A sales methodology comparison is only useful if it tells you what each method does in a deal. Six widely used B2B methods do different jobs: some qualify a deal and others run the conversation that builds the business case. Here they are side by side, with the evidence a manager checks for each in a deal review. For how methods fit together across a sales team, start with the sales methodology guide.
The chart
| Method | Job it does | Core unit | Evidence a manager checks in a deal review | Leaves to another method | Pairs with |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| MEDDPICC | Qualify: is the deal real and forecastable | Eight criteria: Metrics, Economic Buyer, Decision Criteria, Decision Process, Paper Process, Identify Pain, Champion, Competition | Each criterion marked buyer-confirmed, rep-inferred or unknown | How to run the conversation | Gap Selling, the ValueSelling Framework®, SPIN |
| Gap Selling | Diagnose in discovery | Current state, future state and the gap between them, in the buyer's numbers | Buyer Input Data: problems, impacts and success measures stated by the buyer | A formal qualification checklist | MEDDPICC |
| ValueSelling Framework® | Qualify on value and agree a plan | Qualified Prospect Formula®: Differentiated VisionMatch™, Value, Power, Plan | Any term at zero; value stated in the buyer's own numbers; a plan the buyer owns | Little; it covers discovery and qualification | Gap Selling, where teams run both |
| Challenger | Reframe how the buyer sees the problem | Teach, tailor, take control, with constructive tension | The commercial insight the rep brought, and whether the buyer's view changed | Qualification | MEDDPICC |
| SPIN Selling | Question the buyer toward need | Situation, Problem, Implication, Need-payoff questions | Whether the buyer stated the consequences and the value in their own words | Qualification and close plan | MEDDPICC |
| Sandler | Control the process | Seven steps, from bonding and rapport through the up-front contract to the post-sell | An up-front contract for the next meeting; pain, budget and decision process confirmed | Insight and value case | MEDDPICC or the ValueSelling Framework® |
Start here, by where your deals fail:
| Deals fail at... | Read first |
|---|---|
| Forecast: committed deals slip or vanish | MEDDPICC |
| Discovery: the buyer never states a problem worth fixing | Gap Selling or SPIN |
| Price: deals close small or stall on budget | ValueSelling Framework® |
| Status quo: the buyer agrees and does nothing | Challenger or Gap Selling |
| Control: meetings end with no agreed next step | Sandler |
Notes on the chart. MEDDPICC grew out of MEDDIC, created at PTC in 1996; MEDDICC added Competition and MEDDPICC added Paper Process, according to MEDDICC.com. SPIN comes from Neil Rackham's research on more than 35,000 sales calls, according to Huthwaite International, the method's owner. Challenger and Sandler rows use the owners' own terms from challengerinc.com and sandler.com. We hold no partnership with Challenger, Huthwaite or Sandler.
Methods the chart leaves out
The chart covers six methods because they are the ones B2B teams most often weigh against each other. Longer lists add others. Most of them do one of the same jobs, so they fit into the "Start here" table by the job they do.
| Method | Job it does | Closest row on the chart |
|---|---|---|
| Solution Selling | Diagnose the buyer's pain before proposing a fix | Gap Selling or SPIN |
| Consultative selling | Act as an adviser over a series of conversations | Gap Selling |
| SNAP Selling | Keep the message simple and relevant for a busy buyer | Challenger, for its focus on the buyer's priorities |
| Conceptual Selling | Map how each stakeholder thinks about the purchase | Challenger's tailoring, or MEDDPICC's Decision Criteria |
| BANT | Quick qualification on budget, authority, need and timeline | MEDDPICC, lighter |
| CHAMP | Qualification that starts from the buyer's challenges | MEDDPICC, lighter |
If your team already runs one of these, keep it and use the chart to find what it leaves out. Switching to a better-known name with the same job rarely fixes the place deals fail.
Methodology, process and playbook
These three words get used as if they meant the same thing, and the chart only compares the first. A sales process is the sequence of stages a deal moves through in your CRM, from first meeting to signature. A methodology is the way a rep thinks and talks inside those stages: what to ask, what to listen for, what counts as evidence. A playbook is your company's version of both, written down: your stages, your questions, your competitors, your proof points.
So a team can run one process and one playbook with two methodologies inside them. MEDDPICC sets the exit criteria for each stage. Gap Selling or SPIN shapes the discovery call that produces the evidence. When a chart pits "MEDDPICC vs Sandler" as if only one can win, it is usually comparing a checklist with a way of running a meeting.
