Why Objection Scripts Fail When It Actually Matters
Search for ‘how to handle sales objections’ and you will find hundreds of script lists. Read them all, memorise the responses, walk into a live call - and still freeze when the prospect says something slightly different from the version in the guide. This is not a memory problem. It is a retrieval problem.
Under the pressure of a live conversation, the cognitive bandwidth available for accessing stored knowledge competes directly with the bandwidth needed for listening, empathising, and staying present. Research from 67,149 analysed sales calls shows that top performers respond to objections with questions, not answers - and they maintain conversational flow rather than shifting into presentation mode. The reps who handle objections best are not the ones who memorised the most scripts. They are the ones who have internalised a small set of frameworks deeply enough that the right move surfaces automatically.
This guide does two things. First, it covers the 10 most common sales objections with a proven response for each - structured around frameworks, not scripts, so they adapt to how the prospect actually phrases things. Second, it explains how real-time live call coaching removes the retrieval problem entirely - so the right response is available in two seconds whether or not the rep has internalised the framework yet.
“Top performers respond to objections with questions, not answers - and they maintain conversational flow rather than shifting into presentation mode.” Analysis of 67,149 sales calls
The Framework Behind Every Response: Acknowledge - Probe - Reframe
Before the 10 objections, one universal structure. Every proven objection response follows the same three-step pattern, regardless of what the objection is about.
| Step | What It Does | Example Language |
|---|---|---|
| 1. Acknowledge | Validates the prospect’s concern without agreeing with it. Reduces defensiveness instantly. | “That makes sense.” / “I hear that a lot.” / “Completely fair.” |
| Step | What It Does | Example Language |
|---|---|---|
| 2. Probe | Asks a question to surface the real concern behind the stated objection. Most objections are proxies for something else. | “When you say budget, is that zero flexibility - or a question of timing?” / “What specifically is holding you back?” |
| 3. Reframe | Shifts the lens - from cost to value, from risk to cost-of-inaction, from timing to urgency. Does not argue. Repositions. | “The way most teams think about it is…” / “The question worth asking is what it costs not to solve this.” |
Every response in the 10 objections below is built on this structure. The specific language varies by objection type, but the underlying move - acknowledge, probe, reframe - is consistent. When a real-time Al copilot surfaces a response prompt, it follows this same logic, adapted to what was actually said in the conversation.
Real Objections vs Brush-Offs: The First Test
Before applying any framework, the most important diagnostic is whether the objection is genuine or a polite exit. HubSpot research identifies treating the first objection as the real one as the most common error reps make. A prospect who says ‘send me some information’ is usually not interested in the information - they are trying to end the call without conflict.
The test: respond to any suspected brush-off with a single, calm diagnostic question rather than a reframe. If the prospect engages with the question, it was a real objection. If they deflect, the call is probably over and pushing harder will not change that.
- Diagnostic question for brush-offs: “Of course - before I let you go, can I ask one quick question? Is it that this genuinely isn’t relevant for your team right now, or is there a specific concern I haven’t addressed?”
- If they answer: real objection. Use the framework.
- If they deflect: thank them, note the call, and move to re-engagement timing.
The $\mathbf{1 0}$ Most Common Sales Objections - With Live Responses
1. “It’s too expensive.”
Category: Price / budget Frequency: Most frequent objection across all B2B sales
contexts contexts
The wrong move: Immediately discounting or justifying the price point, which signals that the price was never justified in the first place.
Proven response:
“That’s completely fair to raise. Can I ask - when you say expensive, is that relative to a budget that’s already committed elsewhere, or is it more about whether the value justifies the number?”
[If value:] “The way most teams think about it is: if this cuts ramp time from 90 to 45 days for five reps, that’s four or five months of additional productive output per rep. What’s a month of quota attainment worth?”
Why it works: The probe separates a genuine budget constraint from a value gap - two very different problems requiring different responses. The reframe moves from cost to ROI without discounting anything.
What AI surfaces live: Copilot recognises price objection semantically. Surfaces your specific ROI proof points from your knowledge base - actual customer numbers, not generic ROI language.
2. “We’re already working with someone for that.”
Category: Competitor / status quo
Frequency: Second most common objection; often the first wall on a cold call
The wrong move: Attacking the current vendor, which puts the prospect on the defensive and forces them to justify a decision they made.
Proven response:
“Good to know - I’m not trying to replace anything that’s working.
Can I ask: what drew you to them originally?”
[Listen, then:] “The reason I ask is that teams come to us specifically
when [name the gap your product fills that their vendor doesn’t].
