By emran hossain 
For many vendors selling into K–12 education, the received wisdom about “timing” and “who to target” hasn’t changed in years. March through May is the season. Superintendents and curriculum directors are the buyers. Procurement triggers action.
But anyone with real experience inside schools knows that view is outdated.
School districts do not make buying decisions based on size or a single seasonal cycle. Nor are decisions driven only by central office leaders. Instead, the real buying forces are far more distributed, invisible, and driven by the day-to-day work that schools actually do. Understanding this matters for companies trying to engage K–12 districts effectively — because without it, messaging and targeting often miss entire networks of influence.
At the heart of this dynamic is what many organizations overlook: role-specific influence across instructional, operational, and support functions. When we talk about who influences decisions in districts today, we’re talking about a broad set of roles that rarely appear on organizational charts but carry disproportionate voice in solution evaluation and adoption.
Instructional coaches who pilot tools and gather teacher feedback.
MTSS leads and student success coordinators who shape how services are implemented.
Technology directors who assess integration, scalability, and interoperability.
Principals and teacher leaders who provide building-level practicality.
These educators and leaders are not peripheral. They sit at the center of how adoption actually unfolds — long before a formal RFP appears.
This shift isn’t anecdotal; it’s structural. District work has become more complex, more interconnected, and less hierarchical than many sales strategies assume. A principal in a mid-sized district may have more sway over classroom tools in that district than a director who never sees the building floor. A technology lead may eclipse a curriculum specialist in practical decision power when adoption hinges on integration.
This reality makes traditional list-based outreach less effective. Generic “district size” lists don’t help you reach the people who are actually shaping decisions — those educators and leaders whose work touches daily practice.
Addressing that gap requires understanding education workforce data in a role-specific way — not just counting positions or using titles that may not reflect influence. That’s the fundamental shift behind modern K–12 outreach strategies, including platforms like K12 Data, which focus on granular insight into who actually shapes decisions across schools and districts.
Ultimately, understanding K–12 buying means letting go of simplistic assumptions about timing and leadership and embracing a more complex, human view of influence. Vendors who make that shift find their outreach becomes more relevant, more welcomed, and far more effective.
Alex Robinson