You seem to have two problems: 1) the overall perception of tech; 2) the sales cycle of substantial B2B purchases.
Blame the pervasiveness of high technology. In general, technology is wayyyy overexposed as an opportunity area. Everyone now believes that they "know" that technology is straightforward in our society.
I mean - open up a typical cheap smartphone you can buy today. It contains more computing ability than everything onboard the Saturn 5 based Apollo moon missions.
There is an old saying - "familiarity breeds contempt" - technology has been a business media staple for 20+ years. Today, virtually every two bit low end business owner believes that gifted techies are a dime a dozen and he can summon them cheaply by clicking his fingers.
The first inkling I had of this was when Business Week in the early 90s started publishing glowing articles about object oriented programming. My boss at the time, a relic himself with dreams of self-aggrandizement of enslaving low paid coding serfs as menials in his imagined empire (I'm really not kidding!) immediately seized on this as further proof that techies were expendable, dime a dozen lowlifes.
Also, software has indeed become a consumer and business commodity. Unfortunately, software and technology in general are perceived by most outside technology (and a lot of those within technology, in management and leadership roles) as a commodity, like beans, hog futures or scrap metal.
This started when it became very difficult to show a business customer the difference between a highly refined product like Microsoft Word that cost $200 at the office user level, and a custom software program that may require hundreds of hours to develop. "Word costs $200, why are you being an arrogant geek who plays at your work and ripping me off", the narrative goes.
The only answer to this problem of image is portraying high business value and face time. Now this leads to point #2 - handling the sales cycle.
Non-idiots will realize that something extremely specific to their particular business situation will most likely have substantial associated cost.
The rest should be disqualified as prospects.
The subject of "adding value" itself is a constant challenge.
One challenge is clear and accurate communication. Many customers really don't want to tell you that they need help in a particular area, so you never get to the core of the problem where you could help them uniquely.
Partly it's a pride thing, and partly, it is legitimate competitive intelligence that could help their competition if disclosed. Also, a lot of prospects just want to play games - they believe that it's your job to participate in a guessing game until you spot their problem, or, God-knows-what.
Another challenge to complex sales is qualifying the prospect in the first place. Perhaps their business does not produce enough value or even have enough unrealized value to cost-justify custom software.
And yet another aspect is comparison to off the shelf tools. Look at the prevalence of CMSs and things like WordPress in the web design space. The age of custom code for generic web sites is over. Enterprise and B2B software is headed for that place. At some point the arguments in favor of custom/special lose their weight.
I'd say look for books and articles on selling high end IT solutions. The overall concept here is the "complex sale". The key is building enough trust that the prospect starts to understand and accept your formulation of their problem.
Now, words to the wise -
If the prospect is untrusting and dismissive of any overture to drill down to their real needs, LOSE THEM.
If the prospect plays games, LOSE THEM.
If the prospect doesn't listen to you, LOSE THEM.
There is no compromise possible on these three points. You can't do high end business with someone who doesn't listen or who is distrusting.