.png)
.png)
.svg)
.svg)
.svg)
%201.png)
.svg)
.svg)
.png)
.svg)
23
August
2022
.svg)
Something that comes up frequently when MEDDIC is raised in conversation is the comparison to BANT — another sales qualification framework, based on the acronym:
B – Budget
A – Authority
N – Need
T – Timing
The argument usually goes that because both frameworks are built around deal qualification criteria, they must be broadly similar. They're not.
The fundamental difference is one of scope. BANT is most widely used to qualify opportunities at the top of the funnel — it's useful for answering a specific question: should I pursue this opportunity past a first meeting? MEDDIC goes much further. It not only helps sellers decide whether they should be in a deal, but helps them track where they are in it and forecast with confidence.
Comparing BANT to MEDDIC is a bit like comparing cycling to the shops to travelling to the moon. That's not a dig at BANT — it's a genuinely useful framework for SDRs and inside sellers who need an early read on an opportunity. But at enterprise level, it leaves a lot to be desired.
My favorite analogy: if selling were a video game, BANT would be the qualification framework you'd use on easy mode. MEDDIC sits at the other end of the difficulty spectrum, and when used properly, it's the highest setting, where only elite sellers can play to its full potential.
Perhaps I should have renamed my book ‘How to go from Amateur to Pro in the Game of Sales’.
.png)
