B2B Category Jail: The 4 Day Escape Plan

Commoditized categories and B2B category design

Commoditized categories happen when buyers stop seeing meaningful differences between vendors. To them, every RevOps agency, IT provider, or marketing consultancy looks like a slightly tweaked version of the same thing. When that happens, three patterns show up fast: buyers default to price comparisons, margins shrink as discounting becomes the path of least resistance, and pipeline fills with low-intent leads who treat the business like a quote machine.

If that feels familiar, I do not treat it as a personal failure or a “sales team problem” by default. I treat it as a signal that the current story and market position no longer protect the business - especially as buyer research behavior shifts and skepticism rises (see Research from 6sense).

Here is a quick diagnostic I use to spot commoditization in B2B services:

• Most sales calls start with some version of “How much does this cost?”
• Buyers say “So you are kind of like X, right?” and name a competitor I do not consider a true peer
• My proposals look interchangeable with others in the category
• Inbound is driven by broad, generic terms and low-intent directories rather than problem-specific demand
• Winning often means “sharpening the pencil” instead of raising the stakes of the problem

Underneath is a spiral: price pressure pushes me to reduce depth in delivery or marketing; that weakens differentiation; weaker differentiation attracts weaker demand; and weaker demand forces more discounting. If I want to stop guessing and quantify whether I am attracting intent or just volume, I use simple pipeline proxies like the ones in Measuring Lead Quality: Fast Proxy Metrics That Predict Revenue.

B2B category design is how I break that spiral. Instead of competing on feature grids or vague “better service” claims, I redefine the problem I solve and the game I am in. Done well, category design helps me regain pricing power, pull in more right-fit buyers, and reduce friction in the sales cycle because the story feels both obvious and urgent. If you want the foundational thinking behind this discipline, Play Bigger is still the clearest starting point.

Excess share of voice in commoditized markets

“Share of voice” can sound like jargon, but I use it as a simple idea: it is the share of market attention my brand earns compared with other players. When my visibility and recall outpace my current market share, I am usually in a position to grow - because I am showing up in the buyer’s head more often than my current size would suggest.

In commoditized categories, it matters more, not less. If everyone sounds similar, the brand that gets seen and remembered more often becomes the default choice. This is where B2B category design and excess share of voice meet: I create a sharper story, then I make sure the market hears that story more than it hears anyone else’s.

To keep it practical, I approximate share of voice using indicators I can observe in public and owned channels:

• Visibility for priority category and problem phrases (impressions and rankings, not just clicks)
• Growth in branded search interest over time (a useful input alongside Brand search in B2B: what it measures and what it does not)
• Share of page-one presence for core category and problem queries
• Mentions in industry newsletters, podcasts, and earned media
• Presence in AI-generated answer surfaces for the topics I want to own

A lot of this sits on search and discovery surfaces - classic results pages and newer AI answer experiences. When my category name, point of view, and comparisons occupy more real estate where buyers research, perceived share of voice rises.

I do not need flashy spend to improve this. I need consistent distribution of a distinctive point of view. That typically means repeating the category narrative across the website architecture, comparison framing, leadership publishing, and creative hooks that make the story easier to recall. I track progress by watching whether more sales conversations, inbound inquiries, and direct or organic visits reflect the category language - because being louder without being clearer just wastes attention.

Category design for B2B service companies

Category design is a strategy where I choose the game I want to win instead of letting the market choose it for me. I name a problem, frame a new solution type, and claim that space with language buyers can repeat.

I think about the shift from “sales consulting” to “RevOps agency,” or from “marketing consultant” to “fractional CMO.” Those phrases do more than sound current. They signal a different problem, a different engagement model, and usually a different willingness to pay.

When category design is working in a B2B services context, I tend to see the same business symptoms: fewer RFP cattle calls and more invited conversations, inbound leads that already accept the model and language, and shorter cycles because buyers have a mental slot for what the company is.

What it is not: a tagline refresh; “we added AI” bolted onto the same generic service; or a long thought-leadership push that never changes how the business sells or delivers. Real category design reaches into productized services, sales conversations, pricing logic, and even hiring.

A simple example helps. A 35-person “full-service marketing agency” serving B2B software companies struggled with squeezed retainers and late-stage discounting. After a focused category sprint, they repositioned as “pipeline assurance partners for founder-led sales teams.” That shift came with a new category label, a tighter ideal customer profile, and a claim tied to a specific revenue milestone and opportunity-stage outcomes. Their craft did not change overnight; their framing, sales motion, and discoverability did - and margin and win rate followed.

