Chapter 10: Buyer Personas and Stakeholders
Introduction: Technology Decisions Are People Decisions
The RFP looked perfect. A $2.3M MES implementation for a multi-plant automotive supplier. Your firm had the technical chops, the Rockwell partnership, and automotive references. You spent 120 hours on a detailed proposal with architecture diagrams, ROI models, and a phased delivery plan.
You lost to a competitor who charged 15% more.
What happened?
The post-mortem revealed the painful truth: you spoke to the CIO, but you lost because you never engaged the VP of Manufacturing. Your proposal was full of "API integrations," "edge computing," and "cloud-native architecture"—impressive technical terms that meant nothing to the person who actually controlled the budget and had veto power.
The winning competitor? They led with: "Reduce changeover time by 35%, improve OEE from 68% to 79%, and eliminate 80% of paper-based quality forms. Your operators will love it, and you'll get payback in 7 months."
This is the fundamental reality of selling to manufacturers: technology buying decisions are made by committees of 8-15 people with different priorities, vocabularies, and success criteria. Win them all, or lose the deal.
This chapter equips you to navigate the complex stakeholder landscape of manufacturing IT investments:
- Who's in the buying committee and what role each persona plays
- What each persona cares about—their KPIs, pain points, and success criteria
- How to speak their language and tailor your messaging, demos, and proposals
- Common objections by persona and how to address them
- How to build consensus when stakeholders have conflicting priorities
- Political dynamics and navigating organizational power structures
- Change management considerations for each stakeholder group
Whether you're selling services, solutions, or managed services, understanding your audience is as important as understanding the technology.
10.1 The Manufacturing Buying Committee
Typical Committee Structure
Manufacturing IT purchases rarely involve a single decision-maker. Expect a buying committee of 8-15 stakeholders across three layers:
Table 10.1: Manufacturing IT Buying Committee Structure
| Layer | Personas | Role in Decision | Influence Level | Engagement Strategy |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Executive Sponsors (Decision Makers) | CEO, COO, CFO, CIO | Approve budget, set strategic direction, final yes/no | Very High (veto power) | Executive briefings, business case, risk mitigation, board-ready materials |
| Operational Leaders (Influencers) | VP Manufacturing, Plant Managers, Quality Director, Supply Chain Director, Maintenance Manager | Define requirements, validate ROI, lead pilot, champion adoption | High (strong influence, often have informal veto) | Workshops, site visits, co-design sessions, reference calls, pilot partnership |
| Technical Evaluators (Recommenders) | IT Director, OT/Automation Manager, Enterprise Architect, Security Officer, Data/Analytics Lead | Assess technical fit, integration, security, scalability | Medium-High (can block on technical grounds) | Technical deep dives, architecture reviews, POCs, vendor comparisons |
| End Users (Adopters) | Operators, Supervisors, Quality Techs, Maintenance Techs, Production Planners | Use the system daily, provide feedback, drive adoption | Medium (can sabotage if not bought in) | User testing, training, feedback sessions, champions program |
| Support Functions (Gatekeepers) | Procurement, Legal, Finance Controller, Compliance, HR/Training | Contract negotiation, risk assessment, compliance validation | Medium (can slow or block) | Compliance documentation, contract templates, training plans, SLAs |
Key insight: The CIO may not be the primary decision-maker for manufacturing IT. In many organizations, the COO or VP Manufacturing controls the budget and has final say. Always identify the true power structure early.
The RACI Matrix for Manufacturing IT Decisions
Table 10.2: RACI for Manufacturing Technology Investment
| Activity | CEO | COO | CFO | CIO | VP Mfg | Plant Mgr | IT Dir | Operators |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Budget Approval | A | R | A/R | I | I | I | I | I |
| Strategic Direction | A/R | R | I | R | R | I | I | I |
| Requirements Definition | I | I | I | C | R | R | C | C |
| Vendor Selection | A | R | I | R | R | C | R | I |
| Technical Evaluation | I | I | I | A | C | C | R | I |
| Pilot Execution | I | I | I | C | A | R | R | C |
| Budget Management | A | R | A | I | R | C | C | I |
| Change Management | I | A | I | I | R | R | C | C |
| Go/No-Go Decision | A | A/R | A | R | R | C | C | I |
Legend: R = Responsible, A = Accountable, C = Consulted, I = Informed
10.2 C-Suite Personas
CEO (Chief Executive Officer)
Profile:
- Cares about: Revenue growth, profitability, market share, competitive advantage, risk mitigation
- Time horizon: 3-5 years, quarterly earnings focus
- Typical background: Often comes from sales, finance, or operations (rarely from IT)
- Attention span: 10 minutes for initial pitch; wants executive summary, not technical details
Table 10.3: CEO – What Matters and How to Win
| What They Care About | How to Position Your Solution | Key Metrics to Emphasize | Common Objections | How to Address |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Revenue Growth | "Enable 15% more throughput without capex on new lines" | Revenue per employee, capacity utilization | "This doesn't directly drive sales" | "Improved delivery reliability = customer retention; faster NPI = new revenue streams" |