Is that something that’s come up for your team?”
Why it works: Curiosity disarms the defensive posture. The follow-up question probes for the gap rather than attacking the incumbent. If the gap exists, the prospect surfaces it themselves - which is far more persuasive than the rep asserting it.
What AI surfaces live: When a competitor name is mentioned, RAG retrieves the relevant battlecard from your knowledge base. Surfaces specific differentiation against that vendor, tied to the gap your product fills.
3. “We don’t have the budget right now.”
Category: Budget / timing
Frequency: Can be genuine constraint or a proxy for low priority - the two require opposite responses
The wrong move: Accepting the objection at face value and scheduling a call for next quarter without probing whether it is a timing issue or a priority issue.
Proven response:
“Completely understand. When you say budget - is it that there’s genuinely nothing available this cycle, or is it more that this isn’t high enough on the priority list to fight for budget?”
[If priority:] “That’s actually the more useful thing to understand.
What would need to be true for this to become a priority?”
Why it works: The diagnostic question separates two fundamentally different problems. A real budget constraint requires a different path (next cycle, internal champion building) than a priority constraint (which requires making the cost-of-inaction case). Most reps treat both the same way and lose both.
What AI surfaces live: Budget objection recognised semantically. Copilot surfaces the diagnostic question and, if relevant, the cost-of-inaction framing from your playbook.
4. “Just send me some information.”
Category: Brush-off / deflection
Frequency: Polite exit disguised as interest - the most common way a cold call ends without confrontation
The wrong move: Sending a generic one-pager or case study deck and waiting, which produces no response and no follow-up leverage.
Proven response:
“Of course. Before I do, can I ask one quick question -
so I send the right thing rather than everything?
What specifically would be most useful to see?”
[If they engage:] Send exactly that, reference it in the follow-up,
and book a specific next conversation before the call ends.
[If they deflect:] “Totally. I’ll send something short.
If it’s not relevant, just ignore it - no hard feelings.”
Why it works: The question tests whether there is genuine interest. If the prospect specifies what they want to see, they are engaged. If they say ‘whatever you have,’ it is a brush-off - and the graceful exit line prevents a forced conversation that will not go anywhere.
What AI surfaces live: Deflection pattern recognised. Copilot surfaces the diagnostic question and, if the prospect engages, prompts which specific asset from your knowledge base is most relevant to their stated interest.
5. “The timing isn’t right for us right now.”
Category: Timing
Frequency: Hides two different objections: personal bandwidth and organisational readiness
The wrong move: Asking to reconnect in three months without establishing what will be different - which leads to the same conversation with the same outcome.
Proven response:
“That makes sense. Can I ask what would need to change for the timing to be right - is it a capacity thing on your end, or is there something that needs to happen internally before this makes sense to evaluate?”
[Listen, then anchor to a specific moment:] “So if [trigger event] happens in Q3, would that be the right moment to revisit? I can put a note in for [specific date] — would that be useful?”
Why it works: The first question diagnoses whether timing is capacity or readiness. The second anchors the follow-up to a specific trigger rather than a calendar date - which creates a reason to reconnect that is tied to something the prospect cares about.
What AI surfaces live: Timing objection recognised. Copilot surfaces the trigger-anchoring question and prompts the rep to lock a specific follow-up date before ending the call.
6. “I need to discuss this with my team / get sign-off.”
Category: Authority / process
Frequency: Often signals the end of rep influence over the deal if the call ends without a clear next step
The wrong move: Saying ‘of course, let me know what they think’ and waiting passively - which hands control of the deal to a conversation the rep cannot influence.
Proven response:
“Absolutely — that makes total sense. Can I ask who else would be involved?
I want to make sure they have what they need to evaluate it properly.
Would it be useful if I joined that conversation, or put together a short summary they could review first?
And just so I can be helpful on the timing — when does that discussion typically happen, and when would I hear back?”
Why it works: Three moves in one response: identify the stakeholders, offer to support the internal conversation (rather than waiting for its outcome), and establish a specific follow-up timeline. The rep stays active in the deal rather than becoming a passive observer.
What AI surfaces live: Multi-stakeholder signal recognised. Copilot surfaces the stakeholder-mapping question and the champion-development prompt from your MEDDIC playbook if configured.
7. “We tried something like this before and it didn’t work.”
Category: Past experience / risk
Frequency: Carries emotional weight - the prospect is not just sceptical, they are protecting against a repeated mistake
The wrong move: Immediately asserting that your product is different without understanding what went wrong - which sounds defensive and unconvincing.
