Sales Forecasting Carefully, or beating Target?

 

 

Sara Catz President and CFO of Oracle reports:

http://www.morningstar.com/earnings/earnings-call-transcript.aspx?t=ORCL&pindex=2

“Now, to the guidance, and I want to remind you that last Q2 new license and cloud revenue increased 18% in constant currency. So this will be a very, very tough comparison. Though our pipelines and potential transactions for the quarter look really very exciting, our sales leaders remain very careful about what they are forecasting to us.”

The phrase that catches my eye is

“our sales leaders remain very careful about what they are forecasting to us.”

“Sales leaders, very careful, forecasting”

The word ‘semantics’, has become associated with ‘imagined’ differences, we hear the expression

“It’s just semantics”.

However, if I apply double-indexing semantics to Sara Catz’s words,
a depth of meaning appears which should be of interest to ALL Salespeople,
but specifically to the Sales Managers and Salespeople in Oracle.

 

• “Sales Leaders”,

Catz is putting the responsibility, and accountability, for Sales Forecasting squarely on the shoulders of Sales Leaders.

• “Very Careful”,

last year, Catz attributed a ‘missed forecast’ to Sales, further she attributed it to the recruitment, on-boarding and under-performance of many thousands of new Sales people, who did not perform as “Forecast”. Hence, she is NOT looking for Forecasting to “remain” [optimistic], but is in fact signalling that “careful” means “conservative” forecasts.

• “Forecasting”,

in the context used is also “targeting” as it is
performance compared with last Quarter (Q2),
and has inherent risk, as expressed by Catz, in her use of “Constant Currency”,
when her Global Market is has a Volatile Currency uncertainty.

Catz is addressing the Investment and Analyst Community,
her audience expects to hear certain messages,
Risk Management, Growth, Returns,
so she inserts “safety” through “Very Careful”.

 

 

 

 

 

The stock performance was good after her report,
so her message, to her audience, was on song.

 

 

 

 

I am curious about the EXECUTION of her message INSIDE Oracle.

“Sales leaders, very careful, forecasting”

We have over the last 40 years, repeatedly looked at Sales Forecasting.

WHO owns the forecast?

HOW should it be done?

WHAT is the forecast used for?

The consensus from meta-analysis is that Forecasting should be owned at the level closest to the forecast event.
And, I am sure that Forecasting ‘starts’ at the Oracle Sales Executive level.
Should Sales Executives forecast “Very Carefully”?

In Sales, a very careful Forecaster is known as a “Sandbagger”.
They only forecast Rain, when it has already started raining!

The opposite  of a “very careful” forecaster is a very ‘careless’ forecaster, in Sales we call them “Dreamers”.

Every Lead is already a Sale!

Sometimes they are cynically optimistic, they present “Huge” pipelines, stuffed with opportunities which never happen.

The belief that a ‘Big’ pipeline protects poor performance, this is ‘reckless’ behaviour!

“Careful”, cautious, suspicious, precise, judicious, cautious or shrewd;
these are just some of the ‘semantic’ differences using the word “Careful”.

But when you add “Very” then the meanings can bounce from:
‘Actual’ if she used it as an adjective, to ‘Extremely’ if her use was an adverb!

Let’s take the desired case scenario: Catz’s words urge the Oracle Sales force from
Top [Leaders] to Bottom [Sales Executives] to forecast accurately, to be precise, not dreaming nor sandbagging.

Let’s imagine that by so doing, Oracle delivers a good set of results, much as the Forecast. Success.

Or, was it?

Let’s take a poor case scenario:
Catz’s words urge the Sales Leadership to be “conservative”,
they believe that it is better to be accurate than bold.

Meeting Forecast, becomes more important than exceeding Target!

Care to ensure that what you forecast actually happens, then your forecast becomes the “reality”.

The illusion of “See, I told you so” has never been Sales Success,
“better than expected”, “Upside”, “BOLD”, have always been hallmarks in Sales, Corporate and Sporting success.

I have discussed Sales Leadership as a function of their “Maturity”, through the lens of Forecasting and Targeting

http://brianmaciver.blogspot.com.es/2011/01/stretch-sales-targets.html

ORACLE’s results, and its stock performance, are dependent on Good Forecasting,
but they are equally dependent on PERFORMANCE in the Market and likely future performance.

 

It’s about Expectation AND perceived Performance.

It’s about how well you did against how well you ‘might’ have done!

Managing Expectations is OK, but Managing Maximum Performance is more important!

I believe that Catz and her Sales leadership will have to communicate a clear message to their Sales force about what “our sales leaders remain very careful about what they are forecasting to us” really MEANS.

The Sales Leadership will need to turn this into HOW we want Sales Executives to behave,
as neither dreamers nor Sandbaggers, but bold and right!

Big Data, Big Numbers are made up from individuals and their actions,
getting your Sales force to do what is productive, not just careful, is in these days of BIG, quite a challenge!

Let’s just review how tough any forecasting is,

never mind ‘very careful’ forecasting!

http://brianmaciver.blogspot.com.es/2010/10/sales-forecasts-are-just-estimates.html

 

.

Challenging - The Challenger Sale

 

The recent RAIN Group Report,
purports to ‘Challenge’ The Challenger Sale.

http://info.rainsalestraining.com/free-report-what-sales-winners-do-differently

It is based on a survey of “Buyers” talking about “Sellers”.

 

Paradoxically they ignore their own advice:

“Sales research methods often focus on asking sellers, sales managers, and leaders what the top performers do versus average performers. Unfortunately, people’s perceptions of what they do and what they actually do tend to be quite different.

Our research looks at sales from the buyers’ perspective. Our objective was to find the answer to the following question: What are the winners of actual sales opportunities doing differently than the sellers who come in second place?”

Their “research” ignores the very flaw which THEY highlight earlier!

Unfortunately, people’s perceptions of what they do
and what they actually do tend to be quite different.

