Skip to main content
Enterprise Sales, Under the Microscope

Story 01 / A sales myth-busting experiment

The Great AI
Whitespace Trap

Lots of companies use no AI. That does not mean they are waiting to buy yours.

In sales, "whitespace" means customers you have not sold to yet. It looks like room to grow. But an empty space on your sales map tells you nothing about why it is empty. Before you send in the team, find out what is missing: a supplier, a reason to buy, or the ability to get started.

Start with the sales meeting Allocate the team
Five imaginary sales territories connected by a winding route: treasure, an incumbent fortress, an enthusiastic but underprepared market, apparent whitespace, and missing evidence.

The Great AI Treasure Map Fictional territories. Very real sales habits.

Five imaginary territories on the sales map
Treasure IslandNeed, foundations, headroom.

A funded problem and usable foundations could make low adoption interesting. Could is doing useful work here.

Incumbent KingdomAlready bought. Still buying?

High adoption need not mean a closed market. Expansion, replacement and better outcomes are different questions.

Demo VolcanoVery hot. No plumbing.

Everyone wants agents. Data access, skills and accountability have been assigned to a later meeting.

Whitespace DesertNothing sold. Reason unknown.

Low use can reflect weak foundations, a poor fit, budget constraints or perfectly sensible priorities.

Here Be DragonsEvidence not yet surveyed.

Unknown is a research task, not a low score. Missing observations do not become facts when colored on a map.

Hover over the whitespace before you put it in Salesforce. The map is fictional. No country has been classified as a volcano.

A fictional planning meeting. A familiar mistake.

You have 100 salespeople.
Where do you send them?

Imagine you lead an AI sales team. You cannot call every company, run every pilot, or help every customer sort out its data. A person sent to one territory is a person you cannot send somewhere else. A bad territory plan can keep everyone busy without bringing a buying decision any closer.

Your fictional VP has a shortcut: "Go where hardly anyone uses AI. Look at all that whitespace!" It sounds reasonable. There are fewer existing users and, apparently, more first-time buyers. The spreadsheet has turned a lack of customers into a reason to celebrate.

Now imagine two companies that both use no AI. One wants to reduce time spent answering service requests, has searchable records and a manager responsible for the result. It may need a supplier. The other has no agreed problem, no project owner and fourteen Excel files named FINAL_v7_really_final.xlsx. It may need quite a different conversation.

Both look identical in an AI-use statistic. They do not offer the same next step. Public business surveys help us ask which explanation deserves a closer look; they cannot tell us that a particular customer will buy.

The question is therefore practical: should your next salesperson chase the biggest blank space, or the places where customers have more of what they need to get started? First, let the VP make the case. Then see what happens when we ask three questions the spreadsheet left out.

Exhibit 01 / The VP's arithmetic / EU, 2025

The VP of Sales
Whitespace IndexTM

80.05%were not using AI.
The VP calls them potential customers.

About 20 in every 100 businesses used AI. The VP claims the other 80. The subtraction is right; the sales conclusion has not been earned.

100% - 19.95% using AI = 80.05% not using AI

19.95% Using AI80.05% Not using AI
Source: Eurostat, 2025. EU businesses with at least 10 people employed, in the activities covered by the survey. "Not using" is calculated as 100% minus "using." The survey measures use, not purchases, and does not tell us whether the other businesses want to buy.

Your first decision

The VP has already made a plan.

You have 100 salespeople, also called account executives or AEs. The VP sends more of them to countries where fewer businesses use AI. Poland gets 15; Denmark gets 9. Is that the plan you would back?

Equal market size is assumed: each territory stands for the same number of potential customers. Real countries are not equally sized markets.

100 / 100 salespeopleEveryone has a territory

TerritoryNot using AIYour team
  1. 74.03%
  2. 57.97%
  3. 91.07%
  4. 79.73%
  5. 83.60%
  6. 91.64%
  7. 88.46%
  8. 64.96%

Eight examples with the needed survey answers, all from 2025. These are not all European countries or a recommended shortlist of markets.

