CPQ success starts in the boardroom.
A configurator gets framed as an IT project. Or a sales project. Sometimes an engineering project. But rarely as what it actually is: a strategic decision about which part of your product becomes standard, and which part deliberately stays custom.
And that decision can't be made by sales alone. Nor by engineering alone.
Sales, understandably, wants to be able to deliver as much of what the customer asks for as possible. Engineering, understandably, wants to solve every exception properly.
Both entirely logical from their own role. But the result is that nobody, from within that role, asks the question: what do we actually want to achieve here as a company?
That question belongs with leadership.
Because only once the management team actively steers towards selling standard solutions — and makes that visible to sales — will sales actually follow that behaviour. As long as success is mainly measured by revenue and by "being able to say yes to the customer," every exception remains attractive to sell.
"A configurator isn't just a technical project. It's an opportunity for leadership to set a clear direction."
The companies where I see CPQ genuinely making an impact are, without exception, companies where that steering is actually in place. Not as a restriction, but as direction. That gives sales something to hold onto, gives engineering peace of mind, and gives the customer exactly what they're often looking for most: speed, quality, and certainty.
So a configurator isn't just a technical project. It's an opportunity for leadership to set a clear direction — and to see that direction reflected directly in shorter lead times and higher margins.
How is the direction for standardisation determined in your organisation: is it a deliberate choice made by leadership, or does it grow organically out of sales and engineering?