| Profitability | "Reduce COGS by 8% through OEE improvement and scrap reduction" | EBITDA margin, ROCE, free cash flow | "Too expensive, unproven ROI" | "Conservative case shows 14-month payback; we guarantee 50% refund if <50% of projected ROI" |
| Competitive Advantage | "Differentiate with made-to-order in 5 days vs. industry standard 3 weeks" | Time-to-market, customer satisfaction, win rate | "Our competitors aren't doing this" | "Your top 3 competitors are actively investing in Industry 4.0—risk of falling behind" |
| Risk Mitigation | "Reduce supply chain disruption risk with real-time visibility and scenario planning" | Risk-adjusted returns, business continuity metrics | "We've survived without this" | "Regulatory landscape changing (CMMC, ESG); customer requirements escalating; one cyber incident costs $25M+" |
How to speak CEO language:
- Start with business outcomes, not technology: "Grow revenue by $12M" not "Implement MES"
- Use financial metrics they track: EBITDA, ROCE, free cash flow, revenue per employee
- Reference competitive benchmarks: "Top quartile manufacturers achieve 85% OEE; you're at 68%"
- Frame as strategic imperatives: "To win the next generation of EV contracts, OEMs require real-time production visibility"
- Show quick wins: "Phase 1 delivers 60% of value in 6 months"
Engagement approach:
- Initial meeting: 15-20 minute exec briefing with 1-page visual summary
- Materials: Board-ready slide deck (10 slides max), 1-page executive summary, video testimonial from peer CEO
- Frequency: Quarterly updates once engaged; don't over-communicate
COO (Chief Operating Officer) / VP of Manufacturing
Profile:
- Cares about: Production uptime, throughput, labor productivity, quality, safety, delivery performance
- Time horizon: 1-3 years, with monthly/quarterly KPIs
- Typical background: Rose through plant operations, manufacturing engineering, or supply chain
- Attention span: 30 minutes for deep dives; wants to see it work on the shop floor
Table 10.4: COO/VP Manufacturing – Deep Dive
| What They Care About | Pain Points | Solution Positioning | KPIs to Show | Proof Points They Need |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| OEE and Uptime | Unplanned downtime costs $18K/hour; don't know root causes | "Reduce downtime 35% with predictive maintenance and real-time alerts" | OEE, MTBF, MTTR, downtime hours | Pilot results from similar line; live demo of alert-to-action workflow |
| Labor Productivity | Skilled labor shortage; new hires take 6 months to ramp | "Digital work instructions reduce training time 60%; error-proof processes" | Units per labor hour, training time, defect rate | Video of operator using system; testimonial from plant manager |
| Quality and Scrap | Scrap is 4.2% of revenue; quality issues discovered too late | "SPC catches deviations in real-time; prevent defects, don't inspect them out" | First-pass yield, scrap %, COPQ | Before/after SPC charts; case study with $2M scrap reduction |
| Changeover Time | 4-hour changeovers limit flexibility; can't economically run small lots | "Guided changeover procedures cut setup time 40%; enable mass customization" | Setup time, lot size economics, schedule adherence | Time-lapse video of changeover before/after; ROI on increased flexibility |
| Delivery Performance | 82% OTIF; late shipments risk customer penalties and lost business | "Real-time visibility + APS scheduling improves OTIF to 94%+" | OTIF %, late shipment penalties avoided | Customer scorecard improvements; reference from similar manufacturer |
How to speak COO language:
- Focus on operational KPIs: OEE, MTBF, first-pass yield, units per labor hour, OTIF
- Show it working on the shop floor: Live demos, plant tours of reference sites, video of operators using the system
- Acknowledge operational constraints: "We understand you can only take Line 3 down during the July shutdown"
- Emphasize usability for shop floor: "Designed for operators wearing gloves, in bright sunlight, with minimal training"
- Quantify operational risks: "Every day you delay, you're losing $47K in preventable downtime"
Engagement approach:
- Site visit to reference plant: See system in production, talk to plant manager and operators
- Pilot on their line: Low-risk proof on 1 line before committing to plant-wide
- Operator involvement: Include supervisors and operators in pilot design and testing
- Weekly operational reviews during pilot: Show OEE trends, issues, improvements
CFO (Chief Financial Officer)
Profile:
- Cares about: Cash flow, working capital, capex/opex trade-offs, payback period, risk-adjusted ROI
- Time horizon: Annual budgets, 3-5 year strategic plans
- Typical background: Accounting, finance, banking, private equity
- Attention span: 20 minutes; wants rigorous financial model with sensitivity analysis
Table 10.5: CFO – Financial Business Case Requirements
| What They Care About | Questions They Ask | What They Need to See | How to Address Concerns |
|---|---|---|---|
| Payback Period | "When do we get our money back?" | Month-by-month cash flow with cumulative payback | "Conservative case: 18 months. Upside case: 11 months. We can structure milestone payments to align with value delivery." |