Question 1 / Have they considered it?

"Not using AI" is not the same as "looking for AI."

Of every 100 EU businesses, about 80 were not using AI. Only about 11 were non-users that had considered it: 11.10% of all businesses. The survey has not found 80 buyers. It has found a much smaller group for whom the idea has at least come up.

That still leaves a long way to a sale. "We have considered it" might precede a funded project, a rejected proposal, or a conversation that went nowhere. In sales language, "the customer is very interested" sometimes means "they attended the webinar." Neither is an order.

Why Poland and Denmark change the conversation

Start with the VP's view. In Poland, 91.64% of businesses did not use AI, compared with 57.97% in Denmark. Poland offers more blank space as a share of its businesses.

Now ask about consideration. Non-users that had considered AI accounted for 3.90% of all Polish businesses and 16.25% of Danish businesses. Denmark has less blank space, but a larger share of businesses that have thought about filling it.

That does not make Denmark a better territory: these are percentages, not numbers of available customers, and they say nothing about your product. It does mean the VP needs a better reason than "hardly anyone uses AI there." Low consideration could call for finding a useful problem before proposing a product.

Source: Eurostat, 2025. Both consideration percentages refer to all businesses covered by the survey, not just non-users.

Question 2 / Could they get started?

An AI project needs somewhere to land.

Return to our imaginary service team. An AI tool might help answer customer questions, but it needs records it can use and people who can check the answers. If the records are inaccessible or nobody owns the process, a good demonstration does not remove the work required before a pilot.

Public data cannot inspect a customer's records for us. It can offer a clue: 14.33% of EU businesses already used cloud services and data analysis without using AI. They have some relevant technology in place. We call these digital foundations, not proof that they are ready for an AI project.

The businesses that have considered AI and those with these foundations can overlap. One group is about having thought about it; the other is about tools already in use. A company can belong to both, one, or neither.

Exhibit 02 / European businesses, 2025

Some non-users already have part of the setup.

About 24 in every 100 Italian businesses used cloud services and data analysis without AI, compared with about 11 in Germany. Italy's lower AI use does not mean all its non-users lack those tools. The starting point matters as well as the blank space.

Using cloud + data analysis, but no AI (% of all businesses)

Arrow keys select the next or previous country. The country selector provides the same values.

Already using AI (% of all businesses)

Germany

Already using AIOf all businesses
25.97%
Considered AI, not using itOf all businesses
14.95%
Cloud + data analysis, no AIOf all businesses
10.97%
Reported a cost obstacleOf non-users that considered AI
32.35%

Unavailable means the survey does not provide a usable answer here. Missing is not zero. None of these percentages identifies an individual buyer.

Source: Eurostat, 2025. Each point represents a country, not a business. Both measures are percentages of businesses with at least 10 people employed in the surveyed activities. Having these tools does not establish that an AI project is ready to start.
All 27 countries: exact values and flags
2025 percentages. Cost obstacles refer only to non-users that considered AI. The other three columns refer to all businesses covered by the survey.
CountryAlready using AIConsidered AI, not using itCloud + data analysis, no AIReported a cost obstacle
Austria29.95%15.04%5.63%27.55%
Belgium34.54%9.78%16.07%35.52%
Bulgaria8.55%4.89%6.07%55.68%
Cyprus9.27%7.71%20.90%40.64%
Czechia17.60%Unavailable16.41%Break in seriesUnavailable
Germany25.97%14.95%10.97%32.35%
Denmark42.03%16.25%17.78%17.99%
Estonia23.40%Unavailable21.86%Unavailable
Greece8.93%11.05%8.49%54.33%
Spain20.27%11.04%14.49%47.37%
Finland37.82%19.47%13.34%26.11%
France18.16%Unavailable11.53%Unavailable
Croatia15.19%6.65%16.09%64.84%
Hungary10.37%7.37%17.02%43.18%
Ireland19.64%Unavailable19.48%Unavailable
Italy16.40%9.44%23.62%42.98%
Lithuania21.30%16.22%24.42%Unavailable
Luxembourg33.61%10.09%9.44%39.35%
Latvia12.21%10.19%14.51%41.75%
Malta21.51%14.93%18.78%39.93%
Netherlands33.21%Break in series9.96%19.81%21.56%
Poland8.36%3.90%12.76%55.52%
Portugal11.54%12.35%14.96%60.43%
Romania5.21%Unavailable11.38%Unavailable
Sweden35.04%7.15%11.26%24.99%
Slovenia21.61%10.87%10.10%41.80%
Slovakia18.00%8.74%10.59%48.50%

