of customer relationships.

This means that an attractive customer must not only be winnable.

The business must also be able to deliver the expected value in an economically sustainable way.

Not every customer should have the same sales model

This leads to an important consequence for modern Go-to-Market.

If we know that different customer types have different economic potential, why do we so often apply the same resource-intensive sales process to all of them?

A smaller customer with a standardised need might be served through digital self-service, a partner channel or a more efficient sales process.

A larger strategic customer may justify a direct relationship, specialists, management involvement and a comprehensive account plan.

McKinsey's 2026 analysis of the future of B2B sales highlights precisely the need for better account prioritisation and connected commercial workflows.

The interesting point is not that AI makes it possible to contact more customers.

It is that we can become better at identifying the customers where our effort is most likely to create value.

Gartner has similarly pointed to the need to segment B2B customers based on their actual commercial characteristics and future potential.

In my view, this should apply to the entire customer relationship — not only to work with existing customers.

This is not about rejecting small customers

I want to emphasise an important nuance.

A smaller customer can be very attractive.

Perhaps the customer provides access to a new market.

Perhaps it has significant growth potential.

Perhaps it is easy to serve.

Or perhaps it represents a strategically important reference that the business has a concrete plan to leverage.

What matters is that there is a conscious commercial decision behind it.

The problem arises when a business commits substantial resources to small opportunities because no one has defined which customers should actually be prioritised.

Sales then become more opportunistic than strategic.

What would I investigate as a sales leader?

Before investing further in new customer sales, I would ask five questions.

1. Which customer segments generate the highest contribution margin over time?

Not just the largest revenue.

2. What does it really cost to win a customer in each segment?

We need to include the sales and marketing effort that is actually required.

3. How long does it take to recover the customer acquisition investment?

A good contract value is not enough if the investment ties up too many resources for too long.

4. Which customers can be developed after the first order?

A smaller initial order can be attractive if there is realistic and demonstrable development potential.

5. Is our sales model adapted to the customer's economic potential?

If a customer can only become profitable through a more efficient sales process, we should change the model rather than hope the economics improve.

Commercial discipline starts with choosing

An important part of sales is, of course, creating opportunities.

But being able to prioritise between them is at least as important.

We only have a limited number of salespeople, specialists, management hours and commercial resources available.

Every time we choose to invest in one customer, we effectively choose not to invest that same capacity elsewhere.

A business should therefore not only ask whether it can win a customer.

It should ask whether it should win the customer — and under which commercial conditions.

A small sale can require almost as much effort as a large one. But the effort does not automatically become a good investment simply because the order is won.

The modern sales organisation should not be measured by how many customers it can persuade to buy.

It should be able to identify, win and develop customers who create real value for both parties.

That is not less ambitious.

It is more disciplined.

Next article

There is, however, a risk in focusing exclusively on the largest and most attractive customers.

What happens when a business becomes so dependent on individual customers that their decisions can threaten the entire company?

Article 2: The Titanic effect — When your biggest customer becomes your biggest risk.

It is about a commercial danger I have personally experienced three times in my career.

The sources support the analysis of buying processes, customer economics and GTM prioritisation. B2B SaaS benchmark findings are not universal standards for all B2B businesses.