How Buyers Engage Across Their Journey
Think about a time when you had guests in from out-of-town. You brought them to your favorite restaurant, and the first thing they asked was, ‘So, what’s good here?’ And for a moment, you were stumped. You’ve enjoyed your meal every time, but no single dish stands out as a clear must-try — it’s the overall experience that keeps you coming back. Finally, you just say, ‘Honestly, everything’s solid.’
In much the same way, B2B buyers tell us they engage in a wide variety of activities throughout their buying journey, finding all of them generally useful. Each touchpoint adds value, but it’s the combination of these interactions that shapes their decision-making process, rather than any single activity playing a decisive role.
In fact, buying groups engage in hundreds — if not thousands — of digital and human interactions during their buying journeys. In over 80% of purchases, buying teams have already settled on their purchase requirements and a preferred vendor before ever speaking to sellers. To reach that decision, buyers draw upon the mountainous range of resources available to them — consultants, analysts, vendor webinars, endless online content, and much else — using each touchpoint as a steppingstone toward their final selection.
In this report, we’ll explore exactly what buyers have to say about the activities they engage in throughout their journey and the critical factors — such as price, product features, and vendor reputation — that steer their selection.
Buyers Take What You Give Them
We surveyed over 2,500 recent B2B buyers across North America, EMEA, and APAC about the activities they engage in during their buying journeys. From a list of over 20 activities, each was used by 63% to 82% of buyers — meaning most buyers used most of the assets available to them. We also asked how helpful each activity was, rated on a scale from 1 to 5, with 5 being the most helpful. Average ratings ranged from 3.4 to 4.1, indicating that buyers generally found all activities helpful.
Next, we calculated a weighted score for each activity by multiplying its usage rate by its average helpfulness rating. This allowed us to rank the activities in a way that reflected both how often buyers used the activities and their perceived value. If some asset or activity types were were more often but not very useful, this method would identify that.
However, given the relatively narrow range in both usage and perceived value we found, the differences between individual activities were not meaningful in practical terms. For example, the top-ranked activity was a mere .04 points higher than the activity ranked second. Thus, rather than focus on individual differences, we performed an exploratory factor analysis to understand if certain activities tended to rank together or consistently appear at the top, middle, or bottom. In the next section, we dive into the results of this analysis.
Let’s Have a Chat: Buyers Like Real-time Engagement
The exploratory factor analysis showed that activities involving direct (synchronous) interactions with others tended to rank together. These included in-person meetings with vendors, contacting vendors for information, virtual meetings, internal buying team discussions, and consultations with analysts. Whether internal, with analysts/consultants or with vendors, live engagements were consistently the most commonly used and preferred.
Important clarification: When we say an activity was commonly used, we are talking about the type of activity, not the number of times buyers engaged in it. For example, the table below shows that 80.7% of buyers engaged in virtual meetings with vendors. But, we do not know how many such meetings. Further, in the same survey, buyers told us that they do not engage directly with sellers until 70% or more through their journeys, suggesting that buyers like virtual meetings, but only after a point.
This matters, because, for example, while 68.7% of buyers say they filled in a form to view vendor content, it is extremely likely that individual buyers did that far more often during their journeys than they met with vendors at physical offices, which 74.3% of buyers say they did at some point in their journey.
| Buying Journey Activity | Percent of Respondents Engaging | Weighted Average Rating |
|---|---|---|
| In-person meetings with vendors | 82.2% | 1 |
| Proactively contacting a vendor company for more information | 80.3% | 2 |
| Virtual meetings with vendors | 80.7% | 3 |
| Internal meetings with the buying team | 82.4% | 4 |
| Meet with analysts/consultants | 73.7% | 5 |
| Consume Vendor Content | 77.5% | 6 |
| Meet at vendors’ physical offices or other locations | 74.3% | 7 |
| Read analyst reports | 74.0% | 8 |
| Respond to a sale or SDR email | 71.2% | 9 |
| Fill in a form to view vendor content | 68.7% | 10 |
| Respond to a sale or SDR call | 70.7% | 11 |
| Attend industry events (live, virtual) | 66.9% | 12 |
| Talk with peers/social media | 70.0% | 13 |
| Engage in chat on a vendor website | 69.7% | 13 |
| Read industry publications/web syndicated content | 71.3% | 15 |
| Visit 3rd party review sites (e.g., G2, TrustRadius) | 69.7% | 15 |
| Register for a vendor online event (webinar or similar) | 66.7% | 17 |
| Click on vendor ad | 66.7% | 17 |
| Attend vendor-sponsored events (e.g., dinner) | 65.7% | 19 |
| See, but not click on a vendor ad | 62.8% | 20 |
Next, we examined a variety of factors that might influence buyer preferences for these activities. Direct interactions were consistently ranked within the top ten activities across:
-
- Regions (North America, EMEA, APAC)
-
- Buyer roles (Champion, Influencer, Financial Ratifier, etc.)