| NPV and IRR | "What's the risk-adjusted return vs. alternative investments?" | NPV at your cost of capital; IRR comparison to hurdle rate | "At 8% discount rate, NPV is $8.2M over 5 years. IRR of 47% exceeds your 20% hurdle rate." |
| Capex vs. Opex | "Can we expense this vs. capitalize? What's the balance sheet impact?" | Capex vs. opex breakdown; depreciation schedule; balance sheet impact | "We offer both models: $1.2M capex or $28K/month opex subscription. Opex improves your EBITDA margins." |
| Working Capital Impact | "How does this affect inventory and cash conversion cycle?" | Days inventory, DSO, DPO before/after; cash freed | "Reduce inventory from 85 to 62 days = $9.8M cash freed. Improves cash conversion cycle by 17 days." |
| Risk Mitigation | "What if it doesn't work? What's our downside?" | Downside scenario; exit costs; vendor financial stability; guarantees | "Milestone-based payments mean you only pay for delivered value. We offer 50% refund if pilot ROI < 50% of projection. We're backed by [PE firm/parent company]—financially stable." |
| Total Cost of Ownership (TCO) | "What are the ongoing costs beyond initial implementation?" | 5-year TCO: licenses, support, infrastructure, internal resources | "Year 1: $1.5M (implementation). Years 2-5: $220K/year (support + infrastructure). Total 5-year TCO: $2.38M vs. $14.6M benefit = 6.1x return." |
How to speak CFO language:
- Lead with financial metrics: NPV, IRR, payback, EBITDA impact, free cash flow
- Show conservative, base, and upside scenarios: "Even in downside case, we achieve 22-month payback"
- Quantify risk reduction: "Avoid $4.2M annual risk of quality recalls"
- Compare to alternatives: "vs. doing nothing (lose $8M/year in inefficiency) or building in-house (18-month delay, 2× cost, higher risk)"
- Address cash flow timing: "Phase 1 delivers 55% of benefits in first 6 months"
Engagement approach:
- Financial model workshop: Walk through assumptions together; let them stress-test
- Flexible commercial terms: Milestone payments, opex subscription, performance-based pricing
- Reference finance leaders: CFO-to-CFO call to validate ROI claims
- Ongoing reporting: Quarterly financial reviews showing actual vs. projected ROI
CIO (Chief Information Officer) / CTO (Chief Technology Officer)
Profile:
- Cares about: IT strategy, architecture, security, vendor management, scalability, TCO, innovation
- Time horizon: 3-5 year roadmap, annual budget cycles
- Typical background: Software engineering, IT operations, enterprise architecture, consulting
- Attention span: 45-60 minutes for technical deep dive; wants to understand architecture and integration
Table 10.6: CIO/CTO – Technical and Strategic Concerns
| What They Care About | Questions They Ask | What You Must Demonstrate | Red Flags That Block Deals |
|---|---|---|---|
| Architecture and Integration | "How does this fit into our existing landscape? What integrations are required?" | Reference architecture; pre-built connectors; API documentation; integration effort estimate | Proprietary architecture; no APIs; requires rip-and-replace of core systems |
| Security and Compliance | "How do you secure OT environments? Are you CMMC/NIST CSF compliant?" | Security architecture; SOC 2 Type II report; IEC 62443 alignment; pen test results | No security certifications; can't articulate OT security model; data sovereignty issues |
| Scalability | "Can this scale from 1 plant to 20? What happens at 10× data volume?" | Multi-tenant architecture; performance benchmarks; reference with 10+ plants | Single-tenant only; performance degrades at scale; manual deployment per site |
| Vendor Roadmap | "What's your product roadmap? Will you be around in 5 years?" | Product roadmap; R&D investment; financial stability; customer retention rate | Stagnant product; unclear roadmap; frequent M&A; customer churn >15% |
| TCO and Lock-In | "What are hidden costs? How easy is it to switch vendors if needed?" | Transparent pricing; data export capabilities; open standards; professional services cost benchmarks | Opaque pricing; proprietary data formats; customization lock-in; vendor holds data hostage |
| IT Resource Requirements | "How many FTEs do we need to support this? Can we get by with existing skills?" | Support model; training requirements; managed services option; skill gaps identified | Requires rare skills (e.g., obscure programming language); high ongoing support burden |
| Cloud vs. On-Prem | "Should this run in cloud or on-premises? What about hybrid?" | Hybrid architecture; edge/cloud split; data residency options; performance comparison | Cloud-only with high latency; on-prem only with no modern architecture; forces unwanted model |
How to speak CIO/CTO language:
- Use architecture diagrams: Show how your solution fits into ISA-95 levels, integration points, data flows
- Reference industry standards: ISA-95, OPC UA, IEC 62443, NIST CSF, ISO 27001
- Acknowledge technical debt: "We know you have legacy systems; here's how we wrap/integrate without rip-and-replace"
- Show innovation roadmap: "Here's where we're investing: AI/ML for predictive quality, digital twin integration"
- Provide technical proof: POC with your actual systems, architecture review session, API sandbox
Engagement approach:
- Architecture review workshop: 2-4 hour deep dive with your architects and theirs
- Technical POC: 2-4 week proof-of-concept connecting to their actual systems (ERP, SCADA, etc.)
