The Demo Had a Good Run

Reprise surveyed 300+ sales and presales pros to find out what separates demos that close from demos that don’t. 73% of what makes a demo great comes down to soft skills — not product knowledge. Get the data on demo length, AI adoption, personalization, and more in the new Science of the Demo report. Get the report here.

For most of the SaaS era, the demo was THE trust building mechanism. Buyers wanted to see what was possible. SEs were the people who could show them. You built conviction through a sequence: understand the customer, build the narrative, deliver the experience.

But that world is gone.

Buyers have been burned too many times. They were promised something that looked great in the demo, but didn’t survive in their reality.

They’re not arriving at your first call with curiosity anymore. They’re arriving with evidence, research they’ve done independently, a shortlist they’ve already ranked, and one question that cuts through everything else: can you actually prove this works in our environment?

The question keeping Solutions leaders up at night should not be whether their team can run a good demo. It should be whether they are designed for a world where the demo is not enough proof anymore.

For years, we put on a polished show. We wowed buyers in the demo, got the signature and then handed it off to implementation. And then what they were promised wasn’t always what was delivered.

So it’s no surprise that we’re seeing skeptical buyers. Constellation Research reported at the end of last year: the onus is now on vendors to show value beyond proof of concepts. Buyers need to see use cases that demonstrate returns and can scale, not demos that show what is theoretically possible.

IDC research found that 88% of observed AI POCs never made it to wide-scale deployment. For every 33 AI projects a company launched, only 4 graduated to production. That’s the context your buyers are carrying into every conversation with you.

The consequence is a fundamental shift in the level of proof buyers are asking for. They want to see proof that’s close to the line of production, that uses their real data and workflows and reflects their real stakes.

As Pam Dunn at Coder put it at our Virtual Kickoff: “POVs are much more complex now. Buyers want to test more.”

That sentiment is showing up in every conversation we’re having with Solutions leaders right now. The bar for what counts as credible evidence has moved, and it has moved in a direction that is expensive, time consuming, and infrastructure-heavy. And most orgs are absorbing the demand reactively, running more proof work without rebuilding the motion that supports it.

ServiceNow went from rarely doing POVs to, in 2025, doing more than the previous ten years combined. That’s not a process tweak. It’s a fundamental redesign requiring a rebuild of infrastructure, enablement, and sales alignment from the ground up.

It’s not enough to show something works in a demo environment. Buyers want to see it work in theirs. As Jeff put it at our Virtual Kickoff: “It’s similar to the deep proof of value engagements we used to do back in the day. But now we have to take it towards production or build some capability into a product.” His team’s FDE-styled resources are pushing POVs to the edge of production in a pre-production world. That’s a new thing. And it’s becoming the expectation.

Add to this the pace at which software itself is changing. AI is accelerating product development so fast that the durability of any given solution is shrinking. Customers may run something in production for six months before the landscape shifts again. The window to prove value is getting shorter even as the bar for proof gets higher.

Most Solutions orgs are still running a sequence designed for a different buyer. Discovery first. Build the narrative. Earn the demo. Run the technical validation. That sequence was built for someone who needed you to show them what was possible. That’s not who’s sitting across from you anymore.

The orgs getting ahead of this are delivering more proof, faster. That requires a different motion entirely.

Jeff and his team at ServiceNow aren’t waiting to earn the demo. They come in with a perspective already formed, drive straight to an accelerated workshop, and start proving value before the traditional sales cycle would have even finished discovery. In Jeff’s words: “We know where our solution sets fit. We know what problems we’re solving. We do some discovery, but not long drawn-out sessions. We’re coming in with a perspective. We use an accelerated workshop to get things going, fast.”

Shannon Hogue described what that looks like at Vanta: “We’ve been trying to move our AEs to workshops. We don’t want AEs promising a demo, rather a workshop where they expect bi-directional communication. We’ve been pulling in deals from POCs with 2-hour workshops where we figure out the customer’s top workflows, data flows, bottlenecks, and showcase in real time how our solution provides value.”

But more proof, delivered faster, is more expensive. Jaime Lewis-Gross at Saviynt put it plainly: “POVs have become complex and extensive. In many cases it’s comparable resources necessary no matter the size of the opportunity.” The motion change is real, and so is the cost that comes with it.

That forces a gatekeeping question most orgs haven’t answered deliberately: not every deal warrants a production-level proof motion. Dave Cosio at Stave has a gate that works for his team. Before engaging technical resources on any opportunity, he asks sales one question: “What are the consequences if the customer doesn’t move forward with our product?” If that can’t be answered clearly, the POV doesn’t happen. It’s not a perfect system, but it’s a forcing function that protects SE capacity and surfaces the deals where proof actually matters.

At the far end of the spectrum, Viktor Tretyak’s team at beehiiv has moved to a model where the SE motion and the implementation motion are collapsing into one. Most enterprise POVs are production-ready and transferable to the customer at close. The proof is the delivery.

Both are real. Neither is wrong. What’s not sustainable is absorbing more proof work without deliberately designing the motion that supports it. But even the best-designed proof motion fails if the rest of the GTM team is still running the old playbook.

This doesn’t work if Solutions leaders carry it alone. Moving from demo-led to proof-led changes the sales cycle, what reps promise on early calls, and how deals get qualified. If your CRO is still running on the old model, where the SE team runs a POV and the cycle just extends, the motion won’t hold. You need them in it with you.

The shift at ServiceNow didn’t happen by accident. It required walking the CRO through exactly what the new proof motion demanded, what it meant for the sales team’s process, and then asking directly for something most SE leaders don’t ask for: to acknowledge the change, address it with the sales team, and show trust in the SE org. That’s not a comfortable conversation. But once it happened, the POV motion became visible at the executive level. It is something that’s monitored, invested in. It’s a GTM-level commitment with Jeff’s name on it.

The Solutions leaders who get in front of that conversation and can justify a more proof-heavy motion will have a different conversation about team design, resourcing and their seat at the table.

All of this raises a question worth sitting with. If proof is getting closer to production, more expensive, and harder to deliver, does that make the SE more or less valuable?

We’d argue more. And by a significant margin.

According to TrustRadius, 80% say they trust AI tools at least sometimes, but 62% say they always or very often fact-check what AI tells them. Buyers are using AI to arrive more prepared than ever, but they are not using it to make the final call. That still requires a human.

Roberto Carisi at Entrust put it directly: “The trust with the buyer, who has his job on the line for the success of picking the right partner, can’t be built by AI. It’s the SE giving that confidence and building that trust. AI can help us prepare, gather context, be as prepared as possible. But the human side of building trust is with SEs.”

Lenin Gali at Atomicwork shared a story that lands the same point. A CIO told his team they closed the deal because of the SE on the account. The talent, the preparedness, the follow-ups, the chemistry. Not the demo. The person.

AI is raising the floor on buyer preparation. It’s also raising the ceiling on what human judgment is worth. The SE who walks in with context, a scoped hypothesis, and proof of what will work in your environment is more valuable than ever. The bar to be that person just got higher.

— Jeff & James

Share