This applies equally to both Sellers AND Buyers. The perceptions of what Buyers ‘believe’ Sellers DO will actually tend to be quite different from what Sellers actually ‘DO’! We are helped in this by having a body of research of 35,000 sales calls, carried out in 23 Countries, over a period of 12 years!

The second Paradox is using a Comparison of ‘winners’ to ‘losers’.  
N. Rackham and (Dick) Ruff published this flaw in their book ‘Managing Major Sales’ in 1991.
However, the ‘flaw’ of using this approach was widely known since the early 1980’s.

Learn from Neil Rackham:
“And to not waste any time comparing Exemplar Performers (what I call Master Performers) to
Poor Performers. To Moderately Successful Performers, yes.
To see what truly ‘differentiates’ the true Masters.”
Written by Guy W. Wallace, CPT, performance-based Instructional Analyst Architect - Since 1979 and Consultant - Since 1982 [from http://eppic.biz/2013/01/04/1st-friday-favorite-guru-neil-rackham/]

 

 

RAIN Group highlight the Winner/Loser flaw by showing what they top rank in ‘winners’
“Educate with new ideas and perspectives”
compared with ‘losers’ who have this as their 42nd from the top, or bottom Rank!

With this combination of two fatal flaws in their basic research approach,

no credibility can be attached to their conclusions

which, paradoxically, they claim contradict The Challenger Sale Model.
This is a surprising claim as they state Salespeople
“can’t inspire buyers unless they ‘educate them with new ideas and perspectives’”
which sounds like a rephrasing of “Teach with Insights” to me!

In other words, they appear to endorse The Challenger Sale approach.

Do you think The Challenger Sale methodology is superior?

Jill Rowley (‏@jill_rowley) of Eloqua
Winner of the 2013 Sales Representative of the Year – Stevie® Awards

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=HTJQyce2Qf0

 

 

Asked me a simple, straight forward question:

“Do you think The Challenger Sale methodology is superior?”
[to the IBM Signature Selling Methodology SSM]

The short answer is “yes”.

 

The longer answer is below!

IBM’s ‘Structured’ Sales Methodology (SSM) gave them significant Competitive Advantage, across multiple Sales Channels. I was consulting with Big Data Storage when we noticed an increase in sales being lost to IBM Distributors in the early 2000’s. We were used to winning the lion’s share in this arena because it was not IBM, not IBM sales, not IBM process. It was a ‘soft’ Market. I did a number of lost business reviews, and we interviewed several job applicants from IBM Distributors.

We found SSM.

“Over one-third of IBM’s employees use the IBM Signature Selling Method every day as they develop solutions to client problems. IBM has learned that the professionals who have trained on and use this method sell two to three times more than sales personnel who have not. The method is supported by a portal to allow IBM sales representatives to hone their selling skills and to help with soft-skills development, such as self-image and rapport-building, that is necessary for sales success.

IBM’s learning transformation story. 2004

SSM is an elegant methodology which gives IBM and its Sales Channels a common language, allows for rapid scaling and experience sharing. IBM drove it from Marketing, which gave SSM reach and funding.

It is based on the process that Rackham had published several times, most specifically his 1999 “Rethinking the Salesforce”, accurately subtitled as: redefining selling to create and capture Customer value, which he co-authored with John De Vincentis.

Rackham’s Process is described in Chapter seven “Sales Process light in a long dark tunnel”,
where the basis of IBM SSM is covered.

The KEY point is that Sales, unlike other departments, do not have clear boundary “handoffs”, where ‘lean’ improvements can be made.

Rather Sales have an end to end process…….The BUYING Cycle!

And, Sales have to fit with that.

But then you knew that!  Jill, you are the EloQueen.

What you may find interesting is his “Seven Characteristics of a Good Sales Process” page 217.

And, that was what IBM did,
they tested their Sales Process against those seven Characteristics.

From 2003 on in Big Data Storage and Data Services which, compete head to head with IBM, we have used an SSM, underpinned by Consultative Selling Skills based on SPINFAB to successfully compete with IBM and its distributors. If you do not have a SSM, you will lose, a lot, against IBM. In Big Software we underpinned our SSM with Enterprise Selling based on Advanced Selling Skills using VALUE CONSTRUCTION.

When 2008 happened, we had problems all over. Delayed decisions, status quo decisions, losing to the cheapest competitor, and really, really tough Price/Cost negotiations with procurement. Sales were down, margin was down, and profits were down. Yet some Salespeople were doing OK, Revenue Growth, Margins held, and they were earning good Commission!

We audited and assessed the Salesforce. Compared to previous audits there was no skill drop off, but there was substantial activity change. Late entry [or even last minute entry] in the Buying Process was becoming the ‘Norm’. Selling was becoming a matter of weeks of FRANTIC activity followed by months of inactivity in both Strategic accounts and Major accounts.

 

 

In 2010, in London, I held a breakfast briefing with clients from Big IT, Big Data Storage, Big Telco and Big Software, where I suggested that Relationship Based Selling was NOT working.

It did NOT go down well!
We had a lot of toys thrown out of prams.

 

 

 

Some of these Corporations were betting their shirts that the ‘relationships’ they had been building [for 10 or more years] with their clients in Banking, Government, Industry, Transportation, Energy and Petro-Chem were going to sustain them through the “turbulent” economic climate.

Relationships, did not help.

By 2012, we had the following general situation.

 

Yes, SIXTY per cent of the Profit contribution
was coming from only 15% of the Salesforce.

This means that losing a Sales Top Performer, a Rock Star,
was really hitting the bottom line.

Just promoting the Top Performer, could seriously impact Profit performance.

 

In several Telecom Clients in 2010-2012
we took the step of cutting the bottom 15% of Salespeople
who were causing a 20% profit contribution LOSS.

We then gave their accounts/territories to the Top 15%.

It had a very positive Profit Contribution response.
(This technique was used by Unisys in the 1970’s)

 

Then, in late 2011, we began hearing about some of the SEC-CEB research,
and the forthcoming Challenger Sale. I read Rackham’s endorsement,
and obtained an early copy of the book.

