March 2020: Supply chains were collapsing globally. Manufacturing shutdowns. Port congestion. Logistics chaos.
Our supply chain optimization software suddenly looked incredibly relevant.
I thought: "This is it. Supply chain leaders are desperate for solutions. We're going to have the best quarter ever."
We did... eventually. But not in Q2 2020.
In Q2 2020, supply chain leaders were in pure crisis mode putting out fires. They didn't have time to evaluate new software. They needed immediate tactical fixes, not strategic software implementations.
The demand for supply chain software came later—once the acute crisis passed and organizations realized they needed to fundamentally rethink their supply chain strategies.
The peak sales period wasn't during maximum disruption. It was 12-18 months after, when companies moved from firefighting to strategic rebuilding.
I learned that "urgent problem" doesn't automatically mean "urgent purchase." Positioning supply chain software during disruption requires understanding where buyers are in their crisis response journey.
Here's how we navigated the permanently disrupted supply chain market and built a successful GTM strategy around perpetual uncertainty.
Why Crisis Urgency Didn't Translate to Fast Sales Cycles
I expected supply chain disruption to accelerate our sales cycles.
Logic: Companies are hurting → They need solutions → They'll buy faster.
Reality: Our sales cycles got longer during peak disruption, not shorter.
Why crisis slowed sales, not accelerated them:
Reason 1: Crisis mode means tactical firefighting, not strategic software evaluation
During acute disruption (2020-2021), supply chain leaders were:
- Rerouting shipments around port congestion
- Finding alternative suppliers for unavailable components
- Managing customer expectations about delays
- Reporting supply chain issues to executives daily
They didn't have bandwidth to evaluate software. They were too busy solving immediate problems.
Reason 2: Budget freezes during uncertainty
Paradoxically, the companies hurt worst by supply chain disruption froze technology budgets.
Their logic: "We don't know what's happening next quarter. We can't commit to new vendors when our business is uncertain."
Reason 3: Implementation bandwidth disappeared
Supply chain teams were working 60-80 hour weeks during peak disruption. They couldn't spare time for software implementation.
One VP of Supply Chain told me: "I love your solution. But I literally don't have 5 hours this month to dedicate to implementation planning. Call me in six months when things stabilize."
Reason 4: Changing requirements daily
Supply chain strategies changed week-to-week as disruption evolved.
Buyers couldn't commit to software because their requirements kept shifting. What they needed in March was obsolete by May.
We stopped trying to sell during acute crisis and repositioned for post-crisis strategic response.
The Disruption Phases That Required Different Positioning
After analyzing deals we won versus deals that stalled, we identified a pattern: where buyers were in their disruption response determined whether they'd buy.
Phase 1: Acute Crisis (Months 0-6 of disruption)
Buyer mindset: Firefighting, tactical responses, surviving day-to-day
Purchase behavior: Frozen. No strategic decisions. All focus on immediate fixes.
Our positioning: Build awareness and relationships but don't expect closes. Offer tactical help (free tools, emergency support) to build goodwill.
Phase 2: Stabilization (Months 6-12)
Buyer mindset: Crisis is manageable but not resolved. Starting to plan for medium-term.
Purchase behavior: Evaluating solutions but not ready to commit. Gathering information for eventual decisions.
Our positioning: Educational content about supply chain resilience. Pilots and POCs to validate value without commitment.
Phase 3: Strategic Response (Months 12-24)
Buyer mindset: "We can't go back to how things were. We need to fundamentally rethink our supply chain."
Purchase behavior: Active buying. Budget allocated for strategic improvements. Implementation bandwidth available.
Our positioning: Strategic partner helping build resilient supply chains. Long-term transformation, not tactical fixes.
Phase 4: New Normal (Months 24+)
Buyer mindset: Disruption is permanent. Supply chain resilience is ongoing priority.
Purchase behavior: Continuous improvement. Willing to add capabilities and expand platforms.
