man looking bored and underwhelmed representing cost of being average

In most companies, mediocrity is the silent killer of growth. Not failure—because failure gets noticed. Not inefficiency—because inefficiency can often be fixed with tools and automation. The real problem is being average—and the staggering costs that come with it.

Over the past 7-8 years, we have consistently asked CEO’s the same question to get their candid perspective on the effectiveness of their own sales organization. When CEOs are asked to rate their sales organization’s effectiveness on a scale from 1 to 10, the average response is 5.2. We have never had an answer higher than 7. That means most leaders know, deep down, that their teams are operating well below their potential. Worse, they’ve accepted it as the norm or a cost of doing business. But what they may not fully realize is the massive opportunity cost of settling for the middle of the pack.

The Middle 60%: The Hidden Anchor on Growth

Most revenue organizations have a 20-60-20 performance model:

● Top 20% of sellers drive 75-80% of revenue and margin.
● Middle 60% are the “core performers”—reliable, but not exceptional.
● Bottom 20% struggle to contribute meaningfully.

While companies tend to focus on either their rock stars (by rewarding them) or their lowest performers (by trying to improve or replace them), the real battleground is the middle 60%. They represent the largest group, and their performance is the most significant lever for growth.
If these “average” performers could sell just 14% better, the revenue impact in a typical territory could exceed $500,000 per seller annually. Yet, most companies fail to take meaningful action to improve this group’s effectiveness.

Why? Because improving efficiency is easier. Driving effectiveness is hard.

The Efficiency Trap vs. The Effectiveness Gap

Sales organizations invest millions in efficiency—CRM systems, automation, the AI enticement, lead generation tools, and process optimizations designed to get reps in front of more customers faster. Efficiency is appealing to executives because it’s easier to measure and implement.
But efficiency without effectiveness is just faster mediocrity.

Effectiveness—actually selling better once in front of the customer—is far harder to drive. It requires:

● A differentiated, repeatable sales motion
● Behavior change in how reps engage with customers
● Coaching that reinforces the right skills and strategies

Yet, because effectiveness is more difficult to measure and influence from the top down, many companies ignore it or assume that incremental improvements will come naturally. They don’t.

The True Cost of No Decision

If the biggest competitor in any complex sale is the status quo, then the cost of “no decision” is one of the most under-estimated business expenses.

40% of opportunities in the average pipeline end with no decision.

Each of those lost deals represents wasted investment in:

● SDR outreach, scheduling, and marketing spend
● Discovery calls, presales support, and proposal creation
● Legal, procurement, and negotiation cycles

The cost to pursue a deal that ultimately goes nowhere has been estimated at 2-3% of total contract value. Multiply that by the number of “no decision” deals in your pipeline, and the numbers get ugly fast.

The Deal Size Deficit

High performers don’t just win more—they win bigger.

Their deals are 2.57x larger than those of core performers. This isn’t just a function of luck or having better accounts. High performers:

● Solve bigger problems, not just push products
● Attach more solutions to their initial sale
● Establish clear business value, leading to less discounting and higher-margin deals

If your middle 60% improved their deal size even marginally, the lifetime value of customers—and long-term profitability—would skyrocket.

The $XXXM Question

One of the early activities we do with clients is to give them a comparative view of the Effectiveness of their sales organization and to do a high-level calculation of the Cost of Being Average. We call this the Revenue Effectiveness View or REV. This is not a scientific data point, but we have done this enough times, that the Cost of Being Average is generally in the range of 10-15% of Annual Revenue for a company. So, I you are curious about the cost of the problem:

-take your 2024 Revenue number and multiply by 15%
-then multiply that number by Gross Margin %

This gives you a profit impact of the problem that you may know exists and are accepting or a new problem you are now aware of in a different way.

So the real questions are:

If you knew the cost of being average was this high, what would you do differently tomorrow?

What would you invest to build and execute a real plan to try and capture a portion of that gap in 2025 and going forward?

This is not just a sales problem—it’s a growth problem. And solving it requires a fundamental shift in how companies think about effectiveness, coaching, and behavior change.

In our next blog, we’ll explore exactly how organizations can start closing this effectiveness gap—without relying on expensive new tools or unsustainable short-term incentives.

Because if being average is costing you millions, the real risk is doing nothing at all.