Jill, I have worked in Evidence Based Selling skills for 30 years, ~
I am NOT taken in by Fads, silver bullets or Hyperbole. I am a Sales Skills Sceptic.
To be even more precise I use an ‘eliminative philosophy’ which simply says:

“If what you tell me is true, then show me the proof and let me TEST it!”

I wrote a Philosophical Criticism about The Challenger Sale in November 2011.

http://brianmaciver.blogspot.com.es/2011/11/philosophical-criticism-of-challenger.html

I cautioned, TCS would be misunderstood, and it is now the most misrepresented Sales Methodology around. It has ‘disciples’ who don’t get it, and it has “critics and detractors” who don’t get it, either. I suspect that many who comment for, or against, the book have never read it!  Not understanding the Book, the Research, or the Practice does not seem to stop anybody from commenting about it.

Remarkable!

2011, and The Challenger Sale, I already knew that Relationship Selling was NOT working. The startling new Information that the book offered was a sound statistical basis to take a fresh look at Selling,
since the 2008 financial collapse

The emergence of The “Challenger” profile, as distinct from the “Lone Wolf” was really helpful, as both in my research, and is most other research, they were both in the SAME category “Top Performer”. However, now we could measure that one type of ‘top’ performer was in decline, and the other in ascendancy in current Market conditions.

The TCS comparative Statistical Analysis on the ‘Challenger’ out-performing the ‘Relationship Builder’ by more than 10:1 in Complex Selling, was even more than our calculated 7:1.  We had a Validation for what we had perceived in 2010, and had implemented by restructuring the Salesforce population.

Now Jan 2012, the real work began:
“What were the Sales BEHAVIOURS being used by Challengers, and Relationship Builders,
which were defining their success and failure?”

Challengers are “Challengers” because of what they DO,
not because of who they ARE!

Likewise for Relationship Builders.

Early research, we had a 15 year database of Sales Behaviours and Sales Performance results to examine, (n=3000 approx.) We had 300 hours of Video to review. And a current base of 350 audited and assessed salespeople to improve behaviourally.

 

We had several early wins.

Challengers and “Lone Wolf” both used more Suggestions than Proposals unlike Relationship Builders, who used almost exclusively Proposals. This is NOT published in the TCS book and is unique to BMAC Consultants.

What do I mean?

• A “Proposal” is a Statement: “You should do this!”
• A “Suggestion” is a Question: “How would it be if you (or we) did this?”

Challengers and the Lone Wolf by using Suggestions
were having a 60% Buyer agreement rate and a 40% disagreement rate.

Relationship Builders by using Proposals
were having a 60% Buyer rejection rate and a 40% agreement rate.

i.e. this behaviour alone was proving to be 50% MORE successful.

The second early win was on Challenger “Insights.”

See: http://brianmaciver.blogspot.com.es/2012/05/putting-challenger-sale-to-work-four.html

This was the method we used, very successfully,
to generate insights for Big Software to sell Cloud Based substitutes for Enterprise Software.

We then looked at the Behavioural Practice to deliver the insight content.
Again using the Challenger group and comparing behaviours to Relationship builders.

Challenger exhibited a 60:40 ratio of DISAGREEING to Agreeing

Relationship Builders exhibited a ratio of 40:60 disagreeing to AGREEING

It has to be noted that Challengers disagreed rationally, by saying WHY they disagreed,
and delivering an insight, RB’s tended to agree with Customers without saying WHY they agreed.

The Impact on the Buyer is noticeably different!

The Buyer would accept the RB’s agreement and reinforce their current approach.

The Challenger’s rational disagreement would cause the Buyer to defend their current approach and enter into Customer Engagement where the Challenger could PROVE their insight.

So, the question

“Do I think The Challenger Sale methodology is superior?”
[To IBM’s SSM], is:

That they work together!

Using a Structured Selling Process is better than not using a Structured Process.

(NB. it’s very worthwhile to test your “Structure” against Rackham’s Checklist,
just any old “structure” will not do!)

Using the Challenger Approach to initiating Customer Engagement, is superior to most alternatives, especially the Problem Discovery Question based, then Solution offered approaches.

Hence, the furore over “solution selling” is dead discussion.

My research leads me to conclude that Salespeople will NOT learn the ‘behaviours’ of a Challenger just by reading the book, but anyone in Selling can become a successful Challenger by learning the Challenger behaviours and USING them correctly!

 

 

The Golden Triangle, the very Top 5%, Performers in Sales can be developed by careful construction and combination of:

• Revenue Generating Sales Activity [an SSM],

• Evidence Based Selling Skills [including TCS] and

• Business Knowledge [access to Business Insights or an Insight Generation system].

 

 

 

And, all of this fits right on top of current best Practice in Marketing from Companies like Eloqua’s cloud-based marketing automation and revenue performance management software.

Eloqua’s modern marketing cloud delivers best-in-class capabilities to ensure every component of marketing works harder and more efficiently to drive revenue. Having a robust Evidence Based Structured Selling Methodology and an Evidence Based Sales approach, with Validated Sales Behaviours delivers the REVENUE and PROFIT results!

Sales, Jobs for life!

 

Nobody has a lifetime Contract of Employment,

which is strange because Employers want Customers for life.

 

How do we understand a “Job for Life” in 2013?

I believe it is found in the concept of “EMPLOYABILITY”

An ‘employable’ person is one who has desired Skills and Competencies,
which they can use to generate Value for their Employers, they are always in demand.

 

 

As a Sales “Employee” you have the right that your Employer shall at least maintain your current employability.

It is to their current benefit
and it is of vital future importance to YOU.

Employability, for a Salesperson, is having a Portfolio of transferrable Selling Skills,
which will enable you to bring Value to your Employer whoever that is.

 

 

 

 

 

If a Salesperson’s Selling Skills are developed and maintained,
then I believe they will have a job for life.

Selling skills, FUNCTIONAL Selling skills, serve as a good foundation for Management and a great foundation for General Management.

