• 
  
  Dave Brock has written several pieces on the sales process recently. He now has launched an initiative to get some new thinking on the subject by asking ?What's the Future of Buying?.
• 
  
  I have seen several contributions by Sharon Drew Morgen, besides her new book 'Dirty little Secrets...', reminding us that we should stop talking about selling and trying to understand to the extent possible how people and organizations buy.
• 
  
  Ardath Albee in her book ?eMarketing Strategies for the Complex Sales? proposes a marketing flavored look on the buyer's journey. A particularity of her model is that it does not imply a linear process as most others do.
• 
  
  Axel Schultze wrote in a recent blog post that our sales processes are old and suck.
• 
  
  There is a Discussion going on on LinkedIn for several weeks now about what the right steps of a sales process are.
• 
  
  Sales 2.0 Network now offers Dealmaker Genius helping to design your sales process in 15 minutes for free.
• 
  
  Landslide has a similar offering for building a sales process. So these people believe that this task can even be automatized.
• 
  
  Then there are those who still believe selling is an art and therefore cannot be captured in a process.

• 
  
  Despite massive investments for many years in CRM systems, in the design and implementation of sales processes, in training initiative on sales methodologies and selling skills for , sales performance is probably at its lowest since CSO Insights started tracking it some 15 years ago?
• 
  
  Current economic conditions do no longer allow us to continue with such investments even though they seem to be needed more than ever.
• 
  
  Web 2.0 has shifted the negotiation power clearly in favor of the buyer.
• 
  
  Marketing makes claims to be more involved in the revenue gen process wanting to manage and qualified leads when they are 'ready to buy'.
• 
  
  There is an ever growing number of tools under the Sales 2.0 acronym suggesting they can improve sales performance.

• 
  
  Get the sales and marketing organization to have have a common understanding where a buyer is in its journey based on observable reactions from the buyer.
• 
  
  Define accountability for sales and marketing along the customers journey.
• 
  
  Stimulate forward looking discussions on how best to pursue a lead/opportunity (i.e. next best actions to help the buyer to make the next decision, recycle a stalled or lost opportunity, abandon a lead/opportunity or a buyer)

Increased Process Orientation

Access to knowledge repositioned

More focus on Sales & Marketing Collaboration

• 
  
  
  Why account managers should put less focus on the sales cycle and concentrate on what happens with the customer before and after a purchase is made.
• 
  
  
  Why this new focus pays off
• 
  
  
  Why there is an ?early mover advantage? in proactive account management
• 
  
  
  What you do on a strategic level when you concentrate on what happens with the customer before and after a purchase is made
• 
  
  
  Why it pays off to be honest with the promises you make to customers

Let me introduce the concept of the Negotiation Matrix. There are two parties (A and B). They both come to the negotiation table having defined their Walk Away Point (WAP); meaning if they were forced to make concession beyond this point, they would walk away from the negotiation table. Just as an aside the win-win concept might already let us forget this walk away option.

In the Negotiation Matrix, we represent the negotiation options of A on the horizontal axis. All negotiation results to right of the WAP, A considers as a win . Outcomes on the left of the WAP are perceived as a loss by A. The negotiation options of B are represented on the vertical axis. B considers a negotiation outcome as a win if it is above the WAP. Results below the WAP are perceived as a loss by B. The two axis cross at the respective WAP.

This can also be considered the optimal negotiation outcome. At this point, both parties have obtained a maximum of concessions from each other without any party feeling as loser yet. However the win-win concept will accept any negotiation result in quadrant I as a desired outcome ( win-win) of a negotiation. But this is an altruistic concept from the point of view of A and B.

Neurological research carried out with fERM have shown that the human brain has a specific Altruistic area but also a specific Lust area. For judging the suitability of the win-win concept for commercial negotiations, two findings are of crucial importance. First, the Lust center can be triggered by presenting the potential of winning monetary awards. Second, when both the Altruistic center and the Lust center are triggered, the Lust center is stronger and will force the decision in its favor.

This triggering of both centers is exactly what happens in a commercial negotiation. The Altruistic center of both the seller and buyer is triggered because we have been taught to strive for a win-win result in order to maintain an established relationship. For the seller, the Lust center is triggered because of the commission check that can be expected by winning the deal or at least by the desire to get as much cash as possible from the sale. The buyer might have personal monetary incentives in form of a bonus or is at least motivated to outlay as little cash as possible for the purchase. The Lust center being stronger, quadrant I is hardly the desired outcome for neither A nor B. Only for an observer C not involved in the negotiation, this is the optimal quadrant. There is no stimulus to the Lust center.