Strengths and limits of each method
Every method on the chart is strong at its own job and thin outside it. This is how each one tends to play out once a team is using it on live deals.
| Method | Where it is strong | Where teams struggle with it |
|---|---|---|
| MEDDPICC | Forecast calls: each letter is either evidenced or it is not | Reps fill the fields from memory, so the checklist looks complete while the buyer has confirmed little |
| Gap Selling | Building a problem the buyer will pay to fix, in the buyer's own numbers | Discovery runs long when reps treat it as a questionnaire |
| ValueSelling Framework® | One formula that covers value, access to power and a buyer-owned plan | Teams skip the plan and stop at value, so deals still drift |
| Challenger | Moving a buyer who is comfortable with the status quo | An insight the rep cannot back with evidence reads as a pitch |
| SPIN Selling | Question sequencing that gets the buyer to say the consequence | Reps ask the four question types as a script and the buyer notices |
| Sandler | Control of the next step through the up-front contract | Without a qualification layer, a well-run meeting can still sit on a dead deal |
The right column is where most rollouts break. Coaching catches it there: a manager who reviews live deals in the method's vocabulary catches the struggle in week two, while there is still a quarter left to fix it.
How to use the chart
The chart answers two questions: which method fixes the place your deals fail, and which second method covers what the first leaves out. Many teams end up with a qualification layer and a conversation layer.
- 01Pull the last ten lost or slipped dealsOne line each on where it failed
- 02Count the failure pointsThe most common one picks the row
- 03Read the "Leaves to" columnAdd the method that covers the gap
- 04Test both on three open dealsNo new question means the wrong fit
- 05Write the evidence standardCopied into the deal review template
- 06Plan for day 91Still in use three months after launch
- Pull the last ten lost or slipped deals. For each, write one line on where it failed: forecast, discovery, price, status quo or control.
- Count the failure points. The most common one picks the row you start with in "Start here."
- Read the "Leaves to" column for that method. If it leaves out qualification, add MEDDPICC. If it leaves out the conversation, add a discovery method. Then check the fit against your team. Pick a method your managers know or can learn before launch, because one they cannot run in a weekly deal review will fade. Short deals with a single decision maker get little from a full qualification checklist; long deals with a buying group usually need one. If your buyers do not yet know they have a problem, the conversation method matters more than the checklist. And if one method's CRM fields are already there and half filled in, coaching to it is often cheaper than starting again.
- Test both on three open deals. A manager reviews each deal in the candidate's vocabulary, on a call with the rep, and writes down the next question the method produces. A method that produces no new question on your live deals is the wrong fit.
- Write the evidence standard. Copy the "Evidence a manager checks" cell into your deal review template, word for word, so every manager inspects the same thing.
- Plan for day 91. The method you pick matters less than whether it is still in use three months after launch. Train the managers first: if the person running the deal review cannot hear the difference between a buyer-confirmed metric and a rep's guess, nobody will. Launch one method at a time, since a qualification framework, a discovery method and a negotiation course in one quarter leave a team with three vocabularies and no habits. Then review two or three live deals per rep each week, in the method's own words, for the first three months. Our post on adoption at day 91 covers why rollouts fade. The rollout how-to gives the week-by-week plan.
Filled-in example
This example is illustrative. A 12-rep team sells workflow software to finance teams. Here are five of its recent lost or slipped deals.
| Deal | Where it failed | Note |
|---|---|---|
| Deal A, lost | Status quo | Buyer agreed it was a problem, renewed the old tool |
| Deal B, slipped | Forecast | Security review appeared in week 11 |
| Deal C, lost | Status quo | No cost attached to the problem |
| Deal D, slipped | Forecast | Signer was never met |
| Deal E, lost | Price | Buyer compared on license cost |
Status quo and forecast tie at the top. The team picks Gap Selling for discovery, because both status-quo losses had no cost attached to the problem, and MEDDPICC for qualification, because both slips trace to Paper Process and Economic Buyer.
In week one the managers review three open deals with each rep on a call. On one $90,000 deal, Gap Selling produces a new question ("What does the month-end close cost you in overtime today?") and MEDDPICC exposes that nobody has asked who signs. Both methods produced a question the rep had not asked, so both stay.