Our positioning: Platform expansion and additional capabilities for mature supply chain organizations.
We restructured our sales approach based on where each buyer was in this journey:
If buyer is in Phase 1-2: Build relationship but don't push for close. Provide value through content, tools, thought leadership.
If buyer is in Phase 3-4: Active sales motion with strategic positioning.
This phase-based approach stopped us from wasting effort trying to close buyers who weren't ready.
The Messaging Shift from Efficiency to Resilience
Pre-disruption, our supply chain software positioning:
"Reduce logistics costs 15-20% through network optimization and demand forecasting."
This efficiency positioning worked when supply chains were stable and cost reduction was the priority.
Post-disruption, efficiency messaging failed.
A supply chain VP told me: "I don't care about 15% cost savings. I care about whether I can get products to customers when my suppliers can't deliver and my logistics providers are backed up for weeks. Can your software help with that?"
We rebuilt our positioning around resilience, not efficiency:
Old positioning (pre-disruption):
"Optimize your supply chain network to reduce costs and improve delivery times."
New positioning (post-disruption):
"Build supply chain resilience with real-time visibility, multi-source contingency planning, and predictive disruption detection."
Messaging shifts:
From: "Reduce shipping costs through optimal route planning" To: "Maintain delivery reliability during logistics disruptions with dynamic rerouting and alternative carrier management"
From: "Lower inventory carrying costs with demand forecasting" To: "Balance inventory resilience and cost with multi-echelon buffer optimization for supply uncertainty"
From: "Improve forecast accuracy to 95%" To: "Plan for forecast uncertainty with scenario modeling and risk-adjusted supply planning"
This resilience messaging resonated deeply with supply chain leaders who'd experienced disruption firsthand.
Interestingly, our resilience positioning also delivered cost benefits—resilient supply chains were often more cost-effective than fragile ones. But leading with cost didn't resonate post-disruption. Leading with resilience did.
The Proof Points That Matter in Perpetual Disruption
Pre-disruption proof points: "Customers reduced costs X%, improved delivery times Y%."
Post-disruption proof points: "Customers maintained operations during [specific disruption event]."
We rebuilt our case studies around disruption survival:
Case study structure:
Challenge: [Company] faced [specific disruption]: port shutdowns, supplier bankruptcies, logistics collapse.
Response: Using our platform, they implemented [specific resilience capabilities]: alternative sourcing, inventory buffers, rerouting.
Outcome: While competitors suffered [negative impacts], [Company] maintained [service levels, revenue, market share].
Example:
"When the Port of Los Angeles faced 6-week delays, [Consumer Electronics Company] used our platform to reroute shipments through Seattle and Vancouver, maintaining 95% on-time delivery while competitors experienced 40% stockouts."
These disruption survival stories resonated more than efficiency metrics because buyers had lived through similar situations.
We collected "war stories" from customers:
- How they navigated semiconductor shortages
- How they handled ocean freight capacity collapse
- How they managed supplier bankruptcies in critical categories
These stories became our most powerful sales content because they proved our software worked when it mattered most—during actual disruption.
For supply chain companies building disruption-focused messaging, platforms like Segment8 offer vertical-specific positioning frameworks that help articulate resilience value beyond traditional efficiency metrics.
The Buyer Shift from Supply Chain to Cross-Functional
Pre-disruption supply chain software buyer: VP of Supply Chain or VP of Operations.
Post-disruption supply chain software buyer: Cross-functional committee including finance, sales, procurement, and executives.
Supply chain disruption impacted every part of the business:
Sales: Couldn't fulfill orders, lost revenue Finance: Inventory write-offs, expedited shipping costs, margin compression Procurement: Supplier failures, price spikes, availability crises Executives: Board-level visibility into supply chain risk
This elevated supply chain from operational function to strategic priority.
Our sales conversations now included:
CFO: "How does your platform help us predict and mitigate supply chain financial risk?"