Before this becomes a real territory plan

Ninety percent of how many customers?

A large blank space on a percentage chart can still contain few businesses. The game treats its eight territories as equally sized so we can see what changes when we ask different questions. Real countries are not equal-sized markets, and the game is not recommending a European hiring plan.

Your actual account list also matters. A salesperson serving large manufacturers is not selling to "the average European company." Businesses differ in the people, money and systems they can bring to a project. The size comparison below shows why a national average is only a starting point.

Exhibit 03 / What kind of business are you selling to?

The small business and the large employer start in different places.

About 17 in every 100 EU businesses with 10-49 people used AI, compared with about 55 in every 100 with 250 or more. There is more unused space among smaller businesses. There may also be more work to do before they can use what you sell.

AI use by business size, EU, 2025. Percent of businesses in each size group.
People employedUsing AI
From 10 to 49 persons employed17.00%
From 50 to 249 persons employed30.36%
250 persons employed or more55.03%

This comparison does not explain why smaller firms use less AI. It helps frame the next question: would your offer solve their problem at a cost and level of effort they can support?

Full size and industry comparisons
2025, % of all businesses in each stated group. The two groups of non-users can overlap.
EU groupUsing AIConsidered AI, not using itCloud + data analysis, no AI
By business size
From 10 to 49 persons employed17.00%10.24%12.78%
From 50 to 249 persons employed30.36%15.21%22.02%
250 persons employed or more55.03%15.97%22.36%
By industry; at least 10 people employed
Manufacturing17.27%11.76%16.28%
Construction10.79%8.51%10.54%
Wholesale and retail trade; repair of motor vehicles and motorcycles18.62%12.47%18.13%
Information and communication62.52%11.31%12.25%
Professional, scientific and technical activities40.43%14.02%11.98%
Sources: Eurostat by business size and by industry. These are separate EU-wide comparisons. They do not tell us how much of any country's result is explained by its mix of businesses.

Question 3 / What is stopping them?

The demo is over. Now the work begins.

Return to the company with a service problem. Suppose the idea makes sense and the records are usable. Someone still has to connect the tool, decide which answers are acceptable, protect customer information and pay for the work. An interested buyer can be blocked without being irrational or indecisive.

Eurostat asked businesses that had considered AI but were not using it what held them back. About 70 in every 100 named a lack of relevant expertise. About 38 named cost. Those are reasons to discuss implementation and affordability, not simply to repeat the demonstration with more enthusiasm.

We are now looking only at that group of non-users who had considered AI, not all businesses. The same company can name several obstacles.

Exhibit 04 / What interested non-users say holds them back

"Who will make this work?" comes before "Where do I sign?"

Skills are the most frequently reported obstacle among these six. Cost matters too. Different obstacles call for different help; a product pitch is not a substitute for all of it.

Percent of EU businesses that considered AI but did not use it / 2025

  1. Lack of relevant expertise70.31%The skills needed to adopt AI were a reported obstacle.
  2. Unclear legal consequences53.61%Uncertainty about legal consequences was a reported obstacle.
  3. Data protection and privacy52.72%Concerns about data protection and privacy were reported.
  4. Data availability or quality43.51%Availability or quality of necessary data was a reported obstacle.
  5. Costs seem too high38.37%Perceived cost was a barrier; its absence does not establish a budget.
  6. AI is not useful17.79%Enterprises reported that AI technologies were not useful to them.
Source: Eurostat, 2025. Six selected obstacles; businesses could report more than one, so these percentages do not add to 100. Not reporting a cost problem does not mean an AI budget has been approved.