- Security review: Provide SOC 2, pen test results, security architecture docs; meet with their CISO
- Roadmap alignment: Share product roadmap; discuss future integration needs
- CIO peer network: Invite to customer advisory board, user conference, peer roundtables
10.3 Operational Leader Personas
Plant Manager
Profile:
- Cares about: Meeting daily/weekly production targets, keeping the plant running, safety, employee morale, customer shipments
- Time horizon: Daily/weekly/monthly targets; 6-12 month improvement projects
- Typical background: Production supervisor → operations manager → plant manager (typically 15-25 years in manufacturing)
- Attention span: 15-30 minutes; pragmatic, skeptical of "technology solutions"; wants proof it works
Table 10.7: Plant Manager – Priorities and Objections
| Priority | Current Pain | What Wins Them | What Loses Them | How to Engage |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Make the numbers | "I need to ship 12,000 units this week or we pay penalties" | "This won't disrupt production during pilot. We go live during shutdown. You'll hit your numbers." | "We need 2 weeks of downtime to implement" | Be flexible on timing; pilot during low-volume periods; have rollback plan |
| Keep the line running | "Downtime costs me $18K/hour and I get phone calls from the CEO" | "Predictive maintenance reduces unplanned downtime 40%. You'll have advance warning of failures." | "This is another system to babysit and maintain" | Show low-maintenance design; offer managed services; SLA with uptime guarantee |
| Safety | "One serious injury and I'm liable; OSHA is watching" | "Error-proofing prevents unsafe conditions. Digital lockout-tagout improves compliance." | "New system confuses operators and creates safety risks" | Safety review with EHS team; operator training and certification; emergency stop procedures |
| Usable by my team | "Half my operators don't speak English as first language; high turnover" | "Visual/icon-based UI; minimal text; 15-minute operator training; multi-language support" | "Complex interface requiring computer skills" | Operator testing during design; simplified mobile UX; video-based training |
| Proven and reliable | "I can't be the guinea pig; I need this to work" | "27 automotive plants using this, including [competitor]. Here's their plant manager's number." | "Cutting-edge/unproven technology" | Reference sites; invite to plant tour; pilot with low-risk scope; contingency plan |
How to speak Plant Manager language:
- Operational metrics: Units produced, OEE, downtime incidents, late shipments, safety incidents
- Shop floor realities: "We understand Line 4 runs 24×6 and can't be touched except during planned shutdowns"
- Acknowledge skepticism: "I know you've seen technology projects fail. Here's how this is different."
- Show it working: Live demo, plant tour, talk to operators at reference site
- Respect their expertise: "You know this plant better than anyone—tell us what won't work and we'll adjust"
Engagement strategy:
- Walk the floor together: See their operation; understand their challenges firsthand
- Involve them in pilot design: "Which line should we start with? What success criteria matter to you?"
- Operator champions program: Identify 2-3 influential operators to co-design and advocate
- Weekly check-ins during pilot: Show OEE trends, address issues immediately
- Celebrate quick wins: Publicize early successes; give them credit
Quality Director / Manager
Profile:
- Cares about: Product quality, compliance, customer quality ratings, audit readiness, COPQ (Cost of Poor Quality)
- Time horizon: Quarterly quality reviews, annual audits, 1-3 year improvement initiatives
- Typical background: Quality engineer → quality manager → quality director; often has Six Sigma Black Belt, ASQ certifications
- Attention span: 30-45 minutes; detail-oriented; wants to understand process controls and traceability
Table 10.8: Quality Director – Requirements and Concerns
| Requirement | Why It Matters | Must-Have Capabilities | Deal-Breakers | How to Win |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Regulatory Compliance | FDA, IATF 16949, AS9100, ISO 9001 audits; non-compliance = lost certifications/customers | 21 CFR Part 11 (e-signatures, audit trails), full traceability, electronic batch records, CAPA workflows | No audit trail; can't demonstrate compliance; no validation support | Provide validation protocols (IQ/OQ/PQ); compliance documentation; reference customers who passed audits |
| Traceability | "Show me every material lot, process parameter, and operator for serial number XYZ back to raw material" | Forward/backward genealogy, serialization, lot tracking, supplier lot linkage | Incomplete traceability; gaps in data; manual reconciliation required | Live demo of genealogy query; show FDA audit scenario; traceability report examples |
| SPC and Real-Time Quality | Catch defects early; prevent bad parts from reaching customers | Real-time SPC charts, Cp/Cpk calculation, automatic alerts on out-of-spec, control plan enforcement | Manual data entry; delayed reporting (24 hours old); no statistical analysis | Show SPC in action; demonstrate alert when process goes out of control; trend analysis dashboards |
| Root Cause Analysis | Need to identify and fix systemic quality issues, not just symptoms | CAPA workflows, 5 Whys/Fishbone integration, correlation of defects with process parameters | No CAPA module; can't correlate quality with process data; manual root cause | Show CAPA workflow; demonstrate correlation analysis (e.g., temp variation → defect spike) |
| Supplier Quality | Incoming defects cause line stoppages and cost 3× to fix downstream | Supplier scorecards, incoming inspection workflows, corrective action requests to suppliers | No supplier quality module; can't track supplier performance | Supplier scorecard example; incoming inspection workflow demo; CAR template |
| Audit Readiness | Internal audits quarterly, customer audits semi-annually, ISO/FDA annually | One-click audit reports, pre-configured compliance dashboards, evidence repository | Manual report generation; hard to pull audit evidence; no pre-built compliance reports | Audit report examples; demo audit evidence search; provide audit response templates |
How to speak Quality Director language:
- Quality metrics: First-pass yield, scrap rate, COPQ, PPM (parts per million defects), Cpk, customer quality ratings
- Compliance frameworks: 21 CFR Part 11, IATF 16949, AS9100, ISO 13485, GAMP5
- Quality tools: SPC, FMEA, CAPA, APQP, PPAP, control plans, MSA (measurement system analysis)
- Risk-based thinking: "How do we prevent defects from occurring, not just detect them?"
