An enterprise software company needed to land named accounts, not spray leads. DevCommX ran an ABM motion — tight lists, multi-threaded outreach, and coordinated plays into each account.
Customer Intro
An enterprise software company sold six-figure deals into large organisations — the kind of deals where no single person can say yes. A buying committee of five, eight, sometimes a dozen people across security, IT, finance, and the business line makes the decision together. For a motion like that, volume-based outbound is simply the wrong tool. Blasting a thousand contacts to find a lone “interested” reply doesn’t move a committee, and it treats a strategic named account like a lead to be processed. They needed to penetrate a defined set of accounts and reach multiple stakeholders inside each one.
Problem/Goal
Their existing outbound worked against them at enterprise scale:
- Single-threaded outreach — one contact per account meant the whole deal stalled the moment that contact went on holiday, changed roles, or simply went quiet.
- No coordinated committee play — stakeholders were reached (if at all) in isolation, with no narrative connecting them.
- No account-level view — the team tracked leads, not accounts, so nobody could see how engaged a given target account actually was.
The goal was to multi-thread target accounts and move whole committees, not lone champions — and to see engagement at the account level so plays could be timed to real interest.
The DevCommX Solution
DevCommX ran a focused account-based motion built around accounts, not leads.
1. A tight, research-backed account list
We built a deliberately small, research-backed target account list — the accounts genuinely worth a coordinated pursuit — rather than a broad list to spray. Fewer accounts, far deeper on each.
2. Map the buying committee
For each account, we mapped the buying committee: who owns the problem, who signs, who can block, and who influences. That map is what makes multi-threading possible.
3. Multi-threaded, role-specific outreach
We ran coordinated, role-specific outreach to multiple stakeholders in each account — a message to the security lead that spoke to security, one to finance that spoke to cost, all part of one coherent account narrative rather than disconnected cold emails.
4. Account-level signals and escalation
Signals and engagement were tracked per account, so plays escalated as interest grew and the team always knew where each target account stood. The motion follows our signal-led ABM SOP.
Results & Benefits
Multi-threading moved whole committees, not lone champions:
| Metric | Result |
|---|---|
| Stakeholders per account | 3.4 engaged on average |
| Enterprise opportunities | 9 opened in the first quarter |
| Engagement visibility | account-level for sales and marketing |
| Deal resilience | progress held when a champion went quiet |
The resilience point was the quiet win: because multiple stakeholders were engaged, deals kept moving even when any one contact went silent — removing the single-point-of-failure that had killed deals before.
Insight
Enterprise deals are won by committees, so outbound has to be account-based and multi-threaded. Reaching one contact per account leaves the deal one silence away from dead; engaging the committee makes it resilient. The discipline is doing fewer accounts, far more deeply. For how ABM and GTM engineering combine, see ABM + GTM engineering for automated outbound.
Callout Quote
“We stopped chasing single contacts and started moving whole accounts.” — Director of Sales, enterprise software company
Explore ABM agency and GTM engineering, or book a GTM assessment.
Related case studies
Related reading: ABM + GTM engineering for automated outbound and best GTM engineering agencies.
Book a free 30-minute GTM audit. You leave with a prioritised plan either way.