Page 1 of 1
The State of Agentic Commercial Readiness
Which best describes your perspective on this survey?
*
A
I'm reporting on my own company
B
I'm reporting on what I see across the market or my portfolio
C
Advisor or investor perspective across multiple companies
Your role
*
A
CEO or Founder
B
CRO / CCO / Commercial leader
C
CFO or Finance
D
Sales leader
E
Product or Pricing
F
Customer Success leader
G
Other
Company type
*
A
PE-backed
B
VC-backed
C
Public
D
Bootstrapped
E
Other
Annual recurring revenue
*
A
Pre-£5m
B
£5-25m
C
£25-100m
D
£100m+
E
Prefer not to say
Organisational Design
Which best describes your commercial organisation design today?
*
A
Unchanged, still structured for the pre-AI operating model
B
Adjusted at the edges, some teams reshuffled but the core structure holds
C
Actively being redesigned around new agentic objectives
D
Fully redesigned so structure reflects the new commercial operating model and its objectives
How well does your current org design underpin your agentic-era commercial objectives?
*
A
It doesn't, the structure still serves the old objectives
B
Partially, some functions are aligned, others aren't
C
Mostly, structure and objectives are broadly aligned
D
Fully, the org is deliberately designed around human and agent teams delivering the new objectives
Does your org chart describe how work actually gets done now, or how it used to get done?
*
A
It describes the old way, reality has moved on without it
B
It's a mix, parts are real, parts are legacy
C
It mostly matches reality
D
It fully reflects how work happens today
GTM
Which best describes your go-to-market motion today?
*
A
Unchanged, still built for the buyer and motion we had pre-AI
B
We've updated messaging and targeting but the motion is the same
C
We've redefined the ICP and are rebuilding the motion around it
D
Fully rebuilt: new ICP, outcome-led motion, matched to who actually buys now
How well does your GTM reflect who actually makes the buying decision today?
*
A
Still selling to the old buyer, often IT or technical, unchanged
B
Aware the buyer has shifted but not yet reorganised around it
C
Selling to the business-function buyer in most motions
D
Fully oriented to the current buyer, and positioned to reach them before agents shortlist for them
When a buyer's own AI agents start shortlisting vendors, can your GTM get you into the consideration set?
*
A
No, we're not visible or structured for agent-mediated buying at all
B
Unsure, we haven't thought about it in those terms
C
Partially, we've started but it's early
D
Yes, we're deliberately building to be discoverable and selected in agent-led buying
Pricing & Packaging
Which best describes what you've done to your pricing for the agentic era?
*
A
Nothing yet, pricing is unchanged
B
Layered an AI add-on or tier on top of the existing model
C
Redesigned parts of it, some real value-metric change, some legacy
D
Rebuilt from the value metric up, price now scales with value delivered
How well does your pricing capture the value your product creates when agents do the work?
*
A
Not at all, we still charge for seats or access, value has decoupled from price
B
Weakly, we've adjusted but capture is poor
C
Reasonably, price and value are broadly aligned
D
Fully, we can price and charge for outcomes, not just access
Is your AI pricing a genuine redesign, or an AI tier layered on the old model?
*
A
It's an AI tier on the old model, and we know it
B
Mostly a layer, with some redesign
C
Mostly a redesign, with some legacy
D
A genuine ground-up redesign of the value metric
Sales Strategy and Enablement
How have you changed what your sellers actually do and say for the agentic era?
*
A
No change to sales strategy or enablement
B
Updated some talk tracks and materials, motion unchanged
C
Retraining the team around outcome-selling and new buyer conversations
D
Fully re-enabled: sellers lead with outcomes and run the value conversation without reference material
Can your sales team credibly sell the value of your product when an agent, not a human, does the work?
*
A
No, they still sell features and seats
B
Partially, some can, most can't
C
Mostly, the capability is broadly there
D
Yes, the whole team sells outcomes and value fluently
When a customer asks why should I pay for this if the AI does the work, can your average rep answer well?
*
A
No, that question would stall most of our reps
B
Some could, many couldn't
C
Most could handle it
D
Yes, our reps are built to answer exactly that
Compensation
What have you done to your sales comp plan for the agentic era?
*
A
Nothing, the plan is unchanged
B
Minor tweaks, same fundamental structure
C
Redesigning it around consumption, expansion, and value realised
D
Rebuilt: comp rewards agent-driven revenue, consumption, expansion, and outcomes, not seats and logos
How well does your comp plan reward the behaviour your AI strategy actually needs?