The seller (lets assume he is A) and the buyer (let say she is B) from their point of view, due to the force of the Lust center might though rather end up in a win-lose (quadrant IV) or a lose-win (quadrant II) situation. What probably both try to avoid is ending up in a lose-lose situation (quadrant III).

Negotiation results ending in quadrant IV or quadrant II are though, contrary to what the win-win concept would stipulate, not necessarily harmful to a relation. It is acceptable that A sees himself in quadrant I and positions B in quadrant IV if simultaneously B sees herself in quadrant I and projects A in quadrant II. For the external observer this still is a win-win situation, because both A and B will manifest a probably even stronger feeling to walk away as winners as they think they have defeated their opponent.

As a seller or buyer, you must thus take care that your vis-ŕ-vis does not perceive him/herself as a loser. From your own perspective you are not obliged to see your vis-ŕ- vis as a winner and thus a win-win outcome for the negotiation. I believe knowing this will make you more at ease in negotiations and is probably more in line with how human brains work.

The book ?Rethinking Sales Management? by Beth Rogers is,as the subtitle suggests, ?a practical guide for practitioners? how to become more strategic to cope with the challenges of these new normal times.

Beth Rogers has extensive practical experience in marketing and sales roles which she has complemented by in-depth consultancy, research and teaching. Her book therefore stands out from most sales and sales management books. Her advise is not of the type ?here is how I was successful and I do not see why this should not work for you?. Instead, she provides the readers with strategic models and facts helping them to understand the 'Why' of a situation and then deduct the best course of action suited to context they are in.

In the era of customer orientation, Rogers argues, CSOs should have a seat at the strategy table of their enterprises. The first part of the book is an introduction into strategy; enabling CSOs to get familiar with the language talked there . The first chapter introduces well known strategic concepts like the business portfolio matrix (BCG matrix) used to categorize strategies from a enterprise point of view. (inside -out)

In the second chapter, the focus is on the purchaser's perspective of strategy (outside- in). Rogers suggest the purchaser's portfolio matrix as the vehicle to analyze this point of view. This concept is probably less known among C-level executives. Understanding it gives the CSO the opportunity to bring added value to the strategy discussion.

The purchaser's portfolio matrix first presented by Peter Kraljic in an article of the August-September 1983 issue of the Harvard Business review and then reintroduced by Rackham and DeVincentis in their book ?Rethinking the Sales Force? recommends that purchasers should adapt their strategy depending on the complexity of the supply market and the financial impact of the purchase on the enterprise.

In the third chapter, the B2B Relationship Development Box is discussed in depth. This box, also a 2 by 2 matrix, combines the enterprise (internal) view with the purchaser's (external) view. This model suggests that the nature of customer relationships depends on the value the customers bring to the enterprise and the value the enterprise provides to customers (in their view).

The Relationship Development Box is the essential tool for CSO's to understand how to organize their resources to execute on their strategies. The second part of the book therefore shows how this tool is used. Each quadrant of the relationship matrix is explained in a separate chapter As not all relationships are worth to be maintained, this part also contains a chapter about exit strategies.

The four relationships discussed are:

• Strategic (value of the customer to enterprise is high and value of the enterprise to the customer is high). This is the quadrant where Key Account Management is the best fit.

• Prospective (value of the customer to the enterprise is high and value of the enterprise to the customer is low). This relationship is of transitory nature. Business development is the strategy that can elevate this relationship to a strategic one. But one cannot exclude that the value of the enterprise to the customer cannot be increased. In this case, the enterprise should move the relationship to the tactical quadrant in order to avoid continuous over investment in the relationship.

• Tactical (value of the customer to the enterprise is low and value of the enterprise to the customer is low). This quadrant is often considered as not very attractive. Considering the use of other channels than a direct field sales force (e.g. Telesales or Channel Partners) is though more viable than considering this relationship as transitory and trying to elevate it to a strategic one.

• Cooperative (value of the customer to the enterprise is low, value of the enterprise to the customer is high). This is probably the most delicate quadrant to handle. The balance must be found between avoiding over investing in the account and risking competitive vulnerability. The cooperative relationship might therefore also be of transitory nature.

The third part of the book entitled Strategic Focus for 21-st Century Sales Management

addresses four weaknesses observed in the management of the sales function.

• Reputation Management can be seen as a part of corporate reputation management brought to the fore by new regulations like the Sarbanes-Oxley Act. Rogers though also cites results from own studies where ?breach of trust? was quoted as the single most likely cause of the disintegration of a customer relationship. Maintaining integrity of the sales people as a form of reputation management has though also a direct impact on sales performance. Undue internal pressure and variable pay schemes can negatively influence this performance.

