Key Takeaways
- Theorem’s research found that manual errors and disconnected workflows in the pre-sales phase are slowing deal execution and introducing major risk into advertising revenue operations.
- The findings suggest that automation in pricing, approvals and data management can improve close rates, speed execution and create more consistent revenue outcomes.
New research from Theorem, a digital marketing solutions provider, shows that 77% of organizations experience manual errors in pre-sales that disrupt advertising revenue execution, revealing a critical and often overlooked risk in the deal process.
While most organizations believe their current ad sales and pre-sales tools are effective, the data shows persistent manual friction, errors and delays across the deal process.
The research points to pre-sales as a pivotal stage where pricing, approvals and deal structure are set, directly impacting how quickly deals close and how reliably they are executed. Notably, 90% of professionals spend more than five hours per week on manual pre-sales tasks, with 44% spending over ten hours.
Theorem’s Jay Kulkarni On the Importance of Pre-Sale Structure
According to Jay Kulkarni, Founder and CEO at Theorem, organizations are still closing deals, which makes these inefficiencies easy to overlook
“However, as volume and complexity grow, what once felt manageable starts to erode margin, slow growth and introduce risk at scale,” said Kulkarni in a statement. “Ultimately, this research proves that the pre-sales phase is where revenue integrity is established, and it requires the same level of structure and control as any other revenue driving function.”
What is The Friction Slowing Down Ad Sales
Pre-sales processes are slowing down advertising revenue. As deal complexity increases, teams are spending more time coordinating pricing, proposals, approvals and data across disconnected systems, leading to delays, inconsistencies and rework before deals are finalized.
The data shows a clear disconnect—while 92% of organizations believe their tools are efficient, a significant share of professionals are still spending substantial time on manual pre-sales work. Pricing validation, proposal revisions and approval routing remain the biggest points of friction, along with fragmented data across systems, which slow deal cycles and introducing execution inconsistencies. Other key findings Include:
- 77% report manual errors that slow down or derail work, with nearly half saying this occurs frequently.
- 32% cite waiting on client approvals as the leading cause of delays, followed by internal system or data issues (22%) and too many stakeholders in the review process (21%).
- 52% report limited integration between ad sales and operations systems, contributing to inefficiencies across the workflow.
- 61% say they would spend more time on strategy and client relationships with more automated pre-sales processes, while 47% believe deals would close faster.
Stalled deals are driven more by process design than individual performance, with waiting on inputs, disconnected systems and layered approvals emerging as the primary causes of delay.
Fixing What Slows Deals Down
Organizations are starting to address these gaps by improving how pre-sales workflows connect across systems and teams. The focus is on reducing manual steps, improving data accuracy and speeding up approvals.
This change is already showing results as 86% of organizations report an increase in closed deals after introducing pre-sales automation, along with gains in speed and accuracy. Adoption remains uneven, with some teams citing integration challenges, data concerns and budget barriers. As pressure on advertising revenue grows, pre-sales is becoming a more visible factor in deal performance, driving faster execution and more consistent outcomes.
“Pre-sales processes have historically been treated as coordination work, but it plays a much larger role in revenue outcomes,” said Michele Bavitz, Vice President of Growth at Theorem. “When pricing, approvals and data are not governed early in the process, teams absorb that complexity later through delays, rework and lost efficiency. This is where revenue performance begins to take shape.”