Engagement strategy:
- Compliance documentation review: Provide validation protocols, 21 CFR Part 11 compliance matrix, audit support plan
- Quality workflow workshop: Map their current CAPA, NCR, SPC processes; show how system supports them
- Reference audit success stories: "Customer X passed FDA inspection with zero findings using our system"
- Pilot with quality focus: Measure scrap reduction, FPY improvement, audit prep time during pilot
Maintenance Manager / Reliability Engineer
Profile:
- Cares about: Equipment uptime, maintenance cost per unit, mean time between failures (MTBF), spare parts inventory
- Time horizon: Weekly maintenance schedules, quarterly shutdowns, annual budget
- Typical background: Electrician/mechanic → maintenance supervisor → maintenance manager; may have PdM/vibration analysis certifications
- Attention span: 20-40 minutes; hands-on, practical; skeptical of "predictive magic"
Table 10.9: Maintenance Manager – Value Drivers and Skepticism
| Value Driver | Current Challenge | Solution Value Prop | Skepticism/Objection | How to Overcome |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Reduce Unplanned Downtime | "Motor #7 failed yesterday—cost us $85K in lost production and emergency repair" | "Vibration monitoring predicts bearing failures 3-6 weeks early; schedule repair during planned shutdown" | "We've tried this before with sensors—too many false alarms" | Show tuned model with <5% false positive rate; start with 3-5 critical assets; prove value before scaling |
| Optimize Maintenance Spend | "We're over-maintaining (wasting parts) or under-maintaining (causing failures)" | "Condition-based maintenance reduces spend 25% by maintaining only when needed" | "Our preventive schedule works fine; we know our equipment" | Respect their knowledge; position as complement, not replacement; show MRO inventory reduction |
| Faster Diagnosis | "Diagnosing complex issues takes hours-days; need specialists who aren't always available" | "AI-assisted diagnostics suggest likely root causes; guided troubleshooting steps" | "Nothing beats an experienced tech's judgment" | Absolutely agree; frame as "decision support" not "replacement"; expert system captures tribal knowledge |
| Spare Parts Optimization | "$2.8M in MRO inventory; afraid to reduce it because of stockouts" | "Predictive visibility lets you right-size inventory; order parts based on predicted failures" | "Can't risk a stockout to save inventory carrying cost" | Phase approach: start with non-critical spares; show data before reducing critical spares |
| Integration with CMMS | "Our CMMS (Maximo/SAP PM) doesn't talk to shop floor; manual work order creation" | "Auto-generate work orders in your CMMS when alerts trigger; close loop automatically" | "We don't want another system to manage" | Integrate with existing CMMS; position as "making your CMMS smarter" not "replacing it" |
How to speak Maintenance Manager language:
- Reliability metrics: MTBF, MTTR, maintenance cost per unit, planned vs. unplanned maintenance ratio, spare parts turns
- Failure modes: Bearing wear, misalignment, imbalance, lubrication issues, overheating, seal leaks
- Pragmatic value: "You'll know Motor #7 needs a bearing replacement 4 weeks before it fails"
- Respect their expertise: "Your techs know this equipment cold—we're giving them better tools"
Engagement strategy:
- Involve senior techs early: They know the equipment best; make them partners in sensor placement and alert tuning
- Start with 3-5 critical assets: Prove value on worst offenders (frequent failures, high downtime cost)
- Tune alerts together: Expect 2-3 months of baseline data collection and alert tuning
- Show CMMS integration: Demo work order auto-creation; show closed-loop workflow
Supply Chain Director / Logistics Manager
Profile:
- Cares about: Inventory levels, supplier performance, on-time delivery, freight costs, working capital
- Time horizon: Weekly shipments, monthly S&OP, quarterly inventory targets
- Typical background: Logistics coordinator → buyer/planner → supply chain manager; may have APICS/CPIM/CSCP certifications
- Attention span: 30 minutes; data-driven; wants to see demand/supply planning tools
Table 10.10: Supply Chain Director – Priorities
| Priority | Pain Point | Solution | Value Metric | Proof Needed |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Inventory Optimization | "85 days inventory; CFO wants 65 days but I'm afraid of stockouts" | "Demand sensing + safety stock optimization = 68 days inventory with 98% service level" | Days inventory, cash freed, service level % | Model showing inventory reduction with maintained service levels; reference customer results |
| Supplier Performance | "Supplier late deliveries cause line stoppages; no visibility into supplier issues" | "Supplier collaboration portal; share forecasts, POs, track deliveries real-time" | Supplier OTIF %, line stoppages due to material shortage | Supplier scorecard dashboard; alert when supplier shipment is delayed |
