In disruption questions, which option best represents the primary purpose?

• A. Can I ask how does your ideal situation compare to what you have now with this vendor you are using?
• B. Back when you chose to work with that company, what was your selection criteria? In what ways has that changed today?
• C. If you could change one thing about who you use now, what would that be?
• D. So to me, it sounds like things are going fairly well for you with what you're using now; is there anything you would change about it if you could?

Answer: (C)

Disruption questions aim to surface genuine dissatisfaction by inviting the prospect to name a concrete change they’d make in their current setup. This kind of prompt creates a moment where real gaps become explicit and open the door to discussing how your solution could fill them.

The best option asks, if you could change one thing about who you’re using now, what would that be? It’s precise and action-oriented, nudging the prospect to identify a single area of frustration or limitation. That yields a clear, actionable topic you can explore further and positions your offering as a potential remedy without assuming the problem is huge or forcing a makeover. It’s enough of a deviation from the status quo to disrupt the usual thinking while remaining non-threatening and approachable.

Other options tend to steer the conversation away from concrete disruption. Comparing the ideal situation to the current vendor invites discussion of aspirations rather than current pain, which can dilute the disruption effect. Recalling selection criteria from the past focuses on history rather than present shortcomings. Suggesting things are going well and asking what they'd change if they could can keep the dialogue comfortable and may avoid uncovering real issues.