Comments by Paul McCord Subscribe

On Boost Your Sales series: “As a Seller, Is Social Media Just Hype or Is There Real Value In It?” by Paul McCord

Josh,

Here's the link to Nigel's post: http://salesandmanagementblog.com/2009/06/22/boost-your-sales-series-would-you-hire-an-administrative-assistant-who-cant-use-word-by-nigel-edelshain/

On Book Review: The One Minute Closer: Time-Tested, No-Fail Strategies for Clinching Every Sale

Niall, you're right--if the book were written as a parody of sales training I'd be rolling in the floor.  Unfortunately, the authors are serious.   I've only given a very small taste of the direction of the book. 

Throughout the authors admonish the reader to 'muster as much sincerity as possible,' 'look the customer directly in the eye if you can,' and realize that 'no simply means the customer doesn't yet have enough information to say yes' implying that 'no' should never be a reason to stop hard selling a prospect.

There are numerous closing techniques that are just as absurd and destructive as those I've mentioned in the review.

Unfortunately, readers of the Customer Collective aren't likely o have bought the book anyway, but maybe the review will save someone a bit of money and time.  On the other hand, it might also deprive them of a good laugh.

On Are your Salespeople asking the right questions.......

Actually, Christian, I do believe this movement toward pre-purchase research, self-diagnosis and solution determination will lead to a very large portion of salespeople becoming obsolete in the sense of being seriously involved in the purchase decision.  They will become nothing but glorified (if they're lucky) order takers. 

On the other hand, I believe that those sellers who learn how to address this type of prospect in a manner that truly adds value to the prospect and where they can establish authority with the prospect on par with those 'experts' the prospect has consulted via the internet and other media will make more money than ever and be more central of guiding and helping the prospect than ever before.. 

Certainly there will still be a relatively small segment of the profession that's kinda in the middle--catching the more traditional prospect who hasn't done any research and isn't all that picky about where they get their advice and guidance.  But those prospects won't be the majority, especially in areas such as financial services, really big ticket items, more complex products and services. 

So, I guess I'm a pessimist also--but in an optimistic sorta way.

On Are your Salespeople asking the right questions.......

Christian,

Thank you for the analysis and suggestions.  This is an issue that I've been talking about for a couple of years and one that I think will become a serious one for sellers. 

Prospects--both business and consumer--have access to an incredible amount of what they believe to be objective and authoritative expert information not just from the internet although that is the primary source, but from cable tv shows, specialized publications, talk radio, and other sources that were not available just a few years ago.  Many no longer believe they need a salesperson for anything other than supplying the product or service they have already determined is the solution to their issue--and since they've already determined the solution and just need the product or service, they want it at the lowest possible price. 

If sellers don't learn how to add significant value for the prospect when entering the sale late in the buying process, they'll end up being nothing but order takers, selling based on price alone.  It is critical that sellers learn how to deal with this issue because it isn't going to do anything but get worse.

On Sales Force Ineffectiveness, Conjecture On The Future Of The Profession, Part 1 of 3

Dave,

Excellent analysis; looking forward to the remainder of your discussion. 

I believe the perceived exposure to objective, unbiased experts via the internet is going to be one of the biggest change agents we in sales face.  Increasingly both business and consumer prospects are researching their needs and issues before ever thinking of engaging with a salesperson or company. 

As you point out, this research can make them more informed and less knowledgeable.  The problem is many believe they are more knowledgeable than the sales professionals they eventually connect with since through their research they were guided by what they believe to be unbiased, objective and knowledgeable experts. If the sales professional’s analysis and/or solution doesn't mesh with their own post research analysis and solution, they question the sales professional's ability and/'or motives.

You ask rhetorically will prospects take the time to sift through the mass of material to find information from quality sources.  The problem is the answer is virtually always going to be "yes" in the sense that the prospect will believe they have found good information from a quality source whether they have or not, meaning that salespeople will no longer be in the position of educating their prospects but the unenviable position of having to reeducate them--a more difficult task and one requiring the salesperson to establish credibility on par with the ‘experts’ the prospect found on the internet.

On Twitter for Business—Why Is Everyone all Atwitter?

Ardath,

Thanks for the point of view.  I guess I'm like you--continue to experiment and hopefully find how to make it as useful as possbile without having to commit a great deal of time to it.  Such a simple tool, yet difficult to nail down its true use and value.

On Twitter for Business—Why Is Everyone all Atwitter?

Dave, Charles, and Trish,

Thanks for your points of view, you've each made some excellent points and have given me some areas to look into.

Although my post is slanted a bit more negatively than I really am toward Twitter, I am trying to figure out its optimal use.  To date I've used it primarily as a pre-sales investigation tool where I follow the execs of companies I'm interested in working with in order to get a feeling for the issues they're dealing with, their concerns, the direction of their company.  Unfortunately, right now there are very few execs on Twitter, so the numbers are slight--but still enough to justify the time.

Expanding my usage, yet maintaining time discipline may be a challenge, but, as I said, you all have given me some ideas to kick around.

Paul

On Twitter for Business—Why Is Everyone all Atwitter?

Dave,

Thank you for your response and giving me a good idea of your experience with Twitter.

You do, however, bring up an issue that I didn’t mention.  You mention that you tweet 10 to 15 times a day and spend about 30 minutes on Twitter.  That gives you about 2 minutes per tweet—but no time to read the tweets of those you follow.