-
- Price points
-
- Solution types (Hardware-Machinery, Services, Software)
-
- Business need (new business capability, improving existing capability, renewal, etc.)
It is clear buyers prefer direct communication regardless of what is being purchased, where it’s purchased, or how much it costs.
Not Bad but Not Great: Ads and Vendor-Sponsored Events Hover Near the Bottom
Conversely, vendor ads (whether seen or clicked) and vendor-sponsored events (online or in-person) consistently ranked near the bottom. This was true across all the same dimensions listed above (buyer roles, price points, solution types, business need), except region.
| Buying Journey Activity | Percent of Respondents Engaging | Weighted Average Rating |
|---|---|---|
| In-person meetings with vendors | 82.2% | 1 |
| Proactively contacting a vendor company for more information | 80.3% | 2 |
| Virtual meetings with vendors | 80.7% | 3 |
| Internal meetings with the buying team | 82.4% | 4 |
| Meet with analysts/consultants | 73.7% | 5 |
| Consume Vendor Content | 77.5% | 6 |
| Meet at vendors’ physical offices or other locations | 74.3% | 7 |
| Read analyst reports | 74.0% | 8 |
| Respond to a sale or SDR email | 71.2% | 9 |
| Fill in a form to view vendor content | 68.7% | 10 |
| Respond to a sale or SDR call | 70.7% | 11 |
| Attend industry events (live, virtual) | 66.9% | 12 |
| Talk with peers/social media | 70.0% | 13 |
| Engage in chat on a vendor website | 69.7% | 13 |
| Read industry publications/web syndicated content | 71.3% | 15 |
| Visit 3rd party review sites (e.g., G2, TrustRadius) | 69.7% | 15 |
| Register for a vendor online event (webinar or similar) | 66.7% | 17 |
| Click on vendor ad | 66.1% | 17 |
| Attend vendor-sponsored events (e.g., dinner) | 65.7% | 19 |
| See, but not click on a vendor ad | 62.8% | 20 |
In both East Asia and Hong Kong (SAR), ads viewed were among the top five ranked activities. While meetings and direct communication remained popular, buyers in these regions demonstrated a stronger preference for online content, including ads, vendor-provided digital materials, responding to emails, and reading analyst reports, compared to their peers elsewhere.
Key Patterns in Buying Activities
While no single activity consistently stands out above the rest, meetings and other types of direct communication reliably rank near the top of the list, underscoring the value buyers place on personal engagement. Regardless of the solution or its cost, buyers are eager to discuss their options. This is true of discussions with sellers, even though those discussions don’t occur until after a favorite vendor has been chosen.
In contrast, vendor-sponsored events and ads typically rank lower, though regional differences — like those in East Asia and Hong Kong — can shift these preferences.
Despite these trends, it’s important for providers to recognize that most buyers engage in the majority of activities we surveyed, with each activity being used by 63% to 82% of respondents. And, the scores buyers assigned to these activities fall within a narrow range, indicating that buyers engage in a broad spectrum of activities and generally find them helpful. This lack of differentiation between the most and least preferred interaction types suggests that 1) buyers will engage with whatever is available to them, and 2) marketers should offer a diverse mix of resources, ensuring that prospects have multiple avenues to view their brand as a reliable and valuable partner. Most importantly, marketers must seek to understand the preferences of their own audiences and deliver content accordingly.
Purchase Drivers: What Seals the Deal
As we’ve learned, buyers move through their purchase journeys by engaging in a wide array of activities, with each buying group participating in over 800 interactions with vendors per journey. The information they seek through these activities is aimed at meeting specific needs in their evaluation of both the solution and the provider.
This year, we asked buyers to identify what guided their final vendor selection. From a list of ten potential factors, they indicated which ones played an influential role in their decision and then ranked them in order of importance.