Category design vs positioning vs branding

These three get mashed together constantly, and that is how time and budget get burned. I separate them by job-to-be-done.

Category design asks: what game am I creating or naming so I can win? Positioning asks: within that game, why should a specific buyer pick me? Branding asks: how do I look, sound, and feel so people remember and trust me?

I think of them as a stack:

When I am hearing “So you are like X” from buyers and my language does not fit what I actually do, it is usually category design. When the category is clear but buyers do not see why I am different, it is positioning. When people understand the offer but do not remember or trust the brand, it is branding.

This is also where I draw a line between category issues and pure sales execution issues. If my best reps all struggle in similar ways - even with a solid playbook - it is often category or positioning. Sales execution problems usually show up as uneven rep performance. Category jail shows up as consistent soft close rates, heavy discounting, and “you sound like everyone else” regardless of who runs the call.

Category jail

Category jail is what happens when the market files me under a crowded, generic label and leaves me there. I might be ten times better; it will not matter if buyers have no mental space for the difference. If you want a deeper symptom list, Category Jail and Other Symptoms a Company Needs Category Design is a solid reference point.

The costs stack up quietly: discounting becomes normal, acquisition costs creep up because I need more volume to hit targets, close rates drop even when objections feel vague, and senior talent gets tired of selling “same as” work. (If CAC is trending the wrong way, I also look at The economics of B2B CAC: what actually drives it up or down to separate signal from panic.)

Operationally, I feel category jail when late-stage prospects still ask “How are you different from X?”, when the team can only chase generic keywords because nobody agrees on a sharper target, when partners cannot describe the company in one sentence, and when sales decks over-index on feature lists instead of problem framing.

If I want a rough self-score, I rate how often the team gets forced into direct price and feature comparisons with near-identical vendors. Low frequency suggests the story is protecting the business. Mid frequency suggests partial jail (often fixable with focused work). High frequency suggests deep jail - where a surface-level copy refresh will not move the needle.

Why traditional differentiation fails

Most B2B services fall into the “-er” trap: faster, better, cheaper, smarter. That leads to feature matrices and claims like “better service” or “deeper expertise.” In commoditized categories, this fails because processes get copied, “better” is hard to prove before delivery, and buyers will not invest energy decoding subtle nuance across ten similar vendors.

The alternative is category-level differentiation anchored in a clear point of view. I define a specific problem, name an enemy, show a new way, and then back it with proof. When deals still stall, it is often because the buyer cannot connect the dots between the problem, the risk of doing nothing, and the decision path - which is exactly the “no decision” gap described in Why B2B deals stall: the information gaps that trigger no decision.

Here is the difference in feel:

False differentiation: “I am a full-service RevOps agency that integrates systems to drive revenue growth, with better service and faster implementation.”

Category POV shift: “Most B2B teams lose deals they never see because revenue data is scattered. I treat RevOps as a single source of revenue truth for founder-led teams - so the pipeline leaks become visible, and the fixes happen before hiring more reps or piling on more tools.”

The second version changes what the buyer thinks the decision is even about. That is category design on the ground: not just a label, but a story that re-frames the problem.

Category sprint

I do not need a year-long strategy project to get started. Many B2B service companies can run a tight four-day category sprint that fits around normal operations. What matters is who is in the room and what comes out the other side.

At minimum, I include the founder or CEO, sales leadership, delivery or operations, and marketing. I also bring real inputs - call recordings, win-loss notes, and a small set of conversations with ideal customers - so the work is grounded in buyer language rather than internal opinions. If marketing runs this solo, it usually fails, because category design touches pricing, packaging, and sales behavior. (If I am planning any major site or messaging changes, I pressure-test first using The B2B Messaging Test: How to Validate Positioning Before a Redesign.)

Brutal team clarity

Day one is where I force honesty: who I serve best, who I do not want, who I truly compete with, and what keeps buyers stuck in the old way. I also get explicit about what I refuse to compete on going forward and which deals I should have walked away from sooner.

The deliverable is a one-page clarity memo: primary ICP, no-go clients, real competitive set, and the core problem the business solves. Disagreements are normal; I use evidence from recent deals first. If the evidence does not resolve it, I pick a direction and commit to testing. Indecision costs more than an imperfect first draft.

Writing the category POV

Days two and three are for shaping the category POV. The structure I find most usable is: what changed in the market (context), what current solutions miss (missing), and how the approach addresses that gap (innovation). From there, I define a small set of narrative pillars that future content and sales conversations can hang on.

