Prove the Fix: Why Showing DIY Beats Pushing Features

CROs and RevOps leaders don't approve software; they approve fixes. If your business case reads like feature theater, Finance will treat it like marketing. The alternative is simple and powerful: prove the fix. Describe the problem in the buyer's world, drill to the root cause, and then show exactly how to fix it in operational language—so clearly that a competent internal team could do it themselves. When you make the DIY path explicit and credible, you earn the right to compare DIY to your approach on time, risk, and value. That's how decisions get made.

Lead with a fix a competent team could implement

Start with the problem as the buyer experiences it, then move immediately to the mechanics of the fix. Write it like an internal Ops plan, not a pitch. Spell out:

• What changes (the specific workflow, artifact, or governance).
• Who changes it (roles and owners, not just "the team").
• When it changes (milestones, entry/exit criteria, and timeboxes).
• What data is required (source systems, fields, and validation rules).
• How progress is proven (the Canary that should move first, and how it's measured in their system of record).

Include early warnings and failure modes. If the fix depends on enablement, define the enablement artifact. If it depends on a shared checklist, show the checklist. This level of specificity is not "giving away the secret." It's how you prove there actually is a fix, and that you understand the work.

Make DIY part of your advantage

Most sellers avoid DIY because they think it undercuts their value. In reality, DIY is your credibility engine. By laying out the do-it-yourself path in detail, you prove that the solution isn't magic and that the cause is truly fixable. Treat the buyer like a peer operator: give them the steps, the sequencing, the data dependencies, the governance model, and the realistic calendar time it would take their org to run the change. If they could reasonably do it themselves, say so. If not, say why—using operational reasons (competing priorities, cross-functional friction, specialized knowledge, integration complexity), not hand-waving.

Counterintuitively, showing DIY differentiates you. You're no longer asking them to buy a promise; you're comparing two credible paths to the same fix. That's a stronger position than any feature tour.

Don't ship noise

If your "plan" is just AI-generated fluff or a rehash of generic best practices, you'll flood the buyer with noise and get tuned out. Keep the material specific to the identified root cause and the buyer's operating environment. Strip out jargon and filler. Show artifacts that people will actually use: a stage exit definition with proof points, a renewal calendar with ownership, a discovery template that forces quantified problem statements, a business-case worksheet with fields that map to their CRM. When in doubt, choose fewer, better artifacts that move the Canary early.

Compare options with real timelines and risk

Once the fix is concrete, compare the three implementation choices on a stable frame—same horizon, same adoption assumptions, same risk definitions, same cost categories:

Do Nothing: Baseline the cost of standing still. If the Canary trend is unfavorable, show compounding effects.

DIY: Use the very plan you just laid out. Include internal coordination, enablement, integration work, and the real calendar time for learning curves and ramp. Be respectful—no straw-man.

Find a Vendor (your approach): Describe your approach in the same operator language. What changes in what order? How do you reduce time to first proof? What risk controls are built in?

For each option, make time and risk as explicit as value:

• Time-to-first-proof: the smallest, fastest test that moves the Canary with their data and their team.
• Time-to-rollout: the sequence of phases after the first proof, with clear gates and owners.
• Risk controls: the design elements that reduce variance—scope limits, instrumentation, governance reviews, fail-fast criteria.

Avoid the temptation to "win" by loosening knobs on your model. Lock the frame first. Then, if you vary assumptions, do it transparently and explain why a given parameter differs across options.

Design a first proof that proves the approach (not the feature)

Pilots fail when they try to show everything or when they only test "does it run." You want a first proof that tests the approach: a bounded change that should move the Canary, with success criteria the buyer defined with you. Keep it small and safe:

• Scope: one team or segment where instrumentation is clean.
• Artifact: the specific workflow, template, or checklist people will actually use.
• Measurement: the Canary inside the system of record, audited weekly.
• Timebox: long enough to see movement, short enough to maintain attention.
• Exit: continue, change scope, or stop—pre-decided and written down.

If the proof works, the next step is obvious: promote the same artifacts and governance to the next team or segment. If it doesn't, the decision is also obvious: adjust or stop. Either outcome is a good outcome because a decision happened quickly and safely.

Write the risks like an operator

Executives don't expect zero risk; they expect known risks with controls. List the most likely failure modes and your control plan:

• Ownership drift: name the exec sponsor and operator owner; set a weekly decision cadence.
• Data gaps: define required fields and the fallback plan if data quality is uneven.
• Change fatigue: keep scope tight; limit "asks" to what moves the Canary.
• Cross-functional blockers: pre-book approvals or create an escalation path with time limits.

Tie each control to the Canary and the Impact model. If a risk materializes, show exactly how you'll know and what you'll do within the timebox.

Package the comparison for Finance

Make it possible for a CFO to decide in minutes. Start with a one-page summary they can forward:

• The Canary and current baseline.
• The fix in one sentence (what changes, for whom, by when).
• The Impact range with the specific assumptions that drive it.
• The three options compared on one frame (time, risk, value, cost).
• The first-proof plan (scope, timebox, owners, success criteria).
• The decision requested (approve the first proof; budget and people time required).

Behind that page, include the operator-level details: the artifacts, the data fields, the measurement plan, and the rollout path if the proof succeeds. The goal is portability: the case should travel inside the buyer's org without you in the room.

What "good" looks like (RevOps checklist)

• The fix is written like an Ops plan, not a pitch.
• The DIY path is explicit and credible—steps, owners, timeline, risks.
• The vendor path uses the same frame and language as DIY.
• Time-to-first-proof and risk controls are front-and-center.
• The comparison holds on a stable frame—horizon, adoption, risk, costs.
• The pilot tests the approach, not just "does it run."
• The decision requested is small, safe, and reversible.

Close: The fastest path to value is the one that proves the fix

When you prove the fix, you change the conversation. You're no longer asking buyers to believe; you're showing them how to decide. By documenting DIY, you make the solution real. By comparing options on time, risk, and value, you make the trade-offs explicit. And by designing a first proof that moves the Canary, you give executives a safe, fast way to say "yes."

That's how RevOps and CROs want to buy. Not a features tour. A credible path to a fix—made obvious by a business case that makes a decision easy.