• Working with Marketing can be a source of so far untapped profitability. Kotler, Rackham and Krishnaswamy in their article in the Harvard Business Review of July/August 2006 believe that there can easily be a gap of 20% in profits between organizations where marketing and sales are aligned compared to companies where sales and marketing work independently in separate silos or even worse fight each other. Also this chapter has a link to the Relationship Box. Rogers suggest that Marketing should have the lead for tactical relationships, whereas Sales should be leading for strategic relationships.

• Leadership: Five tools are discussed: Awareness (incorporating self awareness and awareness of others), Framework (strategy and values), Extensive Communications, Coaching and Development and finally Trumpeting. The last point is probably not readily understood. It means telling and rewarding people for things they have done right. Although financial rewards are the culture of sales, those rewards do not necessarily have to be only in monetary form.

• Process Management as a necessary prerequisite for continuous improvement is discussed in this chapter.

This book is a great eye opener to sales people contemplating to become sales managers. After having read it, they will understand the kind of strategic thinking needed to succeed in this role. For sales managers and executives, coming to the realization that their current approach will not bring the expected results in the future, it is an excellent source for understanding how they can evolve their role and being more successful with a strategic approach.

Early in the buying cycle, marketing and sales can use generic statements. Later in the buying cycle, salespeople must be able to articulate very specific statements, tailored to the individual customer, demonstrating specific value to the customer as well as superiority and differentiation against the competition.

This is how I would summarize the message of my Masterclass ?The Dynamic Value Proposition? I gave over at the Top Sales Experts last month. It was also the consensus from a discussion I triggered with the blog post ?Can Value Propositions be Generic?.

My friend Dave Brock was the most vocal supporter of the idea by publishing an own blog post. He has actually written a second post since; further elaborating on the dynamic character of a value proposition.

Although having a dynamic value proposition following the customer's buying cycle and the evolution of ones competitive position is necessary, it is not sufficient if salespeople want to follow the recommendation of an IDC Customer Experience Panel in January 2009. They identified that ?Putting aside the generic pitch? as the #1 item to be improved by sales people to bring more value to the relationship with the customer.

Even an objectively and technically well crafted message, delivered by the salesperson, has a high chance not to pass with the individual at the customer's organization as we all interpret messages in our own context.

In my next Masterclass ?The Adaptive Value Proposition? on November 10, 2009 I will suggest to pay attention to three aspects of the receiver's context (customer persona) to facilitate reception of the value proposition:

• Functional Position

• Attitude to Change

• Sensory Predicates

I discussed why they can be inhibitors for your message to pass and give you suggestions how to overcome them.

If you scroll down on this page, you will find the slide deck used for this presentation.

If you want to know more about what Dave Brock had to say on the value propositions you can follow these links: Post 1, Post 2.

This link will lead you to my post ?Can Value Propositions be Generic?where I discuss the dynamic aspect in the context of the customer's buying cycle.

Over at construction management degrees Elizabeth Johnson has published a list of the Top 100 Blogs to Boost your Sales Skills . As this blog is included in this list (No. 60), I have invited her to write a guest article to give us some insights on what it takes to be successful as a Sales Managers for construction projects.

A sales manager has various responsibilities, not the least of which involves being responsible for managing an entire team of sales representatives and others. You have the usual job of making sure that the people working under you meet their targets and that they are doing their jobs to the best of their abilities. But when you?re responsible for managing sales in a construction project, you need to know more than just how to sell or how to motivate to sell.

Sales managers for construction projects are generally entrusted with dealing with customers who wish to customize their living or working space. This means they need to know a lot about the construction process and the industry as well, because they will be talking to and dealing with clients before the home or office is built. They have to coordinate various factors, starting with the design and including cost as well.

When you have to talk to clients about the way their home has to be designed, you need to know more than just the basics about architecture and interior design. You need to be able to tell customers if certain design ideas are feasible or not, which is why you need to know architecture even though you are basically a sales manager. And besides the possession of knowledge and experience in these subjects, you must be thoroughly dedicated and motivated.

Your main aim should be to provide the customer with a unique experience that is tailored to suit their needs. And in order to do this, you need to know how to work with a team of industry professionals so that your company is a success. Collaboration is a very important part of any business deal, and only when you can work in tandem with your colleagues can you impart to the customer a truly enriching and rewarding experience.

Your communication skills should be excellent ? as someone connected to sales, you must have the gift of the gab and know how to read each customer individually and tailor your words and actions according to their temperament and needs. And even though you are a manager, you must spend enough time in the field, being actively involved in promoting your projects, dealing with clients, taking care of any problems that may arise, and knowing all that is going on in your department.