Proven response:
“That’s really useful to know - and honestly, l’d rather understand that than pitch past it. What happened? What made it not work?”
[Listen carefully, then:]
“Based on what you’ve described, the issue was [reflect their specific pain].
The reason I think this is worth a second look is [specific structural difference]. But you’d know better than me whether that addresses the actual problem - does that sound like what went wrong?”
Why it works: Curiosity rather than defensiveness. By asking what happened, the rep learns the specific failure mode - which may or may not be relevant to their solution. The reframe is built on what the prospect said, not a pre-loaded script, which makes it land as genuine rather than rehearsed.
What AI surfaces live: Past failure signal recognised. Copilot surfaces the diagnostic question and, once the failure mode is described, can retrieve relevant differentiation from your knowledge base that specifically addresses that failure type.
8. “I’ve never heard of your company.”
Category: Trust / brand recognition
Frequency: Common on cold calls with newer or smaller vendors; implies the prospect needs social proof before they engage
The wrong move: Over-explaining the company’s founding story or defensively listing credentials, which feels like justification rather than confidence.
Proven response:
“Fair - we’re relatively new in the market. The reason you haven’t heard of us is that we’ve been heads-down working with a specific type of team rather than spending on brand. We’re currently working with [named customer or customer type].
Honestly, the fastest way to evaluate us is to see it in a 15-minute call.
If it’s not relevant, you’ll know within the first five minutes.”
Why it works: Acknowledges the objection without defensiveness. The ‘heads-down’ framing reframes small size as focus. The named customer adds social proof. The low-commitment ask ( 15 minutes, self-selecting out in five) reduces the perceived risk of saying yes.
What AI surfaces live: Trust objection recognised. Copilot surfaces your most relevant named customer reference for this prospect’s industry or company profile from your knowledge base.
9. “Your product doesn’t have [feature] that we need.”
Category: Product fit / missing feature
Frequency: Can be a genuine blocker or a proxy for a broader fit concern - and needs to be distinguished before responding
The wrong move: Immediately promising a roadmap item or explaining why the feature is not necessary - both of which feel dismissive of the stated need.
Proven response:
“Helpful to know - can I ask how you use [feature] today and what it enables for your team?”
[Listen, then:] “The reason I ask is that some teams need [feature]
for [use case A] and others for [use case B].
If it’s [use case A], we actually handle that through [alternative approach].
If it’s [use case B], that’s genuinely something we don’t do - and I’d
rather tell you that honestly than oversell it.”
Why it works: The question uncovers the underlying use case before the rep responds to the feature request. This is the only way to know whether the gap is real or addressable differently. The honest ‘we don’t do that’ option builds credibility for everything else the rep says.
What AI surfaces live: Feature gap signal recognised. RAG retrieves your product documentation for relevant alternative approaches. If no alternative exists, copilot flags this so the rep can respond honestly rather than guessing.
10. “Call me back next quarter.”
Category: Timing / deferral
Frequency: Sounds like progress but is usually a polite way to end the conversation without confrontation
The wrong move: Saying ‘sounds good’ and scheduling a follow-up without establishing what will be different in Q3 - which leads to the same call with the same outcome.
Proven response:
“Of course. I want to make sure it’s worth your time when we reconnect can I ask what changes in Q3 that makes it the right moment?”
[If they specify something:] “That’s really useful. So if I reach back out in [month] when [specific trigger], that’s a better window - is that right?”
[If they can’t specify:] “Totally fine. I’ll reach out then. In the meantime, would it be useful if I sent one short thing - just so you have some context before we speak?”
Why it works: The first question tests whether ‘next quarter’ is a genuine trigger or a polite exit. If they specify something real, the rep anchors the follow-up to that trigger. If they cannot, the follow-up offer gives the rep a reason to re-engage before the calendar date arrives - and something specific to reference.
What AI surfaces live: Deferral pattern recognised. Copilot surfaces the trigger-anchoring question and prompts the rep to lock a specific follow-up date with a reason to reconnect.