Insist that your Selling skills, hence your future EMPLOYABILITY are at the highest level.

If your current Employer will not do this, then before you lose what employability you have.
Leave and find an Employer willing to maintain your Selling skills.

In all events, recognise that YOUR future employability,
YOUR Job for Life, rests in YOUR own hands.

Take actions to safeguard your employability, do it for yourself!

The Secret to Selling

 

A great sales Guru discovered the Secret to Selling.

It is comprehensive; it is elegant in its simplicity.

Those who learn the secret will have untold success and fulfil their dreams.

Using the secret will bring great wealth, which may then be demonstrated in Property,
possessions of great quality and a five-star life style for themselves and for their families.

They will be respected and valued by their Employers,
admired by their colleagues and loved by their Customers.

The great sales Guru who found and taught the Secret of Selling
retires and disappears to live in secluded luxury.

The Salespeople who learned the secret begin to fail.

They search libraries for new books, watch new videos and attend conferences for the secret.
They consult with Consultants,
they are trained by Trainers and
they seek coaching with Coaches.

They search for the Secret of Selling in Psychology,
they then resort Pseudo-Psychology and Folk Psychology. 

They ask neuroscience if they have found the Secret of Selling
and they are told of a Biological basis to decisions.

Computers are bought to enter, share and manage Data, to Control Relationship Management,
to give Sales Force Automation systems and process to the speculations of ignorance.

As their Revenue numbers drop and their success turns to failure,
their search becomes frantic.
Any street prophet, lunatic or charlatan is paid for advice and, even worse, they are listened to.

Salespeople pretend to their Employers that they still have the secret,
but they are losing the respect and value they once had.
Their Colleagues stop admiring them; instead they begin to resent their high salaries.

Customers no longer love them; in fact, Customers avoid them preferring to buy on-line.

Their five-star Lifestyle is no longer possible and their families resent the change.

And then, the sales Guru returns.

They ask again for the secret of selling.

He smiles then replies,

“The secret of selling is in the skills that you have,

the knowledge that you need, the work that you do,

the strategy that you use and the attitude that you hold.”

“After I left, you forgot this,
you listened to false teachers
and you looked for lazy answers.”

• The secret of Selling is in Evidence Based Selling Skills, not in short cuts or proverbs.
  
• The secret of Selling is in Appropriate Knowledge of Product/Market, not in bluff.
  
• The secret of Selling is in Revenue Generating Activity, not in busy work.
  
• The secret of Selling is in a Good Strategy for Your Customers and Your Competition,
  not in an imaginary Selling Process married to an imagined Buying Process.
  
• The secret of Selling is in a Healthy Attitude to work,
  to your Employers, to your Colleagues and to your Customers;
  not in easy answers, tips, tricks, ploys and dodges.

Putting the Challenger Sale to Work (Five)

 

A USP is NOT
a Challenger Insight

 

The CEB research clearly shows that Challenger Insights work.

However, few Salespeople are actually using them!

 

Let´s review briefly, what USP´s are:

“The Unique Selling Proposition (a.k.a. Unique Selling Point, or USP) is a marketing concept
that was first proposed as a theory to understand a pattern among successful advertising campaigns
of the early 1940s. It states that such campaigns made unique propositions to the customer and
that this convinced them to switch brands.

Wikipedia

Marketing produces USP´s by the gazillion:

Faster, bigger, smaller, easier, cheaper, and on and on!

HOWEVER, do they work?

  USP:

The Gas ‘free’ car

 

 

We have known for years, in Sales, that USP´s DO NOT SELL.

Rackham’s Research published as SPIN Selling devotes a chapter to it (Ch.9)

“The Myth and Magic” of the Initial Benefit Statement
and the USP in “Opening the Sale” is just another rod on Sale’s back!

“It’s the fastest on the Market!” offers the novice Salesperson.

“We do NOT need more SPEED, we need more reliability,
and faster usually means LESS RELIABILITY!” Retorts the cynical Customer.

This really is stepping off on the wrong foot,
from push “benefit” to Customer Objection in less than 10 seconds!

“We do not want your USP of speed;
we believe that might damage the reliability that we really need.”

The brochures promote SPEED, the adverts promote SPEED,
and the Call-centre is calling trying to book appointments for salespeople to talk about SPEED.
It is another failed Marketing Campaign, but Sales is going to get the blame.

“They didn't sell the USP: SPEED!” laments the CMO.

 

Opening the Sale refresher
http://brianmaciver.blogspot.com.es/2012/02/three-great-selling-skills-that-really.html

 

How do we construct these Challenger Insights?

From the MARKET, not MARKETING!

Get together with some customers, product specialists and ….

OK some marketing people
(but have an equal number of Salespeople present).

DO NOT let Marketing seize the White Board
or write-up the minutes of the meeting.

Have a Customer Engagement;

see their world through their eyes.

Ask Customers to design your next product,
or to modify your existing products.

Find out where “Speed”, size, or cost etc. is on their priority list.

From the meeting develop and test a variety of “insights”,
this is the beginning of Challenger Insights. (And the end of the USP! fiasco)

 

.

Can a 21st Century Sales Methodology be built on Proverbs?

 

I had the great fortune to know my wife’s Grandmother. Born in 1900, at the province of Soria, Castile and León, Spain. She lived to be 93 years old. She left her village Castillejo de Robledo for the first time when she was 65 years old. Leaving behind the three story house which had been the family home for 4 generations, without the benefit of running Water, Gas or Electricity. The family had lived off the land for 200 years, a few acres of Vines which made the fine Ribera de Duero Wine, a few pigs, chickens and goats in a “corral”, a Burro to help till their wheat field and a “huerta” to grow vegetables besides the river.