Before treating it as final, I pressure test draft language with a handful of buyers who match the ICP. I look for what feels obvious, what feels new but still clear, and which phrases they naturally repeat back. That echoed language is often the most valuable output because it becomes the backbone of site copy, search targets, and sales openers.

By the end of day three, I want a short narrative that can be spoken in a few minutes, several homepage headline options, a sales-call opener, and an internal “why now / why change / why this approach” document (not a public FAQ, but a tool for consistency).

Word-by-word consensus

Day four looks slow but is where I protect the business from future drift. I go line by line through the POV, headlines, and key claims to confirm three things: sales can say it with a straight face, delivery can back it up, and leadership is willing to repeat it for long enough to matter.

This is also where I decide what not to do yet. If the category POV is not set, I avoid amplifying the old story with broad campaigns or major redesign work that locks in messaging I am about to change. I would rather stabilize the narrative first, then scale distribution behind something that actually helps me escape commoditization.

Category creation formula

Not every company should try to create a brand-new category. Sometimes it is smarter to compete inside an existing one with sharper positioning. I use a simple test: context + missing + innovation.

Context is the market condition that makes the idea plausible. Missing is the gap the existing category ignores - ideally a problem buyers feel but struggle to name. Innovation is the different way I solve that missing piece through model, process, or technology. When all three line up, category creation becomes realistic. When they do not, I am usually better off tightening positioning within a known category.

This is where “adjacent possible” thinking is useful: the sweet spot sits just beyond what buyers are used to, but not so far that it feels like science fiction. If the POV requires buyers to overhaul how they are measured or paid, adoption is likely to be slow. If it feels like a natural next step from how they already think, sales cycles tend to move faster.

A quick gut-check I use before pushing hard on category creation: can I describe what I do without sounding like dozens of others; do I have enough runway to educate the market; does my approach make the old way feel outdated for the right buyer; can leadership commit to one story for a meaningful window; and am I willing to adjust offers, pricing, and who I sell to - not just the copy. If you want a crisp distinction between being first and truly creating the category, this Harvard Business Review research is helpful.

Bringing my category to market

A strong POV on a slide deck is not enough. The market needs repeated exposure across channels. I aim less for a “big bang” and more for a disciplined drumbeat with a few louder peaks.

An internal category evangelist helps - often that is me as the CEO or founder, or a senior leader with credibility. The job is to write, speak, and present using the same language again and again. Repetition is not a flaw; it is how buyers learn what to associate the company with.

This also changes content strategy. Instead of generic tips, I shift toward POV-led assets that name the problem and enemy concretely, contrast the old way with the new way, and use real stories to make the new way feel practical. Creativity matters here - not for novelty, but because distinct hooks help the narrative stick in a crowded feed.

Common mistakes that stall category efforts:

• The “enemy” stays vague, so the story has no tension
• Claims do not have matching proof, so sales avoids the new language
• Sales is not aligned, so reps revert to old decks and old comparisons
• Distribution is weak, so the POV stays trapped in one place
• Messaging drifts by channel, so buyers hear inconsistent versions

If I want deeper frameworks, examples, and case studies on operationalizing category design, Category Design Advisors is a useful rabbit hole - especially for how narrative, packaging, and go-to-market decisions reinforce each other.

Category leadership

When category design works - and I keep supporting it with share of voice - the feel of the business changes. Buyers start reflecting my language back on calls. I spend more time disqualifying poor fit than chasing any interest. Price objections soften because the comparison shifts from “vendor rates” to “the cost of the problem.” Sales cycles tighten because the POV pre-educates buyers before the first conversation. Hiring often gets easier because the company feels like it stands for something specific.

This is also how I frame it to a board: category decisions are not “just marketing.” They affect pricing power, sales motion, packaging, hiring, and the investor narrative itself. If commoditization is showing up as margin pressure, rising acquisition costs, and soft close rates, category work becomes a business lever - not a creative exercise.

I also do not wait a year to judge whether it is working. Early directional signals often show up within 60-90 days as I hear different reactions on calls and see shifts in engagement and discoverability. Hard revenue impact commonly shows up over two to four quarters, especially in complex sales.

To keep measurement grounded, I track a small set of monthly indicators:

• Branded and category-related search interest trends
• Share of page-one presence for category and problem phrases
• Direct and organic pipeline contribution (not just traffic)
• Conversion rates through key stages, alongside average discounting and deal size

Those metrics help me see whether the market is starting to respond differently - so I can adjust the narrative, proof, and distribution before I waste quarters pushing a story that does not land.