B2B Buyer Behaviour: What the Research Shows

Every figure in this article is survey research published by a vendor, analyst firm, or consultancy. That does not make the numbers wrong, but it bounds what they can prove: they describe what respondents said, in a particular sample, at a particular time. The limitations section near the end applies to everything above it.

When buyers first talk to sellers

6sense's 2025 Buyer Experience Report, built on nearly 4,000 survey responses from buyers with recent purchases of $25,000 or more, found the point of first seller contact moved from about 69% of the way through the buying journey in 2024 to 61% in 2025, roughly six to seven weeks earlier. The same research reports that the vendor leading at the selection phase went on to win 77% of the time, down from 83% in prior years, and a companion finding puts the first-contacted vendor's win share at roughly four deals in five.

Read carefully, this is a correlation about preference, not proof that early contact causes wins. 6sense's own interpretation is that first contact tends to reflect a preference the buyer has already formed. The practical implication is about where preferences form: in the research phase, before a rep is invited in. It does not establish that any particular early-outreach tactic changes the outcome.

What buyers say they want from suppliers

Gartner's survey of 632 B2B buyers, fielded in August and September 2024, found 61% preferred an overall rep-free buying experience, 73% actively avoided suppliers that sent irrelevant outreach, and 69% encountered inconsistencies between the information on a supplier's website and what its sellers told them. A follow-up Gartner survey of 646 buyers a year later put the rep-free preference at 67%, which suggests the direction of travel, though the two samples differ.

Taken together with the sales enablement evidence, the self-service story is more balanced than "buyers hate reps": buyers research independently, punish irrelevant contact, and notice when the website and the seller disagree. Consistency between marketing and sales materials is the concrete, checkable item in that list, and it is entirely within a supplier's control.

Buying groups and consensus

The same 632-buyer sample described buying groups of five to 16 people across as many as four functions, with 74% of buyer teams showing unhealthy conflict during the decision, and groups that reached consensus were 2.5 times more likely to describe their deal as high-quality. Group size varies by purchase, and consensus correlating with deal quality does not show which causes which.

The defensible practical response is the one covered in our account-based selling playbook: map the group, work more than one thread, and give a champion material their colleagues can evaluate without the rep in the room. Whether that improves outcomes on your pipeline is testable; the survey alone does not settle it.

How technology buyers evaluate products

TrustRadius's 2024 B2B Buying Disconnect study surveyed 2,164 technology buyers and 243 vendors in March and April 2024. Note the scope: technology buyers, not B2B buyers universally. Its strongest findings favour hands-on evaluation: among buyers who used them, free trials were rated most influential by 74%, with product demos and prior product experience each at 71%.

The often-repeated claim that buyers "trust vendor content least" is not what this study shows. Its disconnect is subtler: vendors misjudged what finally drove selection. 64% of vendors believed compelling demos drive wins, while buyers' most common top reason for choosing a product was that it met their needs at the best price. The supported takeaway is to invest in genuine try-before-you-buy paths, not that vendor content is worthless.

Willingness to buy remotely

McKinsey's omnichannel research, published in December 2021, found 35% of B2B decision makers saying they were willing to spend $500,000 or more in a single transaction through remote or self-service channels, up from 27% in February of that year. Two qualifiers matter: this is stated willingness, not observed purchasing, and the research is now several years old. It supports offering credible remote and self-service purchase paths for large deals. The study does not compare meeting tools or document formats.

Methodology and limitations

Four limits apply across everything above. First, all of it is self-reported survey data, which captures stated preference and recollection, not independently observed behaviour. Second, the producers are vendors, analyst firms, and a consultancy whose businesses benefit from the conclusions, which does not falsify the findings but justifies scepticism at the margins. Third, samples differ: 6sense surveyed buyers globally above a spend floor, Gartner surveyed hundreds of B2B buyers per wave, TrustRadius surveyed technology buyers specifically, and McKinsey's field dates are from 2021, so the figures are not comparable across studies. Fourth, the numbers move: 6sense's first-contact point shifted meaningfully in one year, and Gartner's rep-free share changed between waves. Re-check the source before repeating any figure from this page.

What to test on your own pipeline

Three editorial experiments follow from the evidence, and all three are SalesTap suggestions rather than validated plays. First, run the consistency audit the Gartner finding invites: compare your website's claims with your current deck and sequences, and fix mismatches before spending on more outreach. Second, build one piece of consensus-support material (an internal FAQ or business case template a champion can circulate) and test it with random assignment where deal flow allows; a matched comparison is the fallback and can still leave confounding. Third, if a trial or sandbox is feasible for your product, randomly assign it to half of comparable evaluations. Pick one binary primary outcome, such as progression past a defined stage within the observation window, and size the test with an appropriate prospective two-proportion power calculation; track time to decision and win rate as secondary outcomes, and give none of it the weight of shallow signals like opens.

The takeaway

• Preferences form before the first call. 6sense's data puts first seller contact around 61% of the way through the journey, with the early leader usually winning; treat the research phase as the competition, not the warm-up.
• Self-service preference and consistency failures are the supported story. Gartner's surveyed buyers preferred rep-free experiences, avoided irrelevant outreach, and noticed website-versus-seller contradictions; the fixable item is consistency.
• Quote survey findings as survey findings. Every number here is self-reported, sample-bound, and time-stamped; re-check sources before repeating them, and test implications on your own pipeline before spending against them.

Source check: 1 August 2026. All figures were checked against the linked 6sense, Gartner, TrustRadius, and McKinsey pages. The suggested experiments are SalesTap editorial guidance, not measured findings.