It would be easy to label her a Peasant Farmer or even “Peon”, and she had had no formal education being unable to read or write.  Yet she and her husband had raised and ensured that her three children were well fed and educated. All of her children left the village and they came back to take her and her husband with them when they were able to. The house now with all utilities including Broadband, has passed, along with Vineyards, to her son who summers and harvests the grapes with some of his family.

http://www.cellartours.com/spain/spanish-wine-regions/ribera-del-duero.html

I met “Abuela Germana” in her early eighties, by turns she could be talkative or silent. She was a very interesting Old Lady.
Although she had no formal education, she could neither be described as ignorant nor un-educated. She was wise.
Her wisdom was expressed by Proverbs.

“You know a person by the company they keep.”

She repeated this to her Children, her Grand-children, and Great-grandchildren.
She would deliver the saying then explain what it meant, and how to apply it to life.

We reckon, for nobody ever counted, she had more than 500 proverbs. I first noticed that her “recipes” for Cooking were expressed this way, to give the ingredients and their ratios. She recounted Proverbs for Life, for married life and family life, for Farming, relationships with the land and water, when to sow and when to harvest, the best time for the “matanza” to turn Pig into Chorizo and Jamon, for relations with friends and neighbours:

“Good walls make for good neighbours!”

Many sayings were derived from the Biblical Book of Proverbs,
but even more clearly came from folk wisdom,
garnered through centuries living and working in the same part of Spain.

You will be glad to know that I will spare you from lists of examples,
mainly because she spoke them in Castilian Spanish, but often in a dialectal form.
They were understood by her and were “her way of thinking”.

So, I am no stranger to Proverbs.

My question is “Can a 21^st century Sales Methodology be built on Proverbs?”

We could use expressions like :

· Haste makes waste

· A stitch in time saves nine.

· Ignorance is bliss

· Better late than never

· You can catch more flies with honey than
   you can with vinegar.

· You can lead a horse to water, 
   but you can't make him drink.

 

 

 

 

· Those who live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones.

· A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush.

· A little learning is a dangerous thing.

And easily make them apply to Sales and Selling,

“People who live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones” could apply to relationships with the Competition.

A commonly used proverb is “Don’t knock the Competition”
but what does that mean in a 21^st century “Modern Selling” setting.

Is it glib? Has it become a cliché?

Does “A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush” mean that in Sales we should only pursue “sure things?”
or only take small deals or stay out of the sales underbrush and beware of Poison Ivy?

Could a Salesperson justify keeping damaging information from a customer by declaring
“Ignorance is bliss?”

Can unethical behaviour by Salespeople be justified under cover of Hyperbole
“All is fair in love and war [or sales]”

Or should we use the nemesis to successful Selling “ABC Always be Closing!”

In these “modern times” the anti-proverb is more widely used:
"Nerds of a feather flock together” could describe Facebook or perhaps better Twitter!

My answer to the question is NO!

A 21^st Century Sales Methodology,  CANNOT be based on Proverbs.

 

It leads to Sales Myopia and a Dysfunctional Selling situation.

Sales time and energy is wasted on a simple quick answer inappropriate to a Complex Selling. The basis of all FUNCTIONAL Sales methodologies is in Sales Behaviour. DOING the right thing, in the right way, at the right time, during the right circumstances not regurgitating a cliché.

 

Evidence Based Selling Skills

rest in Identifying FUNCTIONAL Selling Behaviours,
in LEARNING how to execute those Behaviours
and in actually DOING them.

Here is a little evidence, a BMAC Study of 150 Salespeople identified as Sales “Poor Performers” by their Manager and Peers’ opinions, as well as by their actual Sales Results and confirmed by the results of Sales Skills Assessment;

90% described themselves as “Skilled in Sales Methodology.”

Almost all long-term “Poor Performers” describe themselves as able to sell,
yet the evidence is overwhelming that they cannot!

 

The use of Proverbs as a Sales methodology
I would simply describe as:

“A little learning is a dangerous thing.”

How to Change the way your Company Sells

 

The way Buyers “Buy” Products and the Markets that they buy from,
as we know changes, thus the WAY We Sell MUST also change!

The way a Company actually sells,
and they way individual Salespeople are selling,
is a function of the presence, or absence, of these Four Forces and their relative strengths.

Pragmatic Change is, without any doubt the most successful Sales Change,

but it needs the Conservative ‘restraint’ to prevent it running off-the-rails.

In my MBA Dissertation (1999) I identified FOUR Forces which cause Selling to “Change”,
i.e. from the Orthodox Approach or "Traditional" to the "New" or Unorthodox Approach. 

Four forces which cause the Sales Approach to Change:

primarily a “fall” in Sales Performance,
changes in the “Product/Market”,
changes by the “Competition” and “Economic” Change.

But, what was even more interesting was not the CAUSE of change,
but HOW Companies went about “changing” the way they Sell.

BMAC Consultants identified Four Ways that people CHANGE their Sales Approach

 

  

1. Pragmatic Change, based on evidence, what works?
This is akin to Mintzberg’s view of “Emergent” Strategy. 

Different Salespeople try different things with different Customers and
a "New Way of Selling" emerges, based on evidence.  It has basic Validation.

2. Conservative Change attempts to stop Pragmatic Change,

fearing that it won’t work, or is changing Selling too fast.

“Let us just keep going” the Market will shift in our favour.

The old way is best and we have “evidence” that it USED to work,
even if it no longer works!

 

These first two were “evidence” based, the next two are NOT!

 

3. Utopian Change to a ‘new, ideal and perfect’ Sales world,
without evidence of its likely effectiveness.
Based on a New Book, a Charismatic Sales Trainer, a ‘Cult’ like approach
where blind faith, hope and trust in a Method, Process, Software, ‘Guru’ or ‘Expert’.
When initial performance reports say it’s NOT working this is explained by
the Change not being fully “accepted”, it then forms into “Disciples” and “Rebels”.



   
4. Restorative Change is going back to the “Golden Age of Selling”.
This is again NOT evidence based.
It simply requires that the Sales “Techniques” believed to work in the past,
e.g. as used previously in IBM, XEROX, APPLE
or one of the ‘Door to Door’ Sales Companies be re-adopted.
It usually has several Senior Executives sponsoring it
and the introduction of the Sales Trainer who trained them.