CRO/VP of Sales: "Can we give customers real-time visibility into order status and delivery predictions?"
CEO: "How do we demonstrate to our board that we have supply chain risk under control?"
Procurement: "Can we identify single-source dependencies and qualify alternative suppliers faster?"
We rebuilt our sales approach as multi-stakeholder:
Supply Chain stakeholder pitch:
"Operational visibility and control to maintain delivery performance during disruption."
CFO stakeholder pitch:
"Financial risk management through supply chain predictability and scenario planning."
Sales stakeholder pitch:
"Customer communication tools that proactively manage expectations and reduce escalations."
Executive stakeholder pitch:
"Enterprise risk management and board-level visibility into supply chain health."
Same platform. Different value propositions for different stakeholders.
This multi-stakeholder selling was more complex but resulted in larger deals and faster executive buy-in.
The Pricing Model That Matches Disruption Economics
Pre-disruption pricing: Subscription based on shipment volume or transaction count.
This pricing broke during disruption because shipment volumes fluctuated wildly:
- Q2 2020: Volumes dropped 40% (pandemic shutdowns)
- Q4 2020: Volumes spiked 200% (e-commerce boom)
- Q1 2021: Volumes unstable and unpredictable
Usage-based pricing created budget uncertainty customers couldn't handle during uncertain times.
We rebuilt pricing for disruption economics:
Pricing model: Capacity-based, not usage-based
Instead of pricing on actual volume (unpredictable), we priced on capacity:
"Your supply chain network capacity is X facilities shipping Y units annually. Our platform is sized for that capacity. Price is fixed regardless of actual volume fluctuation."
Benefits for customers:
- Budget predictability during volume uncertainty
- No penalty for volume spikes (which they couldn't control)
- Alignment with long-term capacity, not short-term volatility
Multi-year contracts with price protection:
Supply chain leaders wanted protection from vendor price increases during inflation.
We offered:
- 3-year contracts with locked pricing (no increases)
- 5-year contracts with capped escalation (maximum 3% annually)
This price predictability was valuable during overall economic uncertainty.
Value-based pricing tied to resilience metrics:
For mature customers, we offered value-based pricing:
- Base platform fee + success fee based on resilience metrics
- Metrics: service level maintenance during disruption, stockout reduction, on-time delivery improvement
- Aligned our revenue with customer outcomes
This value-based approach resonated with CFOs focused on ROI certainty.
The Implementation Approach During Operational Chaos
Standard software implementation: 90-day project with full team dedication.
During supply chain disruption, 90-day full-team dedication was impossible.
Supply chain teams were overwhelmed with daily firefighting. They couldn't dedicate resources to implementation.
We rebuilt implementation for crisis bandwidth constraints:
Phased implementation with immediate value:
Phase 1 (Weeks 1-4): Quick wins
Implement capabilities that delivered value immediately with minimal effort:
- Visibility dashboards (show current supply chain status)
- Alert systems (proactively notify about potential disruptions)
Phase 2 (Weeks 5-12): Core capabilities
Implement fundamental optimization capabilities:
- Inventory optimization
- Network planning
- Demand planning
Phase 3 (Months 3-6): Advanced capabilities
Add sophisticated capabilities once team had bandwidth:
- Scenario planning
- Risk modeling
- Advanced analytics
Flexible implementation pacing:
Allow customers to pause implementation during crisis escalation and resume when things stabilized.
We had customers who took 12 months to complete 90-day implementation plans because they had to pause three times during acute disruption periods.
Standard software companies would have pushed for faster implementation. We succeeded by being flexible and understanding that supply chain teams' first priority was operations, not software implementation.
The Competitive Landscape During Supply Chain Boom
Supply chain disruption created massive VC investment in supply chain tech.
2019: ~20 notable supply chain software competitors 2022: ~200 supply chain software startups
This created market confusion for buyers:
"Everyone claims to solve supply chain resilience. How do I know which solutions actually work?"