As we observed with the activities buyers engage in, there were few stark differences in what buyers found important. However, another exploratory factor analysis found that price, product/solution features, and ease of implementation tended to cluster together in buyers’ minds. Much like the prominence of direct communication in buyer activities, these three factors consistently ranked within the top five reasons buyers chose a vendor.
This was true regardless of:
- The respondent’s role in the purchase process (champion, ultimate decision-maker, financial ratifier, etc.)
- The business need the solution fulfilled (new business capability, renewal, etc.)
- The type of solution (hardware, services, software)
Purchase Drivers by Buyer Role
Purchase Drivers by Capability Type Purchased
Purchase Drivers by Solution Type
While price, product features, and ease of implementation typically rank within the top five reasons buyers choose their vendor, this pattern shifts slightly as the cost of the solution increases. For solutions costing $300,000 and above, these factors are still important, but vendor reputation/brand and customer service/support become increasingly prominent. This suggests, not surprisingly, that as the investment increases, buyers prioritize trust, reputation, and support over features and price alone.
In our study, purchases of solutions that would provide new business capabilities were generally more costly. It is also likely that implementing solutions that provide new business capabilities also have the potential to be more disruptive to the business. Consequently, buyers may be more inclined to seek a vendor with a strong reputation to mitigate the risk of costlier, more disruptive purchases.
Purchase Drivers by Solution Cost
Key Patterns in Purchase Drivers
As we’ve learned, the bottom line — price, product features, and ease of implementation — usually carries the most weight in driving buyers to select a winning vendor, with vendor reputation and customer support gaining importance as solution costs rise. Beyond these primary drivers, two other groups of factors also show consistent patterns. As shown in the chart below, vendor reputation/brand, customer service/support, previous experience with the vendor, and domain expertise tend to rank in the middle. Meanwhile, case studies/success stories, input from analysts/consultants, thought leadership, and customer advocacy/referrals are generally ranked lower in terms of influence. The differences within these groups are minimal and largely meaningless in practical terms.
While these groups or ‘tiers’ provide some guidance on how buyers prioritize their final vendor choice, it’s important to remember that, much like the activities buyers engage in, the range between these factors is relatively narrow. Even though price, features, and ease of implementation consistently rank at the top, factors like thought leadership and customer advocacy/referrals should not be overlooked. In the grand scheme, their rankings aren’t far behind those of the Tier 1 factors.
Where to Go from Here
Overall, what buyers do and how they decide is consistent, regardless of the type of solution being purchased, the buyer’s role on their team, price points, business needs, or region. Buyers like direct communication but avoid having it with sellers until they are more than two-thirds of the way through their journeys. And buyers report that price, features, and ease of implementation consistently carry the most weight in their decision-making process.
However, it is important to remember that we found little difference in what buyers do or prefer – or even what drives their decisions. Buyers consider a broad spectrum of factors and engage with most tactics and assets made available to them. This means providers need to deliver a well-rounded and comprehensive approach, while clearly communicating their unique strengths and differentiators to stand out against competitors.
Most importantly, marketers should take pains to understand from their own buyers what their preferences and decision-drivers are.
About The Buyers in Our Study
Our study included 2,509 B2B buyers across three geographic regions: North America, Europe, Middle East, and Africa (EMEA), and Asia-Pacific (APAC). Participants were located in North America (37.46%), EMEA (29.77%), or APAC (32.76%) during their purchase. Notably, 15% of our sample consisted of buyers working for organizations headquartered in a different region than where they were located. For instance, 2.6% of participants had company headquarters in Latin America, although none of them were in Latin America during their purchase process.
To qualify for the survey, participants must have bought at least $10,000USD in annualized value within the last 24 months (the average respondent participated in such a purchase process 8.44 months prior to taking the survey). The average annualized deal size across participants was 4.58 on our Purchase Cost Scale which is in between the ranges of $200,001 to $300,000 and $300,001-$400,000 USD. The buyers who participated in our survey come from companies that experienced an average of 48.4% revenue growth over the past twelve months. The participants in our survey represent companies of various funding types, including privately funded (31.03%), Private Equity (PE)-backed (25.70%), publicly traded (37.92%), and Venture Capital (VC)-backed companies (5.33%).
Buyers from Tech & Software companies were the most represented, followed by a relatively even distribution across Professional Services, Business Services, Manufacturing, and Financial Services. Four percent of respondents held individual contributor roles, while the remaining participants had a more evenly spread range of titles, from managers to senior executives.