Often, you will find both ‘Utopian’ and ‘Restorative’ Change at work
in the same Company, at the same time, as neither is "Evidence" based.

I collected substantial evidence that Evidence Based Selling works.

 

So, By Accident or by Design?

How are you Changing?

 

But, sometimes LUCK works too!

There is such a thing as the right product,

in the right place, at the right time;

it just doesn’t last!

This blog was originally entitled “Modern Selling”

Modern Selling will always be of its own age, and it will always be ‘unorthodox’.

‘Orthodox’ Selling will always be the one just before it.

 

The Key Constructs in this Blog are Copyright ©BMAC Consultants 1999,
and if used should be acknowledged.

Is a Sales Methodology needed? Only if you want to succeed!

From Dave Stein's research area five of
The Real Reasons Sales Training Fails and What To Do About It

#5 Is an inadequate or completely absent Sales Methodology

(the organising principles underlying Selling)

In more than 20 of my Clients medium and small I have discovered that there was no methodology at all to their selling. They had a Sales Department, a Sales Manager and Salespeople but NO methodology for Selling. That is usually why I get called in because: “not having a Sales Methodology”
like “not having a Sales Strategy” means that you usually fail!

Dave Stein’s ESR site has a good enough definition of Sales Methodology and how it differs from Sales Process on http://davesteinsblog.esresearch.com/2009/12/02/more-excuses-for-not-doing-...

In my view, it is also about having a Sales Process that is driven by
YOUR Product/Market BUYING METHODOLOGY.

That is Selling the way your Market wants to Buy.

“Easy to Buy From!” is always the highest rated characteristic of a Supplier in the eyes of the Buyer when you survey Buyers.
“Trusted Advice” scores low at 30%.

How do you know if you have a working Sales Methodology,
a broken Sales Methodology or no Sales methodology at all?

Well, you can retain a Sales Consultant like me, or you can ask your Customers:
“How easy are we to buy from?”

Ask some of your Lost Business Prospects:
“Were we easy to buy from, or did the difficulty in dealing with us play a part in why we lost the deal?”

Fixing a broken Sales Methodology (or a partly working Methodology), really does need a Consultant (internal or external). The output is ‘This is what we do wrong and why (PROOF),
and this is HOW through Changes we will put it right and these are the measures to prove its improving’.

Perhaps the toughest part of SALES METHODOLOGY is when you finally realize you cannot BUY one,
you have to CONSTRUCT one. Some great Companies like Huthwaite (SPIN is only a Part, you have to buy the Package), Miller Heiman, TAS, or Holden will sell you the components, BUT YOU will have to do the Assembly and the heavy lifting IMPLEMENTATION.

You can, if you are smart enough even mix and match
getting the Right, not just good enough, Components.

Sales Training without a Sales Methodology doesn’t work.

 

IBM (referring to their Structured Selling Methodology)
calls them their Cash Generating Machines!

So, save all your wasted expense on novelty courses
and one day training events, daft books, sales blogs and sales tips.
And, invest the money and time to build a Working Sales Methodology.

Is it true that 87 cents of every dollar spent on Sales Training is wasted.

 

87 per cent spent on Sales Training is wasted.

Google shows: About 555,000 results (0.22 seconds)

The “87 per cent belief” is widespread,
it is quoted endlessly,

But, is it TRUE?

 

In “The Challenger Sales” Book they write:

“Research by Neil Rackham has shown that 87 per cent of sales training content is forgotten by reps within thirty days”   (location 2705 the Challenger Sale - Kindle edition)

What is this REALLY all about?

The 87% Statistic was first published in the “American Society for Training and Development Journal” November 1979 and is credited as a Huthwaite Study. At first Publication it was an “87% loss of a “New Skill”, later in Neil Rackham’s 1991 book “Managing Major Sales”, the Graph fig 5.1 Page 130 is titled as : “Sales Training without systematic coaching wastes 87 cents in the Dollar”. However, seldom quoted is the comment on the previous page 129:
“Some Sales people showed a skills GAIN.
Where this happened, they had been systematically COACHED following training.”

And in 2001 Neil Rackham published an impassioned white paper
“The Coaching Controversy”, where he puts the context thus:
http://www.ascenticg.com/hw_survey/hw.htm

“The Xerox Corporation carried out several studies, one of which showed that
in the absence of follow-up coaching 87 per cent of the skills change brought about by the program was lost. That’s 87 cents in the skills dollar. Knowledge training, on the other hand, generally shows a much smaller loss.”

So, now we have a clear view of what it is all about.
Neil Rackham uses the 87¢ (cents) statistic,
taken from a study made before 1979,
(Part of the “Newcastle” Study?)
at Xerox based on the SKILL loss post-Sales Training of Photocopier Salespeople.

Indeed it is qualified, to distinguish between
SKILLS and KNOWLEDGE,
the latter showing far less “Loss” than the former!
And, then it is further qualified (logically) to be
“The loss of the Skills ‘Gained’ during the Training”.

 

 

 

 

This is a long way from:

The '87cents' has grown and changed into a "proof".

“Research by Neil Rackham has shown that 87 per cent of sales training content
is forgotten by reps within thirty days” (The  Challenger Sale)

This “Proof” is used to support
“Sales Training doesn’t work!”
usually followed by the Hollow Claim
“Except MY Sales Training, which is the only one which works!”

Neither is likely to be true!

Here are some other Statistics from before 1979:

http://info.cancerresearchuk.org/cancerstats/types/lung/smoking/#percent

In 1979 40% of males smoked versus 20% today a 100% change.

If we used the 1979 Data we would be 100% WRONG in its usage!

Why didn’t we instead focus on the KEY Information
Published in Neil Rackham’s Classic book “SPIN Selling”. Page 12

“Potential Customers remember just over 5 key points from the 8 key points presented during the Sales Presentation.  Just SEVEN DAYS later,
they can only recall just over 2 Key points.
A 50% Memory loss and a drop from “likely to buy” to “unlikely to buy!”