We differentiated through:
Differentiation 1: Disruption track record
We had customers who'd used our platform during actual disruption (2020-2022). Competitors raised funding in 2021 and had no disruption track record.
Our messaging: "Proven during real disruption. Not just PowerPoint promises."
Differentiation 2: Operational depth vs. analytics breadth
Many competitors positioned as "supply chain analytics platforms"—dashboards and insights.
We positioned as "supply chain operational platform"—not just visibility but action:
"We don't just show you the problem. We help you solve it with automated contingency execution."
Differentiation 3: Vertical-specific capabilities
Many competitors built horizontal supply chain platforms for all industries.
We built industry-specific capabilities:
- Retail supply chain module (store replenishment, seasonal inventory)
- Manufacturing supply chain module (raw material sourcing, production scheduling)
- E-commerce supply chain module (last-mile delivery, returns management)
This vertical depth beat horizontal breadth in competitive deals.
Differentiation 4: Implementation realism
Competitors promised "30-day implementation and immediate ROI."
We promised "Phased implementation matching your bandwidth with value delivered incrementally."
Buyers appreciated honesty over unrealistic promises.
What Worked: The Crisis-to-Transformation GTM Journey
After navigating three years of supply chain disruption, we identified the GTM strategy that worked:
Phase-based engagement:
Acute crisis (Months 0-6):
- Focus: Thought leadership, free tools, relationship building
- Goal: Be present and helpful without expecting sales
- Content: "How to navigate [current crisis]" tactical guidance
Stabilization (Months 6-12):
- Focus: Education on long-term resilience strategies
- Goal: Position as strategic advisor for post-crisis rebuilding
- Content: "Building resilient supply chains" strategic frameworks
Strategic response (Months 12-24):
- Focus: Active sales with transformation positioning
- Goal: Close deals as companies rebuild supply chains strategically
- Content: Customer success stories showing resilience outcomes
Continuous improvement (Months 24+):
- Focus: Platform expansion and deepening customer relationships
- Goal: Grow account value as customers mature their capabilities
- Content: Advanced capabilities and optimization opportunities
Results from phase-based approach:
- Close rate: 22% → 58% (better phase qualification)
- Sales cycle: 4 months → 9 months (longer but predictable)
- Average ACV: $120K → $380K (strategic positioning commanded higher prices)
- Customer expansion rate: 140% net retention (customers expanded as they matured)
The Uncomfortable Truth About Supply Chain Software GTM
Supply chain disruption created massive market opportunity. It also created market confusion, buyer overwhelm, and prolonged decision timelines.
"Urgent need" didn't translate to "fast purchase." It translated to "eventual strategic investment when we have bandwidth."
What doesn't work:
- Pushing for fast closes during acute crisis
- Efficiency-only positioning (cost reduction)
- Single-stakeholder sales (supply chain VP only)
- Usage-based pricing during volume volatility
- Rigid implementation timelines
- Horizontal positioning (all industries)
What works:
- Phase-based engagement matching buyer crisis journey
- Resilience positioning with disruption survival proof
- Multi-stakeholder selling (supply chain + finance + sales + exec)
- Capacity-based pricing with price protection
- Flexible, phased implementation
- Vertical-specific capabilities
- Realistic timelines and honest positioning
Building a supply chain software business during perpetual disruption required patience, buyer empathy, and willingness to provide value before expecting purchase.
Our results navigating disruption:
- Revenue: $1.2M → $18M ARR in 36 months
- Customer count: 28 → 185
- Average ACV: $120K → $380K
- Net retention: 140%
- Market position: emerged as category leader in resilience-focused supply chain software
The supply chain software companies that won during disruption were the ones that understood buyers were in crisis, provided genuine help during firefighting phases, and positioned as strategic partners for long-term transformation once buyers had bandwidth.
Meet buyers where they are in their crisis journey. Provide value before asking for purchase. Position as long-term partner, not transactional vendor.
That's how you build during disruption.