One deal through six methods (illustrative)
This example is illustrative. Rowan sells a contract management platform to a 900-person insurance broker. The legal operations lead likes the demo. Renewal of the current tool is in five months. Here is the next question each method would push Rowan to ask.
- MEDDPICC: "Who signs a contract of this size, and have I met them?" The Economic Buyer is unknown, so the deal stays out of commit.
- Gap Selling: "How many contracts slip past their renewal date today, and what does each one cost the broker?" Without that number there is no gap, only a preference.
- ValueSelling Framework®: "What would the legal operations lead need to show the CFO to get this approved?" That question tests Power and Value together and starts the plan.
- Challenger: Rowan brings a view the buyer has not considered, for example that renewal risk sits with the account teams more than with legal, and checks whether it changes who the buyer thinks should be in the room.
- SPIN Selling: "When a renewal is missed, what happens next?" The implication question gets the buyer to state the consequence in their own words.
- Sandler: Rowan ends the call with an up-front contract: at the next meeting the buyer brings the renewal list and the person who owns the budget, and both sides agree what a yes or no would look like.
The one Rowan's team should run first depends on where its deals have been failing, which is what the "Start here" table is for. Most teams would pair MEDDPICC's question with one of the conversation questions, because the first tells you whether the deal is forecastable and the second gives the rep a way to make it so.
Two ways teams misuse a comparison chart
Picking the method with the best reputation. A chart sorted by fame tells you nothing about your pipeline. Start from your own lost deals, as in step 1.
Stopping at the choice. The chart gets a method chosen. Coaching gets it used. If managers do not review live deals in the new vocabulary every week, the method becomes a CRM field. This is where our AI sales experts help. The rep brings the deal, on a call, to an expert that runs the team's method: Keenan for Gap Selling, built with A Sales Growth Company; Val for the ValueSelling Framework®, built with ValueSelling Associates; and Caty for MEDDPICC, any other method or your own playbook. See how methodology coaching works, or talk to us.
FAQ
What are the main types of sales methodologies?
The main types of sales methodologies are qualification, discovery, value, insight and process methods. MEDDPICC qualifies, Gap Selling and SPIN run discovery, the ValueSelling Framework® builds the value case, Challenger brings insight and Sandler controls the process. Most B2B teams run one qualification framework alongside one conversation method.
Which sales methodology is best?
No single sales methodology is best for every team. The right one fixes the place your deals fail. If committed deals slip, start with a qualification framework like MEDDPICC. If buyers never name a problem worth fixing, start with a discovery method like Gap Selling or SPIN.
Can you combine MEDDPICC and Challenger?
Yes, MEDDPICC and Challenger combine well because they do different jobs. Challenger shapes the conversation with a commercial insight that reframes the buyer's problem. MEDDPICC checks whether the deal has the evidence to be forecast: a met Economic Buyer, a known Paper Process, a tested Champion.
Is MEDDPICC a sales methodology or a qualification framework?
MEDDPICC is a qualification framework, though many teams call it a methodology. It defines what must be true about a deal to forecast it and does not script the conversation. That is why teams pair it with a selling method such as Gap Selling or SPIN.
How long does it take to roll out a new sales methodology?
Training a new methodology takes days; making it stick takes about three months of weekly coaching on live deals. Rollouts tend to fade after launch when managers stop reviewing deals in the new vocabulary, which is why the first 90 days matter more than the kickoff.
What is the difference between MEDDIC, MEDDICC and MEDDPICC?
MEDDICC and MEDDPICC are later versions of MEDDIC, which was created at PTC in 1996. MEDDICC added Competition, and MEDDPICC added Paper Process, the steps and owners between a verbal yes and a signed contract. Most teams selling to large buying groups now use MEDDPICC because late-stage slips often trace to procurement, legal or security.
Where does BANT fit in a sales methodology comparison?
BANT (Budget, Authority, Need, Timeline) is a quick qualification check, lighter than MEDDPICC. It suits short, transactional cycles and early screening, and it leaves the conversation itself to another method. Our MEDDPICC vs BANT piece compares the two in detail.
Which sales methodology suits a small team?
A small team usually gets the most from one conversation method its founder or sales lead can coach every week, such as Sandler or Gap Selling, plus a short qualification check. A full MEDDPICC rollout pays off once deals involve a buying group and the forecast matters to the board.