| Demand Forecast Accuracy | "35% forecast accuracy; leads to excess inventory or stockouts" | "ML-driven demand forecasting; collaborative planning with sales" | Forecast accuracy %, inventory reduction, obsolescence reduction | Before/after forecast accuracy; show how ML improves over statistical methods |
| Freight Cost | "$6.2M annual freight; too many LTL shipments, poor load optimization" | "TMS optimizes loads, consolidates shipments, selects lowest-cost carrier meeting service needs" | Freight cost per unit, on-time delivery % | Freight savings analysis; load optimization example; carrier performance tracking |
| Cross-Border Logistics (USMCA) | "Managing Mexico/Canada shipments; USMCA compliance; customs delays" | "Landed cost calculation, USMCA rules of origin tracking, customs documentation automation" | Customs delay reduction, compliance risk | USMCA compliance features; landed cost calculation example; customs integration |
How to speak Supply Chain language:
- Supply chain metrics: Days inventory (raw/WIP/finished), inventory turns, OTIF %, forecast accuracy, freight cost as % of COGS
- Planning processes: S&OP, demand planning, MRP, supply planning, inventory optimization
- Acknowledge constraints: "We understand you can't cut inventory until forecast accuracy improves"
10.4 Technical Leader Personas
IT Director / Manager
Profile:
- Cares about: Keeping systems running, project delivery, helpdesk tickets, security, vendor management, budget
- Time horizon: Daily/weekly operational firefighting, quarterly projects, annual budget
- Typical background: Developer → sysadmin → IT manager; often promoted from within; stretched thin
- Attention span: 20-30 minutes; pragmatic; worried about adding complexity
Table 10.11: IT Director – Concerns and Support Needs
| Concern | Root Cause | How to Position | Support You Must Provide | What Breaks Deals |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| "One more system to support" | Already supporting 40+ applications with 5-person team | "Managed service option: we monitor, patch, support 24×7. You focus on business apps." | Clear support model; SLAs; runbooks; 24×7 NOC; knowledge transfer plan | "You'll need to hire 2 FTEs to support this" |
| "Integration complexity" | Every integration project goes over budget and timeline | "Pre-built connectors for your ERP/MES; 80% of integration is template-based" | Integration effort estimate; risk mitigation; reference integration examples; professional services | "Custom integration required; 6-12 month timeline" |
| "Security and compliance" | CIO will block if security isn't addressed; CISO has veto power | "SOC 2 Type II certified; IEC 62443 aligned; we'll work with your security team" | Security documentation; SOC 2 report; pen test results; security workshop | No security certifications; can't articulate OT security |
| "Change control" | IT has strict change windows; can't disrupt business | "Changes deployed in your maintenance window; automated testing; rollback plan" | Deployment runbooks; rollback procedures; test plan; low-risk deployment approach | Requires disruptive changes in production hours |
| "Skills gap" | Team has ERP/CRM skills, not OT/manufacturing expertise | "We provide training, documentation, and Level 3 support; knowledge transfer over 6 months" | Training plan; documentation; knowledge transfer; L1/L2/L3 support model | "Your team will need to learn Python/Ignition/proprietary tools" |
| "Vendor fatigue" | Tired of vendors over-promising and under-delivering | "Fixed-price pilot with success criteria. Milestone payments. Reference customers you can call." | Realistic commitments; transparent roadmap; regular status updates; no surprises | Overpromise; miss deadlines; surprise scope/cost changes |
How to speak IT Director language:
- Operational metrics: Uptime %, ticket volume, mean time to resolution, change success rate, security incidents
- Infrastructure: Servers, databases, networks, cloud resources, backup/DR
- Support model: L1/L2/L3 tiers, runbooks, SLAs, escalation procedures
- Acknowledge their constraints: "I know you're juggling 15 priorities with limited resources"
Engagement strategy:
- Offer managed services: Take operational burden off their plate
- Provide detailed runbooks: Show them it's supportable
- Involve them in architecture review: Get their input; make them co-designers
- Transparent communication: Weekly status updates; flag issues early; no surprises
10.5 Navigating Multi-Stakeholder Dynamics
Building Consensus Across Conflicting Priorities
Manufacturing IT decisions often involve conflicting priorities across stakeholders:
Table 10.12: Common Stakeholder Conflicts and Resolution Strategies
| Conflict | Stakeholders | Typical Positions | Resolution Strategy | Example |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Capex vs. Opex | CFO prefers opex (better EBITDA); CIO prefers capex (lower TCO) | CFO: "I want subscription pricing"<br>CIO: "Capex TCO is 30% lower" | Offer both models; show 5-year TCO comparison; let them choose | "Option A: $1.5M capex. Option B: $32K/month opex. Your choice based on what's best for your metrics." |
