An enemy can be pain points, processes, or even incentives that keep your customer stuck. Treating sales as a joint mission to defeat that enemy creates energy, urgency, and alignment. It is also the simplest way to remove feature sprawl from your pitch. The goal is not to vilify people or trash competitors. The goal is to name the thing your buyer already fights each week, then show how your system makes winning more likely and less costly.
Closing a sale is rarely about adding more benefits or shaving a little off price. Buyers want a partner who stands on their side of the problem. When you position your offer as the practical way to beat a defined threat, indecision drops. The choice becomes clear. Join the mission and move forward, or keep paying the hidden tax of the status quo. That shift turns your team from product narrators into field guides who have walked the path before.
The hidden system mistake is fuzzy opposition. Early teams often sell against nothing in particular. The deck lists outcomes, the demo shows features, yet the buyer never feels the cost of inaction. Marketing talks about efficiency, sales talks about savings, product talks about speed. None of it lands because no one has said what the customer is trying to defeat. Without a named enemy, your message blends into vendor noise and your only lever becomes discounting.
This muddle usually starts from good intentions. Founders want to stay positive and avoid sounding confrontational. Teams copy category language from larger players and soften any sharp edges. Discovery gets crammed into a script rather than a genuine map of obstacles. Over time the company becomes fluent in benefits but inarticulate about stakes. The pipeline fills with polite conversations that go nowhere, and win rates drift down even as demos go up.
The cost is not only external. Internally, the lack of a defined enemy fragments ownership. Product prioritizes what is easy to ship. Sales chases high surface area features that look impressive on calls. Customer success overpromises to make renewals stick. Strategy meetings become debates about taste rather than decisions informed by the buyer’s real fight. Morale takes a slow hit because effort rises while outcomes stay flat.
You fix this with a simple, cross functional blueprint. First, write a one line enemy statement for your primary segment. Name the operational or financial harm that repeats without your solution. Keep it neutral and specific. For example, a payments startup might say that the enemy is settlement delay that starves working capital for seven out of ten mid market merchants. A compliance tool might say the enemy is audit rework that burns two quarters of headcount every year. Precision matters because it sharpens design, messaging, and qualification.
Second, define the stakes and the counterfactual. What does life look like if the enemy keeps winning for another quarter. What changes if the enemy loses within ninety days. Put numbers to both states. If you cannot quantify the before and after, your team will default to feature talk. Numbers make the mission measurable, and they protect the story from sliding into hype.
Third, align your capability to the kill chain. Each feature must reduce a concrete step in the enemy’s attack. Replace vague phrases like smart routing or automated workflows with the specific choke points you remove. If settlement delay is the enemy, show how your risk model clears 30 percent more transactions at first pass and how your reconciliation removes manual holds by day two. If audit rework is the enemy, show how your controls library cuts duplicate testing by half in the first cycle. Resist the urge to add extras that do not move the battle forward.
This is where ethics and culture enter. A useful enemy is a costly constraint, not a person to blame. Do not build a narrative that humiliates a department or shames a role. Do not rely on fear. People buy relief and momentum, not anxiety. Name the system problem, not the individual. If you feel tempted to bash a competitor by name, stop and return to the constraint. Your credibility compounds when you stay focused on the buyer’s reality and your own evidence.
Turn the blueprint into daily practice across teams. Product is your weapons team. Their roadmap should stack around the fastest way to neutralize the enemy for the target segment. Marketing is your narrative unit. Their assets should open with the enemy statement in the buyer’s words, then move quickly to measurable before and after states. Sales is your field command. Their talk track should qualify on the enemy, not on budget or job title, and demonstrate how your sequence defeats it with the least internal change. Customer success is your shield line. Their playbooks should prevent the enemy from re appearing after go live and surface repeatable proof within the first ninety days.
Pricing and packaging should reinforce the mission. If your buyer is starved for working capital, do not demand heavy upfront fees. If rework is the problem, price on clean outcomes rather than hours consumed. Commercial terms that contradict the mission erode trust. The fastest way to signal alignment is to let the customer pay in the currency they actually care about. You can keep margin by tying upside to verified reduction of the enemy’s cost.
Governance keeps the framework honest. Set a rule of evidence for claims used in sales assets. Tie every number to a source, even if the source is your own anonymized cohort data. Review your enemy statement quarterly with real customers and prospects. Ask what you misread. Ask what grew worse. A named enemy can change as your segment matures. Staying current prevents the story from becoming a museum piece.
This approach scales across regions without losing respect. In Singapore, buyers often seek quiet proof and pragmatic change. In the UAE, buyers may accept bolder vision if it comes with visible sponsorship and fast wins. In Taiwan, technical credibility can matter more than theatrics. The framework adapts because it is grounded in the buyer’s constraint rather than your brand mood. You change tone, not truth.
Two quick diagnostics can expose gaps. If you removed price from the conversation, would your current pitch still make the buyer feel safer from the enemy. If your top three roadmap items shipped on schedule, would they materially reduce the enemy’s cost in the first quarter of adoption. If either answer is no, you have a clarity problem, not a pipeline problem.
There is a common objection that naming an enemy is divisive. It is not, if you do it correctly. You are aligning around a problem that already consumes time and budget. You are giving your buyer a way to anchor stakeholders without theatrics. Division appears when vendors attack people or smear competitors. Alignment appears when vendors document the constraint and propose a credible path to relief. Your tone determines the culture you build around this practice.
You can pressure test this in a single sprint. Pick one segment and one enemy. Rework one deck, one demo flow, and one success plan. Run ten calls. Track how early the enemy appears in the conversation, how fast stakeholders align, and how quickly next steps firm up. You are looking for less back and forth on features and more discussion about the sequence that defeats the constraint. If calls feel shorter but denser, you are on the right track.
Use the common enemy sales framework as a tool, not a slogan. It gives your team a center of gravity that survives leadership changes and market cycles. It also protects you from the treadmill of trend driven messaging. When the world gets noisy, you can always return to the buyer’s weekly fight and the tangible way you help them win.
One last reflection. If you stopped showing up for two weeks, would your team still name the same enemy, propose the same sequence, and protect the same outcomes. If the answer is yes, you have designed clarity, not charisma. That is what customers trust, what teams repeat, and what closes with integrity.
WhatsApp
Instagram
Threads