The Enterprise AI Whitespace Zoo / Imaginary customers

Same empty box.
Four different conversations.

All four companies below use no AI. What changes is whether they want to start and whether they have the basics in place. These are fictional examples, not descriptions of countries or customers identified by the surveys.

Wants to start / Can get started

The Pouncing Leopard

We know the problem. We have the data. Who can help?

Your next conversation is about a project: what result matters, who decides, and what a successful first step would look like.

Wants to start / Needs the basics

The Excited Puppy

We absolutely need agents. What is a data owner?

Your next offer may be help with records, access or skills. Selling a bigger AI promise does not make those tasks disappear.

Could get started / Sees no reason

The Sleeping Panda

The platform works. Why are we doing this again?

Your next job is to establish whether there is a problem worth solving. A technically capable business does not owe you an AI project.

No clear reason / Needs the basics

The AI Sloth

Perhaps next year. Perhaps something else.

Your next decision may be to spend less time here. Not every company needs to buy AI now, and that can be a sensible choice.

Back to the planning meeting

Would you send the same people to the same places?

The VP cared only about who was not using AI. We now have three more things to consider: whether businesses have thought about it, whether some basics are in place, and whether cost is an obstacle. Giving those answers importance produces a different plan. It does not produce a sales forecast.

What would you give priority to?
Choose my own priorities

These numbers express relative importance, not a predicted chance of a sale. Equal numbers give equal importance; zero leaves an answer out.

The calculation balances your priorities across the same eight countries. Survey answers do not change. Full calculation and limits.

The Schym AI Opportunity Matrix keeps four questions separate. Actual purchase intent is still unknown. Consideration is only a clue, and fewer cost complaints do not establish a budget.

Exhibit 05 / A what-if plan, not a forecast

Where your 100 salespeople would go.

The VP's starting plan; you have not saved a first decision is the open circle. The filled circle is the plan with your current priorities.

Territory0 to 20 peopleFirst / Now
Germany12 / 13
Denmark9 / 15
Greece14 / 11
Spain13 / 13
Italy13 / 14
Poland15 / 10
Portugal14 / 13
Sweden10 / 11

9 of the 100 salespeople would change territory.

Denmark would get 15 people instead of 9; Poland would get 10 instead of 15. What changed is the importance you gave the answers, not the customers themselves.

A different plan is a reason to question the original shortcut. Before staffing a real territory, you still need actual account counts, available budgets and evidence that your offer fits.

Calculated from your priorities and the same Eurostat 2025 figures. Equal market size is assumed. Every plan still totals 100 people. No revenue has been forecast. How the calculation works.

Take a better brief to your next customer.

The worksheet keeps both plans and the facts behind them. It leaves room for what the surveys cannot tell you: which problem the customer will pay to solve, who owns it, and what must happen before a project can start.

Monday morning, after the meeting

Ask why the space is empty.

Nothing here says to avoid businesses that use little AI. A genuinely underserved market can be attractive. The mistake is to treat the absence of use as evidence that customers want your product and can put it to work.

For the next account conversation, replace "How big is the AI opportunity?" with three questions:

  1. What problem is worth paying to solve? Name the work, the cost of leaving it alone, and the person responsible for improving it.
  2. What must be in place before a pilot can work? Check the records, access, people and approval needed. This may change what you offer first.
  3. Why would this become a buying decision now? Find out whether there is funding, a decision owner and a useful deadline. A webinar registration answers none of those questions.

Then decide whether the next step is a project, help with the basics, a clearer business case, or less sales effort for now. Countries with high AI use can still contain expansion and replacement business; countries with low use can still contain excellent buyers. The public figures help you decide what to investigate. The account conversation tells you what is actually there.

Total Addressable Market and Total Addressable Fantasy are, fortunately, abbreviated differently. The spreadsheet should preserve the distinction.

For a closer look

Sources, calculations and limits.