*
A
It rewards the opposite, still paying for seats and logos the market is shedding
B
Weak alignment, mostly legacy incentives
C
Reasonable alignment, some new-model incentives in place
D
Strong alignment, comp and strategy pull in the same direction
Is your comp plan currently pulling your team toward your AI strategy, or against it?
*
A
Against it, we pay for exactly the behaviour we're trying to move away from
B
Neutral at best, it doesn't help
C
Broadly with it
D
Fully aligned, comp actively drives the new strategy
Metering and Entitlement
Can you actually measure what customers consume and value?
*
A
No, we have no consumption or usage visibility
B
Basic usage data, but not tied to value or billing
C
Good metering in place, partially wired to entitlement and billing
D
Full metering: we track consumption, entitlement, and value in real time and can act on it
How ready is your metering to support usage or outcome-based pricing?
*
A
Not at all, we couldn't bill on usage if we wanted to
B
Early, significant gaps
C
Mostly there, some manual work
D
Fully capable of metering and billing consumption and outcomes
If you decided to move to outcome-based pricing tomorrow, could your systems even measure the outcome?
*
A
No, we're blind to the outcome
B
We'd struggle, lots of manual effort
C
Mostly, with some work
D
Yes, we can measure and bill on outcomes today
Customer Success and Adoption
What is CS actually measured and structured to do today?
*
A
Manage renewals and relationships, no value-realisation mandate
B
Track adoption loosely, renewal is the real metric
C
Driving measurable adoption and value, partially instrumented
D
CS owns value realisation, measured on it, and structured to drive it
How well can CS prove the value your product delivers to a customer?
*
A
It can't, value is asserted, not measured
B
Weakly, anecdotal evidence only
C
Reasonably, some hard value data
D
Fully, CS can show quantified value and use it in renewals and expansion
At renewal, can CS show the customer hard proof of value delivered, or does it come down to relationship and hope?
*
A
Relationship and hope, we can't prove value
B
Mostly relationship, thin proof
C
Mostly proof, some relationship
D
Hard, quantified proof of value every time
Revenue Architecture and Financial Management
What has finance done to prepare the back end for agentic-era revenue?
*
A
Nothing, the financial model still assumes fixed subscription revenue
B
Started discussions, no structural change yet
C
Actively reworking rev-rec, forecasting, and margin models
D
Fully rebuilt: rev-rec, forecasting, billing, and unit economics all handle consumption and outcome revenue
How ready is your financial architecture for variable, consumption or outcome-based revenue?
*
A
Not ready, rev-rec, forecasting, and billing all assume fixed subscriptions
B
Early, one or two areas started
C
Mostly ready, some gaps remain
D
Fully ready across recognition, forecasting, billing, and margin
Every unit of agent usage carries a real compute cost. Have you re-modelled your margins for that, or are you still assuming near-zero marginal cost?
*
A
We haven't re-modelled margin at all, still assuming SaaS economics
B
We know it's a problem but haven't quantified it
C
Partially modelled, some visibility
D
Fully re-modelled, we know our per-unit margin under AI delivery
Commercial Systems and Data Infrastructure
Can your commercial tech stack actually support the new model?
*
A
No, our CRM, CPQ, and billing are hard-wired for fixed subscriptions
B
Some capability, heavy manual workarounds
C
Mostly capable, some gaps
D
Fully capable: systems support new pricing, metering, billing, and reporting end to end
How well does your data infrastructure give you a single, trusted view of consumption, value, and revenue?
*
A
No single view, different teams carry different numbers
B
Fragmented, lots of reconciliation
C
Mostly unified, some gaps
D
Fully unified, one trusted view across the commercial model
If you rebuilt your commercial model tomorrow, would your systems let you run it, or would the tooling block you?
*
A
The systems would block us, we're constrained by the stack
B
Significant friction, but not a full block
C
Minor friction
D
No, our systems are ready to run a new model today
What's the single hardest part of adapting your commercial model to the agentic era?
Want the full findings first, benchmarked against your peers across all nine layers? Add your email.
Thank you. When the full findings publish, everyone who took part gets them first, benchmarked across all nine layers, so you'll see exactly where you stand against your peers. FR Advisory
Submit my responses,
