What if I told you that a company’s biggest tech stack investment decision is often rushed and packed with biases?

The unfortunate truth is that CRMs are rarely chosen based on real fit. And once an ill-fitting CRM is implemented, businesses quickly pay the price. When the wrong one is in place, the cost extends far beyond the subscription. You’ll feel it in low adoption, unexpected implementation hurdles, and unreliable pipeline data. Bit by bit, these issues erode the ROI you hoped for, severely reducing the positive impact a CRM should have for your team.

Most executives agree that choosing new software is a high-stakes game. Make a winning choice and you’re a hero; pick a dud and it will follow you throughout your tenure in an organization. That’s why many people simply select the least risky option. The head of sales will say, “Let’s just go with Salesforce,” despite a thorough evaluation of a variety of options that are right-sized. Or worse, the decision gets made in isolation—maybe by the CEO—because the board prefers Microsoft and “that’s what all their portfolio companies use.” I’ve been through all of these situations and more. No matter the scenario, the pattern is familiar: rushed decisions, internal biases, and, too often, the wrong CRM chosen for the wrong reasons.

New research reveals how bias leads mid-market teams to the wrong CRMs

Some decisions shouldn’t be rushed, and choosing your CRM is one of them. It’s not just another tool—it’s a major investment in your tech stack that impacts your entire go-to-market (GTM) team. In many ways, it’s the foundation for how you generate and retain revenue. Still, despite tighter budgets and growing pressure to improve efficiency, 38% of decision-makers admit they rushed the CRM selection process. That’s just one finding from a recent report by Insightly and Ascend2, based on a survey of nearly 300 GTM professionals. The takeaway is clear: too many mid-market companies end up with CRMs that simply don’t work for them.

So, what’s driving the rush? Whether it’s a lack of time or an oversimplified decision-making process, the result is the same: many mid-market teams aren’t setting themselves up for success. Let’s take a closer look at the common biases that lead executives to cut corners when choosing a CRM.

Bias #1: Exclusively trusting external opinions over your internal experts 

Remember the earlier example where a CEO chose a CRM based solely on a recommendation from their board—without input from the people who will actually use it? That’s a classic example of authority bias. Your board’s perspective is undeniably valuable, but those views should be validated at the ground level to ensure the decision can be operationalized based on the unique needs of your business.

Unfortunately this consultative step is often skipped. While 55% of executives believe their CRM is being used effectively, only 27% of non-executives agree. That disconnect speaks volumes about how decisions made in isolation can miss the mark when it comes to actual day-to-day usage.

Bias #2: Choosing “safe” options to avoid risk 

Another common pattern is the tendency to stick with what seems like the safe choice. The idea that “no one ever gets fired for choosing Salesforce” is a well-known saying—and a prime example of status quo bias and loss aversion in action. That’s probably why 39% of mid-market companies with 50–100 employees are using Salesforce, and 26% are using Microsoft.

According to The Decision Lab, status quo bias can lead to “making important decisions without sound reasoning,” such as defaulting to popular opinions or resisting changes that might actually be beneficial. We can see this bias clearly in the data: 32% of decision-makers prioritized vendor reputation over direct fit when choosing their CRM.

Read More: SalesTechStar Interview with Travis Rehl, CTO and Head of Product at Innovative Solutions

Bias #3: Relying on familiarity over a real evaluation 

Executives are twice as likely as non-executives to choose a CRM simply because they’ve used it before (26% vs 13%). This is familiarity bias and, while it’s understandable, it can create a significant blind spot.

There’s a certain comfort in choosing a tool you already know, like ordering the same meal at a restaurant because you know what to expect. That comfort is exactly what can keep companies from discovering options that might be easier to implement or deliver more value. Plus, new contenders are coming into the market at light speed; familiarity bias keeps businesses from getting the best and most current tech stack. It’s a vicious cycle that keeps legacy enterprise CRMs in place—not because they’re the best option, but because they’re the devil you know.

Bias #4: Defaulting to big brands based on name recognition 

If someone asked you to name a CRM off the top of your head, odds are you’d say Salesforce or HubSpot. That’s the halo effect in action—where the visibility and perceived credibility of a brand influences our assumptions about quality or fit.

When it comes to big investments like this, I think there’s a troubling perception out there that the bigger the brand, the smaller the risk. That’s likely why 25% of decision-makers chose their CRM because it was a well-known brand. In reality, though, name recognition doesn’t guarantee a CRM will be the right match—especially for mid-market teams with different needs and resource constraints. The CRM failure rate ranges from between 18% to 69%, according to the Harvard Business Review. With just some easy math, it’s plain to see the most popular CRMs are likely driving the majority of these failures.

The hidden cost of biased CRM decisions 

As we’ve seen, mid-market companies often gravitate toward enterprise-level CRMs. But ironically, cost is the most common complaint among mid-market teams about their current CRM. Let’s talk about why that is.

Enterprise solutions come with a bigger price tag, so if your team struggles to implement or adopt the tool, it may never deliver real ROI. Our research shows that 40% of decision-makers prioritized feature volume over usability, which can further hinder adoption. This lack of adoption is likely why Salesforce implementation consultants are everywhere—and I can guarantee that many mid-market companies don’t factor engagements like this into the total cost of ownership of their CRM.

When the CRM actually fits your business, adoption improves. Among respondents who reported full adoption, 86% said their CRM was the right size for their team—compared to just 62% of those with lower adoption. That’s a significant gap.

These “one size fits many” tools may succeed because they bring a sense of familiarity or are well-known, but that popularly doesn’t always reflect real fit. Many mid-market companies report unnecessary complexity, hidden implementation costs, and ongoing struggles with adoption. And those issues are often rooted in a simple truth: the CRM was never the right fit to begin with.

Read More: Why Sales and Marketing Leaders Should Care About Alignment