| Speed vs. Risk | COO wants fast deployment; CIO wants thorough testing | COO: "We need this now"<br>CIO: "We can't rush and break things" | Phased approach: quick pilot on 1 line (satisfies COO), then rigorous rollout (satisfies CIO) | "Pilot on Line 3 in 90 days (low risk, fast). Then 6-month plant rollout with full UAT." |
| Best-of-Breed vs. Single Vendor | VP Mfg wants best MES; CIO wants single vendor (SAP/Microsoft) | VP Mfg: "SAP MES is weak"<br>CIO: "I don't want 10 vendors" | Pragmatic middle ground: Best-of-breed for core manufacturing, integrate via APIs | "Use Siemens MES (best-in-class) with API integration to your SAP ERP. We manage the integration." |
| Cloud vs. On-Prem | CIO wants cloud (modern, scalable); OT wants on-prem (latency, reliability) | CIO: "Everything should be in Azure"<br>OT: "Cloud latency breaks real-time control" | Hybrid architecture: Edge for real-time control, cloud for analytics/reporting | "Real-time control at edge (on-prem). Historical data, analytics, dashboards in Azure." |
| Customization vs. Standardization | Business wants custom workflows; IT wants standard to reduce TCO | Business: "Our process is unique"<br>IT: "Customization = technical debt" | 80/20 rule: Standard for 80%, configure for 15%, custom for 5% strategic differentiators | "We'll use standard for production tracking, configure for your inspection workflow, custom for your unique serialization requirement." |
Political Navigation Tips
Table 10.13: Political Dynamics and Navigation Strategies
| Political Dynamic | Warning Signs | How to Navigate | Mistakes to Avoid |
|---|---|---|---|
| CIO/COO Power Struggle | CIO and COO disagree on priorities; both claim budget ownership | Align them early on shared outcomes (e.g., "reduce downtime"); get CEO to clarify ownership | Taking sides; letting them use you as pawn in political battle |
| Plant Manager Resistance | Plant manager passive-aggressive; "too busy" to engage; delegates to junior person | Escalate to VP Mfg: "We need Plant Manager X's input for success. Can you help prioritize?" | Ignoring resistance; going around them (they'll sabotage later) |
| IT Turf War | IT feels threatened by OT involvement; blocks access, slows approvals | Involve IT early; give them credit; position as "making IT's job easier"; managed service option | Bypassing IT; treating them as obstacle; not acknowledging their concerns |
| Procurement Gatekeeper | Procurement demands RFP, 3 vendors, lowest price; doesn't understand manufacturing | Educate procurement on total cost of ownership, risk of wrong choice; involve CFO if needed | Antagonizing procurement; not providing apples-to-apples RFP comparison |
| Previous Vendor Failure | "We tried this before with Vendor Y and it failed" | Acknowledge past failure; show how you're different; involve reference customers who switched from failed vendor | Dismissing past failure; blaming previous vendor; not addressing root cause |
10.6 Stakeholder Engagement Plan
Recommended Engagement Sequence
Table 10.14: Stakeholder Engagement Roadmap (Sales Cycle)
| Stage | Timeframe | Primary Stakeholders | Activities | Deliverables | Success Criteria |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Discovery | Weeks 1-2 | CIO, VP Mfg, Plant Mgr | Initial meetings, pain point discovery, site visit | Discovery summary, stakeholder map, preliminary ROI | Agreement on pain points; access to plant floor; budget confirmation |
| Solution Design | Weeks 3-4 | VP Mfg, Plant Mgr, IT Dir, Quality Dir | Workshops to define requirements, integration needs, success criteria | Requirements doc, solution architecture, ROI model | Alignment on scope, architecture, and success metrics |
| Proposal | Week 5 | All stakeholders | Executive presentation, technical deep dive, Q&A | Proposal, exec summary, ROI model, SOW | Stakeholder buy-in; objections addressed; path to approval |
| Executive Approval | Weeks 6-8 | CEO, COO, CFO, CIO | Executive briefing, board presentation (if needed), contract negotiation | Contract, SOW, payment terms | Signed contract |
| Pilot Kickoff | Week 9 | Project team: VP Mfg, Plant Mgr, IT Dir, operators | Kickoff meeting, detailed planning, pilot scope finalization | Project plan, RACI, communication plan | Clear roles, timeline, success criteria for pilot |
Stakeholder Communication Matrix
Table 10.15: Communication Cadence by Stakeholder
| Stakeholder | Frequency | Format | Content Focus | Owner |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CEO | Quarterly (if engaged) | 15-min update | Strategic alignment, ROI progress, risk mitigation | Your exec sponsor |
| COO/CFO | Monthly during project | 30-min review | Milestones, budget, ROI tracking | Your delivery lead |
| CIO/VP Mfg | Bi-weekly | 1-hour working session | Technical progress, issues, decisions needed | Your project manager |
| Plant Manager | Weekly during pilot | 30-min standup | Pilot results, issues, operator feedback | Your on-site lead |
| IT Director | Weekly during implementation | 30-min technical sync | Integrations, infrastructure, support readiness | Your technical lead |
| Quality/Supply Chain | Monthly or as needed | Email updates + ad hoc meetings | Relevant to their domain (quality results, inventory impact) | Your PM |
