Ecommerce agencies: decision-maker alignment
Use this decision-maker alignment exercise to understand who uses, evaluates, funds and approves the work without dismissing the person in front of you. You are discussing a store conversion and merchandising review with the owner of an online store. The point of the practice is to make a useful decision together, including recognising when the offer is not a fit.
Agree a stakeholder map and a useful, permission-based way to answer outstanding questions.
The situation
In this fictional brief, customers hesitate at product selection or checkout. The buyer wants a prioritised set of customer-journey improvements. Your offer is a store conversion and merchandising review, but you must first establish whether its scope addresses the actual need.
A relevant delivery constraint is that changes must preserve payment, inventory and fulfilment integrations. Treat that as a fact in the exercise; do not remove it to make the sale easier.
| Your counterpart | the owner of an online store |
|---|---|
| Offer under discussion | a store conversion and merchandising review |
| Evidence available | a recorded walkthrough with observed friction and a testable hypothesis |
| Terms to clarify | Define platform access, implementation, measurement and rollback responsibility. |
How to approach decision-maker alignment
A useful question for this stage: “What would help you explain this proposal internally?” Ask it when the conversation creates a reason for it, rather than reciting every question in order.
- Map roles rather than job titles alone. Ask your contact how they would like others involved and what information those people need.
- Ground the discussion in the buyer’s work. Ask: “Where does a customer need information that the store does not provide?” Listen for a concrete example before making a claim.
- Use evidence relevant to the decision: a recorded walkthrough with observed friction and a testable hypothesis. Explain what it demonstrates and what remains unverified.
- Agree a stakeholder map and a useful, permission-based way to answer outstanding questions.
An industry-specific concern
Buyer: “We only want more traffic.”
Possible response: “More traffic may help, but let us first check whether visitors can choose the product and complete checkout without avoidable friction.”
Why this response helps: it acknowledges the concern, brings the discussion back to a verifiable requirement and leaves room for a different decision. Adapt the wording to what the buyer actually said.
Run the practice
- Prepare for two minutes. One person takes the seller role and one plays the owner of an online store. Read the offer and constraint separately from your preferred answer.
- Have a five-minute conversation focused on understand who uses, evaluates, funds and approves the work without dismissing the person in front of you. The buyer should answer consistently with the brief and ask for evidence when a claim is vague.
- Add this challenge: Your contact supports the idea but cannot share an approver’s details. Offer a concise decision brief they can use.
- Pause for feedback. Quote one useful question and one missed opportunity. Repeat the difficult exchange using a different response.
- Finish by writing the actual agreement. A sensible option, when it fits, is to review one product category and one checkout journey. A clear decision to pause is also a useful outcome.
What to avoid
| Common mistake | Asking to bypass your contact because they are not the final approver. |
|---|---|
| A stronger direction | You know the internal process best. How can we help you prepare a useful discussion with the other stakeholders? |
| Scope and claim boundary | A heuristic review does not prove a conversion uplift. |
| What to measure in real work | checkout completion for a defined audience and period. Establish a baseline and definition before interpreting a change. |
An example conversation
Who will use the result, and who needs confidence in the decision?
Our concern is that customers hesitate at product selection or checkout. Also, changes must preserve payment, inventory and fulfilment integrations.
Where does a customer need information that the store does not provide?
We only want more traffic.
More traffic may help, but let us first check whether visitors can choose the product and complete checkout without avoidable friction.
What would help you explain this proposal internally?
Your working sheet.
Make the exercise your own. Notes are saved in this browser when storage is available. Download a copy to keep; avoid confidential information on a shared device.
Example: customers hesitate at product selection or checkout; changes must preserve payment, inventory and fulfilment integrations.
Example: What would help you explain this proposal internally? Industry question: Where does a customer need information that the store does not provide?
Example: a recorded walkthrough with observed friction and a testable hypothesis. A heuristic review does not prove a conversion uplift.
Example: Propose a clear next step, such as: review one product category and one checkout journey. Confirm the owner and date.
Review your work
This is a reflection checklist, not an automated assessment.
Questions
Who is this ecommerce agencies exercise for?+
Can I use the example as a script?+
How should I assess the result?+
Fictional training scenario. The dialogue illustrates response choices; it is not a customer testimonial or a record of a real sale.
Explore more sales resourcesTake the conversation further.
Read a practical guide to structuring your sales practice, or explore the current London sales masterclass.
Plan your sales practiceExplore Jordan Belfort in London