Not every obstacle in a commercial process is resistance. Sometimes friction appears because the customer is taking the decision more seriously.

The customer has been positive throughout the early discussions. The solution looks promising, the requirements seem manageable, the offer is within range.

Then the process becomes harder. Quality assurance wants additional documentation. Operations requests a detailed implementation plan. Engineering asks what happens if the system fails under unusual conditions.

It is tempting to read this as growing resistance. Another explanation is possible: the customer has moved from exploring an idea to seriously considering implementing it — and a decision with consequences generates questions that an exploration does not.

Why the questions change

Early conversations ask whether an idea deserves attention: could the equipment improve performance, would it fit, what would it cost? Once commitment becomes real, different concerns become relevant — because someone will install this, someone will be responsible for operational risk, someone will approve the expenditure, and someone will answer for it if it goes badly.

Questions that seemed unnecessary during evaluation become essential before commitment. Friction at this stage is often the sound of a decision being taken seriously.

The convergence test

That is not always true, though — and the difference matters. A practical way to distinguish healthy friction from the unhealthy kind is to watch its direction.

In a healthy process, friction converges. A formal qualification procedure appears; specific tests are required, responsibilities are assigned, and the parties agree on what must happen before approval. It creates delay, but each question narrows the distance to a decision point, and the remaining steps become clearer.

In an unhealthy process, friction circulates. Questions answered weeks earlier reappear. New requirements arrive with no visible connection to the decision. Nobody can say what information is still missing — because the obstacle is often not missing information but unresolved ownership, internal disagreement, or an unspoken concern. Even repetition is not proof of dysfunction: different stakeholders can independently raise the same concern, and it takes a question to tell the two situations apart.

Both projects experience friction. What differs is not the amount of work but the function of the work — one process is closing in on a decision, and the other is circling one.

Responding to the right kind

Salespeople are trained to remove obstacles and keep opportunities moving. That is correct when an unnecessary barrier is blocking a good decision. But when the friction is the customer's own necessary evaluation, accelerating past it does not remove the concern — it removes the chance to address it.

Before removing an obstacle, it helps to know whether it stands between the customer and a decision, or is the decision in progress.

From the book

Decision friction and how to tell a delay from a rejection is explored in more depth in Chapters 7 and 11 of Sales Between the Lines, including how the timing, location and nature of friction can reveal what remains unresolved in a commercial decision.