I can see how Twitter can become a time sponge, sucking up all of one’s time and energy.  Not only is there the need to tweet, and as you pointed out, tweet with topically targeted and top of the line  content, but you also have to have the time to track down the tweet material in order to retweet it, and then to read the tweets of those you follow. 

Reading blogs and articles helps prepare to tweet, but when you add that to the time it takes to tweet and then add the time it takes to read a day’s worth of tweets from those you follow, not to even mention responding to some of those tweets, you can spend three, four, five hours or more on Twitter without even realizing it.  I’m still trying to find a real business use for Twitter that is time manageable. 

I also understand your point about referring people to great content, although I’m not sold on the concept of branding myself as the go to person for directions to great content so that they’ll think of me for advice.  Librarians have branded themselves as great people to go to for directions to great content on a mass of subjects, some specializing in business, marketing, and sales materials, but few people would go to them to have them analyze their sales team’s issues and to develop solutions. 

That’s not to say that I don’t subscribe to the concept of being a quality resource, I ‘m just not sold on the idea that it plays a larger part than bringing people to your site so they can read your material and then become sold on you.  It is a courtesy whose ulterior motive is get your material in their hands—a tactic that is useful to both your follower and yourself. 

Thanks again for your insights. 

On A Lesson in Why Sales Training Fails

Paul, You're right--virtually every trainer will demonstrate the technique they are discussing. It's expected, and it helps in applying very simple techniques such as changing a belt on a car.

But when it comes to learning more complicated behaviors and processes, a simple one-time demonstration isn't going to have much of an impact. There has to be coaching follow up--helping the salesperson apply what they've learned in the real world, to really learn how to turn the knowledge into action. Dan's situation was simple enough that a one time demonstration is all he really needed, but for most training situations, a single demonstration isn’t going to do much other than waste the company’s money.

Training isn’t about information exchange—that’s what I gave Dan, information. It’s about behavior change and that can’t be done in a two hour or two day workshop—unless you’re changing the belt on a car.

The real question is why would a company only hire a trainer to give a demonstration? 

If the company isn't prepared to suppliment the training with intense coaching by the original trainer or someone trained to coach the appropriate behavior, they're just throwing money away.  They'll get the same results as Dan did with my phone call--they'll know what to do but not how to do it.  Consequently, the training will be for naught.

On What A Surprise! - After Years Of Greed, Will Come Months Of Fear

 I certainly agree with much of your post--but I think there's more condemnation of greed to go around.

Certainly there was a tremendous amount of greed on the part of the titans of the financial world.  But the flood gates of that greed were not only opened by but were mandated by government's attempt to practice feel good economics, demanding lending institutions lend to individuals who would never qualify for a mortgage had the mortgage been sensibly underwritten.  But rational economics wasn't a concern of Congress.  Instead it was important to buy votes, to make everyone feel good, to 'spread' the wealth.

When mandated to lend to borrowers who were not qualified, lenders resisted at first--until they discovered they could make tremendous amounts of money granting high risk loans since they had ready sources of disposal of the risk.  Once they discovered Congress' folly was great for profits, they quit complaining and grabbed on with both fists, creating more and more ways to get more and more people into homes whether they should have been in them or not.

Realtors were playing the game just as lustily as any lender, securitization packager, congressperson or senator--many shopping buyers to mortgage company after mortgage company until they found one that would approve their buyer, no matter how poorly qualified the buyer--all they cared about was their commission.  Realtors were bold enough to tell mortgage loan officers that if they couldn't get their buyers approved; the loan officer would never see another one of the Realtor's clients. 

 Homeowners who were seeing their homes appreciate at unheard of rates weren't complaining either.  Many sold their homes and bought much bigger homes than they should because the payments were so low with their new adjustable rate loans.  Those that didn't sell were basking in the huge paper profits they believed they had.

First time homebuyers were buying like crazy--a good many who couldn't qualify simply lied about their incomes.  The attitude on the part of many was get in the house and worry about paying for it later.  They could get in with no down payment.  Many bought a home with as little as $500 out of pocket.

Others bought more house than they could afford because after all, homes were appreciating so fast they could dump the house in a year or two before the ARM adjusted and make a killing.

The rest of us, if there were any not in the above categories, weren't complaining either.  After all, the economy was good, we were making money, and the good times would never end.

Greed?  You bet--but it wasn't all in the executive suite.

On Guest Article, “Think Before You Speak,” by Kelley Robertson

 Although I cannot speak for Kelley and wouldn't try, I'll be happy to give my opinion.  Naturally, like all of us who share the thoughts and opinions of others, there are things I wish the author would have added--and sometimes there are things within a given article that I disagree with but find the bulk of the article of value.

This is a case where I don't think Kelley went far enough.  I realize his goal was to present his article within a defined space, I wish he had added a couple of things--one would be an alternative to the price question. I don't try to avoid discussing price but I, as you suggested, put it within the context of value. My approach to discounting has always been within the context of which items would the prospect like to eliminate in order to get the price in line.  It isn't a conversation about discounting at all, it's a conversation about what meets the prospect's needs and if there are items that are expendable, then the price is naturally decreased.  It changes the focus from price to value and what value the prospect wants and needs and what in their opinion can be elminated in order to reduce the cost. 

On A Sales Training Question

 I agree that there should be an eventual intertwining of sales training and product training.  The problem I see most often is that companies make a lot of assumptions about the skill levels of their salespeople in terms of sales training, so when they integrate sales training into their product training they do so at a level that assumes a knowledge and skil that very often aren't there.  Consequently I think there must be some separation of the two since in order to successfully integrate the two trainings there must be a fundamental skill level on the sales side first.