Overpromising does not always involve exaggerated claims or an intention to mislead. Sometimes, it starts with getting caught up in the moment.
I recall accompanying a client to a meeting with a large enterprise that had expressed serious interest in the startup’s technology solution. The demonstration went well. The prospective customer recognized the potential value, and the conversation moved toward implementation.
When the customer asked whether the solution could be delivered within 90 days, my client said that the timeline was achievable. By all accounts, it was a successful meeting.
Then, we got to the parking lot. As we walked toward the rental car, my client told me it would take six months to deliver the solution. They told the prospect it could be ready in 90 days. Those two timelines are very different.
I advised my client to correct the commitment immediately. Leaving that expectation uncorrected could create complications later and place unnecessary strain on an otherwise promising business relationship.
What struck me was how easily that discrepancy had entered the conversation. A positive sales meeting had created momentum, and the desire to maintain it had apparently taken precedence over reality.
I cannot speak to the ultimate outcome of that particular commitment. But the situation illustrates a problem I have encountered in different forms throughout my career: the commercial promise and the operational reality are not always aligned. What begins as an overly optimistic commitment can have significant consequences for both parties.
The price of overpromising
For the vendor, an unrealistic commitment can carry a high price. Engineering teams may need to redirect resources, undertake unplanned development or delay work for other customers. A contract that initially appeared profitable can become considerably less so once those costs are taken into account.
The customer, meanwhile, is making decisions based on what the vendor has promised. Enterprise buyers allocate budgets, coordinate internal teams and schedule related work around expected delivery dates. When those expectations are not met, the executive who recommended the purchase may have to explain the disruption to colleagues and senior leadership. Even if the project is eventually completed, the experience may undermine confidence in the vendor and affect future business.
A question of information and accountability
Sometimes the gap begins within the business itself. Sales and product teams may have different understandings of a solution’s capabilities, particularly when the technology is evolving quickly. A feature may work well in a demonstration but still require substantial work before it can operate in a customer’s environment. Without clear internal guidance, something still being tested can be presented as ready to use.
The way a company measures success matters, too. Sales is expected to bring in new business, while technical staff must make sure the product works as promised. Both priorities are legitimate, but problems arise when the drive to secure a contract overrides a realistic assessment of what fulfilling it will require.
Responsibility cannot rest solely with the person making the promise. When an ambitious request comes in, leadership needs to know who can assess it, who can authorize an exception and whose judgment will carry weight if commercial ambitions and technical realities do not align.
Making commitments the company can support
Good commercial judgment does not mean turning away difficult opportunities. It means being clear about what is available today, what would require customization and what remains on the product roadmap. Everyone representing the business to prospective customers needs to understand those distinctions.
There may be sound reasons to develop a new feature or accelerate work for a particularly important customer. A significant contract might justify additional resources or a change in priorities. But those decisions should be made with an understanding of the likely costs and the effects on existing projects, before a delivery date or capability is promised.
This is especially important for companies entering new markets. Without an established track record or strong customer references, prospective buyers have fewer ways to judge reliability. An early misstep can shape perceptions that take much longer to correct.
The value of a promise kept
I have never believed that successful business development requires saying yes to every opportunity. Sometimes the more responsible response is to explain what cannot yet be done, even when that answer makes a negotiation more difficult.
It may even cost a sale. But it gives the customer the information needed to make an informed decision and allows both parties to proceed with a clearer understanding of what is possible.
Customers understand that products evolve and new capabilities take time to develop. What they should not have to discover after signing a contract is that something presented as available was still an aspiration.
Winning a contract is only one measure of commercial success. The longer-term value of the relationship depends on whether the company fulfills the commitments that made the agreement possible.