Even though the construction industry is presently just recovering from the crash of the recession, qualified and skilled construction sales managers are in still in demand.

Elizabeth Johnson writes regularly on the topic of construction management degrees . She welcomes your comments and questions at her email address: elizabeth.johnson1@rediffmail.com

So many people start a business, buy a franchise or an existing business with no previous sales experience. Add to that the fact that they don?t realize they?ll have to sell and you have a situation where they struggle to succeed.

Lemonade Stand Simple, Accelerate Your Business Growth by business development coach Diane Helbig is a straightforward, common sense guide through the sales process. Diane?s goal was to write a book that provided the reader with actionable information about sales.

We live in a time when more and more people are starting businesses. In order to be successful they must be able to sell their product or service. ?People pour their heart, soul and life savings into their business. Then they struggle, or fail, because they simply do not understand the sales process. They don?t sell effectively, and therefore don?t succeed. It?s really hard to watch and completely unnecessary,? says Helbig.

?The message in the book is that simple,? Helbig explains. Lemonade Stand Simple provides the clarity that business owners need to be more successful without trying so hard. It breaks down common scenarios, step by step, into techniques just about anyone can employ.

Think back to your own lemonade stand days and the simple pleasure of selling refreshing drinks to family, friends and neighbors. You were certain of your product and you knew your client base, Helbig reminds us. You didn?t get bogged down in the process, and you weren?t afraid to be yourself. You knew what you were selling and who you wanted to do business with.

Lemonade Stand Simple resonates with business and sales professionals as well, who praise Helbig for her straightforward, back-to-basics method to selling.

?Diane provides the reader with a no nonsense approach to the sales process that is based in common sense. This book is essential for every small business owner who has to sell and provides a workable sales plan that gets results simply by reading these pages,? said nationally-read author Hal Becker, one of the top sales speakers and consultants in the country.

The book works because Helbig understands those salespeople and small business owners who think they need to fit their sales strategy into a methodology that is not authentic. She?s here to remind us that we?ve all known how to sell since we were about five years old. It?s simple?lemonade stand simple.

Diane is a business and leadership development coach, speaker and author who provides a matter of fact, basic understanding of the sales process to her clients and workshop attendees.

Lemonade Stand Simple, Accelerate Your Business Growth is available on Amazon.com and BarnesandNoble.com Order yours today!

About Diane

Diane is an internationally recognized business and leadership development coach, speaker, and author. As a certified, professional coach and president of Seize This Day Coaching, Diane works with people starting their own business, salespeople who need and want to improve their skills, and business owners who want to master challenges and realize greater success. She is also co-founder of Seize True Success, a coaching practice dedicated to helping franchisees grow and prosper.

Diane helps businesses and organizations operate more constructively and profitably. She evaluates, encourages, and guides her clients. Working with as few as one person to as many as 100+, Diane creates an environment that is cooperative and interactive Diane is a COSE Mindspring editor and a member of the Top Sales Experts panel at www.topsalesexperts.com. She offers workshops, speeches and seminars on the subjects of sales, business development, and leadership. Diane is the author of Lemonade Stand Simple, a sales book for small business owners and is also a contributing author to Chicken Soup for the Soul: Power Moms. To learn more about her coaching practices please visit www.seizethisdaycoaching.com or www.seizetruesuccess.com

Was the subject of a debate I recently followed on LinkedIn. The person asking the question was of the opinion that value propositions work best if they are customer specific.

However a well known expert of the subject was of the opinion, that they need not necessarily be customer specific to be effective. They must though be concrete. Statements like ?our solution reduces cost? do not work. However ?Customers using our solutions have reduced their operating expenses by 10%? should work.

I teach the concept of the Unique Value Proposition, which must answer the questions:

• What do you deliver?

• What is the business outcome ?

• What makes it unique?

• What assurance can you give that you can deliver?

There is also no doubt in my mind that it should be customer specific, actually to be exact, it should be expressed from the customer's view point.

So here is a much better known expert than I stating that a Value Proposition need not necessarily be customer specific to be effective. Was it time for me to revise my opinion on the subject? The short answer is no. Here is why:

The sales world is full of experts contradicting each other. The search for the silver bullet to success is still a very common trend for people working in sales. Such differences of opinions lead thus to heated debates about who is right or wrong. In my experience this is most often the wrong question. The answer depends on the context.

For this question about the value proposition, the context to consider is the customer buying cycle.

This lead me to the concept of the dynamic value proposition In this concept there is room for generic and customer specific value propositions. Using both of them at the appropriate moment while facilitating the customer's buying process will increase your chance to success.