| Operators | Daily during pilot | 10-min huddle | How to use system, feedback, quick wins | Your on-site trainer |
Chapter Summary
Table 10.16: Buyer Persona Quick Reference
| Persona | Top 3 Priorities | Key Metrics | How to Win | Common Objection | Counter-Strategy |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CEO | Revenue growth, profitability, competitive advantage | Revenue, EBITDA, market share | Business case with strategic narrative + financial ROI | "Too expensive, unproven" | Phased approach with guarantees; peer CEO reference |
| COO | Uptime, throughput, labor productivity | OEE, units/labor hour, OTIF % | Operational proof on shop floor; pilot results | "We've tried technology before—it doesn't work here" | Reference site visit; pilot with clear success criteria |
| CFO | ROI, cash flow, working capital | NPV, payback, inventory days | Rigorous financial model; milestone payments; cash flow-positive | "Payback too long, too risky" | Conservative case still attractive; downside protection |
| CIO | Architecture, security, scalability | TCO, uptime, security incidents | Technical proof; architecture alignment; security docs | "Doesn't fit our architecture/standards" | Pre-built integrations; hybrid approach; managed service |
| Plant Manager | Make the numbers, keep line running, usability | Daily production targets, downtime incidents | Low-disruption pilot; operator-friendly design; reference plant tour | "Too complex; my operators won't use it" | Operator testing; simplified UX; champion program |
| Quality Director | Compliance, traceability, COPQ | First-pass yield, scrap %, audit readiness | Compliance documentation; genealogy demo; audit success stories | "Doesn't meet 21 CFR Part 11 / IATF 16949" | Validation protocols; compliance matrix; reference audit success |
| Maintenance Manager | Reduce downtime, optimize maintenance cost | MTBF, maintenance $/unit | Predictive value on critical assets; CMMS integration | "Too many false alarms; doesn't replace expert judgment" | Tuned alerts; decision support (not replacement); start small |
| Supply Chain Director | Inventory optimization, supplier performance | Days inventory, forecast accuracy, OTIF % | Demand sensing demo; inventory optimization model | "Can't reduce inventory without better forecasts" | Prove forecast accuracy improvement first; phase inventory reduction |
| IT Director | Keep systems running, minimize support burden | Uptime, ticket volume, MTTR | Managed service option; runbooks; integration templates | "One more system to support with no resources" | Managed services; clear support model; knowledge transfer |
Discussion Questions
-
Stakeholder Prioritization: If you can only engage 3 stakeholders in a 90-day sales cycle, which 3 do you choose and why?
-
Conflicting Priorities: How do you navigate when the COO wants a fast pilot but the CIO demands 6 months of architecture work before starting?
-
Persona Adaptation: How should your messaging change when selling MES to automotive (IATF 16949) vs. pharmaceuticals (21 CFR Part 11)?
-
Political Landmines: What do you do when the Plant Manager is resistant because they fear the technology will make their role obsolete?
-
Buying Committee Evolution: How does the stakeholder landscape change from pilot ($100K) to plant-wide ($1M) to multi-plant ($10M) deals?
-
Consensus Building: What techniques work to get alignment when Finance wants opex, IT wants capex, and Operations doesn't care?
-
Reference Strategy: Which persona should talk to which reference? (Should CFO talk to CFO? Plant Manager to Plant Manager?)
-
Failed Pilots: If the pilot doesn't meet success criteria, which stakeholder's support is most critical to get a second chance?
Further Reading
Books:
- The Challenger Sale by Matthew Dixon and Brent Adamson (selling to buying committees)
- Selling to the C-Suite by Nicholas A.C. Read and Stephen J. Bistritz
- Value-Based Selling by Dale Furtwengler
- Influence: The Psychology of Persuasion by Robert Cialdini
Articles and Frameworks:
- Harvard Business Review: "Making the Consensus Sale" (Adamson et al.)
- BANT Framework (Budget, Authority, Need, Timeline) for qualifying stakeholders
- RACI Matrix best practices
- Gartner: "How to Sell to the New B2B Buyer" (average of 6-10 stakeholders in B2B purchases)
Industry Resources:
- Manufacturing Leadership Council: Buyer journey research
- ISM (Institute for Supply Management): Procurement best practices
- APICS: Supply chain stakeholder management
- CIO Magazine: IT buying committee research
What's Next?
Chapter 11: How Manufacturers Select IT Partners dives into the buyer's selection process:
- The typical RFP/RFI process and how to win it
- Evaluation criteria manufacturers use (functional fit, references, price, risk, chemistry)
- How to differentiate when you're not the cheapest
- The "shortlist to selection" process (demos, POCs, reference checks, negotiations)
- Common reasons vendors lose deals (and how to avoid them)
- Building long-term strategic partnerships vs. transactional vendor relationships
Understanding who buys (Chapter 10) and how they buy (Chapter 11) gives you a complete picture of the manufacturing IT sales process.