Skip to Main Content

| 6 minute read

Evaluation vs. Discovery: How AI Has Disrupted Commerce Software Buying

AI has compressed software buying, but mostly in the discovery stage. For commerce software evaluations, buyers expect to get hands-on with the product, and see for themselves how it solves their problems.

written by Bryan House

Contrary to popular belief, AI has not made B2B software easier to buy. It has made software easier to find. Yet, evaluation (the stage after the shortlist and before the signature) has become the longest, most contested part of the buying journey. According to G2's 2026 Buyer Behavior Report: The Evaluation Maze, evaluation now consumes roughly 40% of the total buying cycle, more than any other stage.

That’s truly good news if you give buyers a chance to get hands-on with a proof-of-value (PoV) before they buy your product. In fact, I’d argue that the more prospects get to test your commerce software (or any software for that matter) against their own pain points and constraints, the longer your customer relationship will last.

Discovery and Evaluation Aren’t the Same Problem

For most of the last two decades, "shortening the buying journey" meant getting in front of the buyer earlier and staying in front of them longer. AI collapsing the first half of the funnel into something closer to a single query.

  • G2's Answer Economy report found 51% of B2B software buyers now start research with an AI chatbot rather than Google, and 71% rely on chatbots somewhere in the process.
  • Forrester's State of Business Buying, 2026, based on nearly 18,000 global buyers, found 94% used AI during their most recent purchase — and generative AI or conversational search is now the single most-cited meaningful research source, ahead of vendor websites, sales reps, and product experts.
  • G2's Evaluation Maze report says 8 in 10 buyers sourced software recommendations from a tool like ChatGPT or Google AI Mode in the last two years.

All of this data describes a faster shortlist. What happens after the shortlist is where the most interesting part of the story starts, especially for those who excel at solving problems and relationship-building.

The single best way to validate an AI search result is to make good on the promises you’re making with a PoV. The problem is that most vendors’ purchasing processes are built to maximize their own outcomes, not address the customer’s problems to be solved in the evaluation process.

I’ve seen this happen throughout my career, in the form of:

  • Refusing to give customers access to the product
  • Requiring a systems integrator to perform a PoV
  • Sending demo videos instead of providing hands-on access
  • Working with demo data instead of the customer’s own data

All of these plays are about optimizing a vendor’s own sales workflow, with the hope that a solution to the customer’s problem demonstrates itself along the way. Working in open source software at Acquia completely upended my view of this approach. No prospective customer required vendor permission to download Drupal and try it out. They just downloaded the software and tried it. Turns out, that’s how everyone wants to buy software in 2026. While AI is great for compressing the search for options, the PoV is still king for deciding whether a vendor can be trusted to solve a buyer’s problems.

Intelligence vs. Judgement in Software Buying

For any software provider, how you act in the evaluation phase matters most. That’s where human judgement comes into the picture to battle-test what’s required to do the job, how well features align with requirements, and whether the vendor can adapt when they don’t.

Intelligence is pattern-matching against rules — comparing vendors on price, feature checklists, and review scores. AI is very good at intelligence, and it's why discovery collapsed from weeks to minutes or hours.

Judgment is about hands-on access to the solution. There are too many horror stories of deals closed on the back of a slick PowerPoint that ultimately went belly-up because the product didn’t do what the sales team said it did. The scars are real and buying teams don’t make this mistake anymore.

Instead, buyers are now judging whether a vendor's specific claims hold up against their environment, edge cases, and risk tolerance. Judgment requires contact with the product, and interaction with the people who build it. Forrester found more than 60% of business buyers report using some form of trial before purchase — from limited pilots to paid sandbox environments — and that share rises to 78% for purchases over $10 million. And G2's Digital Markets research found 50% of buyers cite a trial as the decisive factor in their purchase decision, compared to 35% influenced primarily by a sales pitch.

What are Buyers Asking Vendors to Prove?

Put the discovery-stage data and the evaluation-stage data side by side and it’s easier to see what buyers expect.

  • A PoV that enables them to see the product with their data, requirements, and integrations.
  • Independent validation, most likely in the form of reference customers, because 69% of buyers explicitly go looking for a human to confirm what an AI tool told them.
  • The solution to a narrow, provable outcome, because buyers evaluating against a specific business problem convert much faster.

Closing the deal requires the buyer to evaluate a commerce product against something close to their real environment, quickly, without a six-month SOW-governed implementation standing between the trial and the truth. Fortunately, that’s where we’re focused here at Elastic Path, and it’s been a key factor in our success.

Get Started with Elastic Path

Schedule a demo to see how Elastic Path delivers unified commerce for leading global brands.