And “statistically speaking” it’s not just Sales:

“The average organization is losing an amount equal to 7% of their annual sales because of poor leadership practices.
The three main side effects of poor leadership practices are increased employee turnover,
decreased customer satisfaction, and reduced employee productivity,
according to David Witt, Program Director at The Ken Blanchard Companies.”

http://www.kenblanchard.com/Business_Leadership/Management_Leadership_Newsletter/December2011_main_article/

Really I just will not leave without talking about MY own Sales Training Courses

By design, my Sales Training Design takes “Skill Loss” into account. The use of Aide-memoires and Practicing the new skills in Simulation with both Video and Observation feedback helps. I recently had a comment from a delegate whom I trained over 25 years ago, he remembered vividly the story I told so he could learn the Sales Skill of “Supporting” !  I haven’t trained that particular skill for some 20 years,
but it was a very vivid story!

 

However, I cannot stress enough that Sales SKILLS Training includes
BOTH Training and Coaching, you MUST do both.

I don’t call Sales Skills Coaching “On-the -job Training” because it IS NOT.
Sales Skills COACHING is the COMPLETION of what you learned during the Training Event.
On-the- Job ‘training’ is somebody showing you how
to fill in your monthly expense report!

 

The right way to Sales Skills COACH can be found at:

http://brianmaciver.blogspot.com/2011/10/true-secrets-of-sales-coaching-for.html
and
http://brianmaciver.blogspot.com/2010/09/how-do-you-make-great-sales-people.html

If you want to sell VALUE, then you had better know what Value Is!

Value is in the “Eye of the Customer”,

Whether we Sales and

Marketing believe it or not.

 

 

Customers assign Values to the attributes of our product or service, every Customer assigns different VALUE.

Anyone, who expresses their belief through “Gut Feel” or worse still “Experience” which Product or Service attributes are most important or Values which they ascribe are almost certainly WRONG.

If you want to Sell VALUE then you must first DISCOVER it.

 

YOU CANNOT CREATE VALUE

 

Nor, can your Sales Managers, nor your Marketing Guru, ONLY Customers perceive Value.

And, what your Customer perceives as Value
and how much Value they perceive must be DISCOVERED by you to offer back to them.

Crucially, Value is always expressed in the Customers own words –
hence it can never be written in a Marketing Brochure or Sales Playbook.
Leave the playbooks where they belong – in the playground!

Value, Real VALUE as Customer’s perceive it is first discovered,
and then it is developed by the Salesperson AND the Customer.

This interaction by Sales and Customer is called:

VALUE CONSTRUCTION

Initially, Value Construction is both soft and subjective research in the Customer’s own world, their REALITY. Using one-to-one or one-to-few meetings which identify as many attributes and ideas as possible. These Attributes are “Constructs” which having been sorted, combined as a synthesis produce a Customer Sourced VALUE PROPOSITION.

A frequent Marketing mistake is to take old Value Propositions from existing Customers and PUSH them as Value Statements to New Customers.

DON’T DO IT,
it simply does not work.

Value ‘Reviews’ with Lost Sales and Current Customers
find “their” Value NOT “True” Value,
which can only be found with the actual Customer.

Experience has given Salespeople the realisation,
that Requirement, Expectation and Want all have different Values.

Customer’s Expectations change, Value is NOT a predetermined significance.

The more difficult it is for a Customer to EVALUATE a Product/Service before purchase,
then the more important EXPLICIT VALUE becomes,
the more important Value Construction becomes!

BMAC Consultants offer Value Construction work shops

as part of their Customer Engagement Process.

How do you lose market share, with the best product and best price?

 

It’s easy, give Marketing control over Customer Relationships.

I have just finished a long assessment for Big IT, they told me to find a problem with Sales.

I did, they were losing deals to a ‘softer’ product and the customer was paying the same or even more.

When I made my initial report, they asked me to recommend a “Sales Training”. I could have said anything. But, I replied that I knew what was wrong, but we didn’t know what caused the problem.

They agreed reluctantly to fund some more Sales Consultancy, but they really wanted “Sales Training”, a good two day event that would ‘energise’ the sales force and bring the lost business back!

 

 

My role as a Sales Consultant is to eliminate mistakes.

That is it. Simple!

Find the mistake, then eliminate it.

At BMAC we call it “error detection and error recovery”.
(At least one of us used to design, test and repair Hard Disk drives).

If YOU are not doing something wrong (or not doing something right) then your business would be booming!

At big IT, we did the usual lost business reviews,
with some remarkable and consistent results across a wide range of
Salespeople, Customers, Customer Segments and Geography.

· Did we lose on Price – NO?

· Did we lose on Product – NO?

 

We drilled down, what was the price difference, little or none.

What was the product difference little or none.

Several (sincere) Lost Customers, even admitted that they had bought more expensively and
they believed the product that they bought although good enough may not be as good as Big IT’s.

So WHY did we lose? We asked. It came down to RELATIONSHIPS.

Over the last three years Marketing has taken over ‘Customer Relationships’. Marketing were responding to incoming queries and contacting “quiet” Customers. Sales were told to focus on ‘Closing deals’.

“Show the Prospect that we have the best Product and the Best price”.

Marketing had installed, at great expense, a new CRM. It collated web landing, Social Media searches, recorded incoming and out-going telephone contacts and had hounded Sales for their “Black Contact Books” to be put in the system. The initial results were great; the sales ‘lag time’ had dropped from entry in the pipeline to Order from 7 months to 4 months. Sales were only working ‘qualified’ leads. Marketing was holding ‘pre-qualified’ leads and “nurturing” them.

So, what was wrong? Where is the error?

The Customers had interpreted Marketing’s new CRM approach as:
“We are Not Interested.”

 

 

 

 

The Customer wanted Sales Engagement!

So, they got it from the “interested” Competition.