Quick-Reference: All 10 Objections at a Glance
| Objection | Category | Key Move | Biggest Mistake to Avoid |
|---|---|---|---|
| It’s too expensive | Price | Probe value vs budget gap | Immediate discount |
| We already use a vendor | Competitor | Ask what they chose them for | Attack the incumbent |
| No budget right now | Budget / timing | Diagnose budget vs priority | Schedule for next Q without probing |
| Send me some information | Brush-off | Ask what specifically to send | Send everything, wait passively |
| Timing isn’t right | Timing | Anchor follow-up to a trigger | Generic ‘reconnect in 3 months’ |
| Need to discuss with my team | Authority | Map stakeholders + offer to join | Passive waiting for outcome |
| Tried something similar before | Past experience | Ask what went wrong specifically | Assert ‘we’re different’ defensively |
| Never heard of you | Trust | Named proof point + low-risk ask | Over-explain company history |
| Objection | Category | Key Move | Biggest Mistake to Avoid |
|---|---|---|---|
| Missing a feature we need | Product fit | Uncover the use case behind it | Promise roadmap or dismiss need |
| Call me next quarter | Deferral | Ask what changes in Q3 | Accept without probing |
Why Scripts Break Down on Live Calls - and What Actually Works
The research on objection handling reveals a consistent pattern: the reps who convert the most objections are not the ones who have memorised the most responses. They are the ones who stay curious the longest. They ask more questions. They spend less time in presentation mode. They treat the objection as the beginning of a diagnostic conversation, not a problem to be overcome.
The reason static scripts fail is structural. A script assumes the prospect phrases the objection the way the training document anticipated. They rarely do. The phrase ‘we’re not ready to move forward yet’ contains a budget objection, a timing objection, an authority objection, and possibly a product fit concern - all at once. A script for one of those does not address the others.
Real-time live call coaching addresses this at the structural level. Instead of surfacing a script for a specific phrase, it recognises the intent class behind what was said and surfaces the right diagnostic question and reframe for that intent - regardless of how the prospect phrased it. The guidance arrives in one to two seconds. The rep glances at it, absorbs the move, and delivers it in their own voice. The prospect hears a confident, natural response. No hesitation, no over-explanation, no defensive pivot.
“Opportunities closed within 50 days hit a 47% win rate. Past that threshold, the number craters to 20%. Every fumbled objection stretches the cycle.” - Prospeo, analysis of 67,149 sales calls
Before and After: Objection Handling With and Without Live Coaching
| Scenario | Without Live Coaching | With Real-Time AI Copilot |
|---|---|---|
| Familiar objection, standard phrasing | Rep recalls the script. Delivers it competently. Outcome depends on how well the script fits. | Copilot confirms the right move. Rep delivers with full confidence. Consistent across all reps. |
| Same objection, unexpected phrasing | Rep does not recognise it as a budget objection. Gives the wrong response. Call deteriorates. | Semantic recognition identifies intent regardless of phrasing. Right move surfaces immediately. |
| Scenario | Without Live Coaching | With Real-Time AI Copilot |
|---|---|---|
| New rep, first week on the job | Rep freezes or over-explains. Credibility gap opens. Recovery is difficult. | Copilot surfaces the diagnostic question and reframe. Rep handles it like a veteran. |
| Competitive objection mid-call | Rep responds from memory. May not know the specific competitor well. Accuracy varies. | RAG retrieves battlecard for that specific competitor. Accurate, specific differentiation surfaces live. |
| Objection stack (two objections at once) | Rep addresses one, misses the other. Prospect feels unheard. Second objection resurfaces later. | Copilot surfaces the underlying intent class. Rep probes to separate the two objections before responding. |
| Post-call manager coaching | Manager reviews recording. Identifies what should have been said. Rep adjusts for the next call. | Rep handled it correctly on the call. Post-call coaching can focus on advanced development, not error correction. |
Conclusion: Overcoming Objections Starts With Staying Curious
The 10 objections in this guide cover the vast majority of what sales reps encounter on B2B calls. The responses are not scripts - they are frameworks built on a consistent underlying move: acknowledge the concern, probe to find the real one, reframe without arguing.
The reps who consistently convert objections are not better at arguing. They are better at listening. They ask one more question before responding. They treat the objection as information rather than resistance. And they stay in the conversation long enough for the real concern to surface - which is almost always more addressable than the stated one.
For teams that want to make this consistent across every rep on every call - not just the experienced ones who have internalised the frameworks - real-time live call coaching removes the retrieval problem. The right move is available in two seconds, in the moment it is needed, without the rep having to hold the entire objection library in working memory while simultaneously running a live conversation.
See how Convinco surfaces the right objection response in real time - live, on every call, from your own knowledge base. Book a demo: calendar.app.google/QxnydVopaeEBVxne9 View pricing: convinco.co/pricing Download the assistant: convinco.co/sales-assistant/download