What the European evidence measures

Enterprises with 10 or more persons employed; NACE Rev. 2 C10-S951 excluding K, as defined by Eurostat. This is a 2025 cross-section, retrieved on 2026-09-10. AI use is E_AI_TANY; consideration is E_AI_EC; cloud and analytics without AI is E_AIX_CC1SI_DA, all in PC_ENT. Barriers use PC_ENT_AI_EC.

Published aggregate point estimates. Comparable standard errors and the covariance of these indicators are not supplied in these extracts; no significance, causal effect or precise population rank is inferred. The 2025 Netherlands observations carry a break-in-series flag. This is a single-year comparison, not a trend. Consideration is not purchase intent. Reported barriers overlap and use a conditional denominator. Published EU aggregates are not reconstructed from rounded component percentages. Other break flags are preserved in the country table. Missing, confidential and unreliable observations are not treated as zero. "About N in every 100" rounds the published percentage for the narrative; exact values remain beside each figure.

Why other AI surveys show different numbers

The EIB Investment Survey 2025 reports generative AI use of 37% in the EU and 36% in the US, and advanced digital-technology adoption of 77% and 78%. The EIB distinguishes adoption from integration into business processes. Its population, weighting and AI definition differ from Eurostat's. Those numbers do not replace European country values or measure a customer's available budget.

The US Census BTOS asks about AI use in the last two weeks and expected use in the next six months. Expected minus current use within one matched collection is an expectation gap, not a conversion rate. From the 17 November 2025 collection, "producing goods or services" became "any of its business functions." This article publishes no numerical expectation gap, smooth pre/post trend, or US-derived intent estimate for Europe.

The OECD study of AI-adopting enterprises uses a 2022-23 selected-adopter survey to examine skills, data and technology diffusion. It supports the discussion of practical complements, not a readiness score for all firms. OECD business ICT observations drawn from Eurostat are not an independent European replication.

How the 100-AE scenario is calculated

The teaching set is Germany, Denmark, Greece, Spain, Italy, Poland, Portugal and Sweden: eight fully observed examples, not a representative sample. The non-use lens uses 100 minus adoption. The other lenses use consideration, foundations, and 100 minus the reported cost-barrier share. The last is only a preference for lower reported cost friction in a selected subgroup.

For each lens, divide each territory's value by the sum across the eight territories. Multiply those shares by the reader's relative weights, add them, normalize and apportion 100 integer AEs by largest remainder. Ties follow displayed country order. All-zero weights give equal shares. An active lens with unavailable evidence has no scenario result.

These shares have different denominators. Normalization makes them preference lenses; it does not make their populations comparable or estimate joint demand. The model contains no enterprise counts, revenue, win probability or account-level intent. The first allocation remains pinned; the edited draft can be incomplete and is labeled as such in the worksheet.

What would change the interpretation

A stable allocation across alternative weights would weaken the claim that the choice of evidence lens matters for this teaching set. An observed relationship between these measures and later, attainable sales could justify a predictive model after out-of-sample validation. These extracts contain no such outcome. No causal effect of readiness, no optimal staffing plan and no purchase-intent estimate is identified.

Size and sector rates are separate marginal breakdowns. The article demonstrates heterogeneity; it does not estimate how much industry composition explains any national difference. EIBIS and OECD support interpretation, not multipliers in the allocation. The Census comparison is methodological: no unmatched numerical intent gap is published.

Reproduce the snapshot and inspect source flags

Frozen source bytes are hash-bound. The deterministic transformation fixes year, activity coverage, employment class and unit, rejects duplicate observations and checks the EU benchmark. Source updates require a new reviewed snapshot instead of overwriting these inputs.

Evidence JSON Country values CSV Source receipts Generation receipt

Eurostat reuse policy: acknowledge the source and retain methodological cautions. EIB and OECD material is cited, not republished as microdata. No private customer data or employer endorsement.

isoc_eb_ai isoc_eb_ain2 EIBIS 2025 Census BTOS methods OECD adoption study