 

Interesting?

A Major Problem in Selling has been identified

A major problem in Selling has been identified by the CSO 2011 Sales Training /Sales Effectiveness key trends Survey.

It is the following simple statistic:
65% of Sales Managers are actively involved in Sales Training delivery and development and 35% of the Sales Managers act as Sales Training Instructors!

Let me use a simple metaphor:

What would happen to the standard of driving if 65% of parents were actively involved in the development and 35% in the delivery of driving instruction?

Further if there was no driving test to measure Competence, Driving Skill, traffic awareness, decision making and attitudes to other road users.... then I guess we would never know the impact!

I carried out an Assessment of 350 Sales people at Big Telco, to measure their Product Knowledge and Selling Skills.  We did this first by testing their product/market Knowledge, and then their Selling Skills in Sales Simulation. Before the assessment we asked their Sales Managers to “rate” their own sales people. Previously, the Sales Managers had actively taken part in the development and delivery of the Sales Training.

The Sales Mangers gave 90% of their Salespeople a pass mark. 315 passes, and 35 Fails.

After external assessment,
185 of the Salespeople FAILED to pass the Assessment (their “Driving” Test).

The Sales Managers had a 500% error in Assessment of their own people .

7 of the 35 “failures” rated by their sales managers passed the external assessment,
and 150+ who had been passed by their Sales Managers “failed” the test and/or the simulation.

30% of the Sales Managers themselves failed the Assessment first time and 10% STILL FAILED THE RE-SITS 6 WEEKS LATER.  125 ‘failed’ Salespeople passed their re-sits 6 weeks later after receiving external Sales Training (not mine!) and on-demand Product training.
They also received some coaching from some Sales Managers.

My conclusion is the skill set for a Sales Trainer is a lot more than PowerPoint Operator.

 

Sales Trainer skills include Validated Selling Skills and Adult Trainer Skills including training needs analysis, diagnostics, training delivery and training evaluation.

 

Realistically, how many Sales Managers have both
Current Selling Skills and Adult Training Skills?

The truthful answer is very few.

 

The “Sales Skills” that Sales Managers do have are being used less and less, may be out of date and in many cases are dysfunctional (ABC, Objection Handling, Steps of the Sale etc.)

Adult Trainer Skills include, as well as subject matter knowledge, adult training techniques.
An understanding of Learner Motivation,
both how to generate it and how to maintain it. 
This is the minimum for the Sales Trainer’s Tool kit

 

CEO’s, VP’s Sales and CMO’s have to ask themselves two hard question:
“Is it worth saving a little money to do a poor job of Sales Training ?”
and “Can just ‘anybody’ really do Sales Training?”

TQM or Total Quality Madness

I am a survivor.

I have survived 17 different management “initiatives” during a 40 year working life. One of them was TQM, Total Quality “Madness”.

Like most fads it started with a Prophet, but now the surviving “Disciples” argue over who the true ‘Prophet’ was. I will not enter their debate, I don’t care who invented it or whose fault it was.



Like all fads, TQM begins with some good ideas and catchy slogans. The ‘higher’ thinking is kept secret and instead anecdotes replace research. “Right first time” was an enchanting idea, which soon cast its spell over millions of workers. But, How?

The “Magic Circle” was invented. Workers who had never had any “voice”, who had never been heard were invited to speak; Assembly Worker, Production Operator and all. “How could we do it better?

Brainstorming, Coffee and Flipcharts soon became a ‘heady’ mixture. And, more anecdotal “results” than you could read on a quiet rainy Sunday.

Up 3%, down 7%,

improved by 13%,

decreased by 5%

and saved 100%

I remember that TQM came with a distant Japanese High Priesthood - their message of Purpose, Process and People conveniently translated into English still seemed somehow ‘Oriental’. But, then “Local Priests” began appearing, people we had known as of little importance and scarce education. Now, these Demi-gurus spoke in parables, “Zero defects”, “Hassle free” (or friction free), “Delighted Customers” and “Employee involvement”. Soon, many otherwise quite smart people had “bought-in.”
They began attending the Circles listened to “Quality” talk from the Local Priests.
Quality, quality, quality was the answer to everything.
Quality assured our collective future.
Quality assured our Profitability.
Quality assured our jobs.



The sceptical few (myself included) asked “Quality at what cost?”
When we tried to change the slogan to “Quality, at a profit” we were howled down, named as “negative non-co-operators” (as opposed to “Collaborators”, which we thought was politically incorrect French.). Our “resistance” was short lived, the Local Priests issued the “Book of Compliance”, and there could be no dissention, Total Quality Rules.

It was then that a most curious thing happened. Those same self-important, not too bright people who had become Local Priests, they underwent a metamorphosis!

Using their “Book of Compliance”, they first became TQM Assessors, and then they became the TQM Police.

At the same time “results” were beginning to come in, both Customers and Sales were being affected. Customers were being asked to accept “Quality” exceeding their requirements. Good enough wasn’t any good, only “Right” was what we now offered!



Along with the “Quality” came cost, building-in quality isn’t cheap,
in fact building-in more quality than the Customer wants is very expensive.



So, now we began losing sales, “more quality than we need, at a price we can’t afford” complained long term Customers, who left for cheaper Competitors. “It’s Sale’s fault” howled the TQM Police,
“They can’t sell the Quality!” And, they were right, we could not even find the "Quality" Market, never mind sell to it! We just couldn’t find Buyers who bought more than they needed for prices higher than ‘good enough’ Quality.

Capitalism, has an inbuilt “evolution system”. It’s not the strongest that survives; it’s the most appropriate for the Product/Market. Don’t build more “quality” than your Market wants, don’t price higher than your Market is willing to pay. And, don’t give people who have never succeeded in any Commercial environment the ability to destroy your Company in the name of Compliance.

If you need a Slogan, use Nike’s “Just Do It!”
But, do it at an appropriate Quality with an acceptable Price.

That’s why you have a sales force.

The Voice of the Customer!

.