In practice, it often creates a different kind of friction. Reality SOC 2 is treated as a unlock: “once we have it → deals move faster” SOC 2 doesn’t reduce scrutiny. It standardizes scrutiny. Before SOC 2: reviews are inconsistent questions depend on the buyer you can navigate deal-by-deal After SOC 2: security teams switch to structured evaluation questionnaires become deeper, not lighter controls get mapped against their risk model, not yours This is where things break: You built controls to pass an audit Buyers evaluate controls to assign risk Those are not the same system. So what happens? same questions repeat across deals answers need customization every time evidence has to be re-explained in buyer context internal champions still struggle to defend you Result: you’re “compliant”… but not easy to buy SOC 2 is not a trust asset. It’s a translation problem.…