II have explained my thinking in a recent masterclass If you scroll down on the blog you can find a copy of the slides used therein. VIP members of Top Sales Experts can listen to the replay here.

when using sport?s teams analogies to coach sales teams.

A Sales Team is a Sales Team or not?

There are at least two definitions that come to mind:

• A group of sales people reporting to a sales manager
• A group of specialists (an account team) all facing a particular customer orchestrated usually by an account manager.

How are they different? An account team is a work group, whereas a team of sales people reporting to a sales manager is not.

What is a Work Group?

I came across the term reading ?The Skilled Facilitator? by Roger Schwarz. Schwarz defines a work group as follows: ? A work group has a collective responsibility for performing one or more tasks and the outcome of the task can be assessed? He goes on explaining that a work group is a social system with boundaries distinguishing members from nonmembers. To qualify as a work group, its members are interdependent in producing their work.

While both two types of sales teams fit to a large extent to this definition, there is though a key difference; the interdependence of the members to produce their work. In an account team, the interdependence is a prerequisite to success.

The team of sales people reporting to a sales manager however is a set of individuals each pursuing his/her own goal. They are primarily paid on making their quota. There is though a team goal. But there is no collective responsibility for that goal; it is primarily the sales manager?s. It is reached if all sales people make their individual contribution. So only the sales manager is dependant on the performance of the individual team members and can achieve his/her goal if he coaches the individuals to maximum performance. For some it might help to define a workgroup by describing what it is not. In the words of Schwarz ?A set of people working on similar but essentially individual tasks is not a work group?.

Why is this relevant?

Examples how sport coaches lead their teams are of little help unless we the equivalent types of sport?s teams. To the above defines types of sales teams.

A set of sales people, reporting to a sales manager, resembles more a team of individual athletes such as swimmers or skiers. The result of the individual matters most and the performance of the team (e.g. the numbers of medals won at the Olympics) is merely the addition of the performance of the individual members.

An account team however resembles more to a soccer or baseball team. Here the sum of the individual contribution does not necessarily make up the performance of the team. There are many examples of well coached and motivated teams having been more successful than a team of uncoordinated stars.

What are the consequences?

While work groups can be coached similar to team sport?s teams, a set of independent specialist has to be coached on a one to one basis. Using the wrong approach is a waste of time and causes frustration as the hoped for success cannot be had.

The productivity of the respective team meetings is a good indicator if the approach is matched to the characteristics of the team. For example if a sales manager has to declare attendance to sales meetings mandatory is an almost sure indicator for unproductive meetings. Sales managers confusing their own goal with the team?s goal as described above are more likely to have mandatory meetings.

There is more advice available how to run meetings for workgroups.

Understanding the different characteristics of teams is also essential for promoting the right people. Sales managers and account managers are distinguished roles requiring their own set of skills. Star account managers do not necessarily make good sales managers.

The most demanding sales manager?s position is probably leading teams of account managers. The dimension of work group leadership must be added when coaching account managers. In this role sales managers must though be well aware that ?do as I do? is not a recipe for success.

There is hardly any CMO not having complained about this. It is nothing new but in today's economic environment, this can be a serious threat to their career. Producing assets that are not used is a waste of money. My conservative estimate is that this waste could easily amount to 10% of the marketing investment in people and programs. This is probably not a wise thing to do when CMOs are increasingly held accountable by CEOs about their contribution they make to the business.

In my Masterclass ?Why do Salespeople Make Little Use of Marketing Assets? on August 20, 2009 at 11 a.m. US Eastern, 4 p.m. UK, 17:00 CET, I will discuss why this is, and what can be done to increase usage. TSE VIP Members can see a replay here. Further down on the page you can find the slides I used. Be warned though, the slides are meant as illustration to to what I said. They are not a self standing document

You might wonder why a consultant focusing on sales effectiveness cares about this and what recommendations he can make to solve this marketing issue.

I am interested in the question for the the same reason why also CSO's (Chief Sales Officers) should be concerned. Not using marketing assets negatively impacts sales effectiveness. It is not that sales would not need such materials. One reason for not using them is simply because they are not aware of what is available and how it could forward their sales campaign. So they might create something on the fly. If sales people are aware of the assets, they find that these often do not fit with the need of the salesperson for a particular sales call. Salespeople spend time to create or adapt those assets to their needs which is time not spend with the customers. We are speaking about several hours per week.

My personal experience about this misalignment between sales and marketing comes from coaching strategic key account teams. Very often, when I ask the question whether they have considered Marketing as a resource they can leverage for the formulation and execution of their key account plans, I get a a blank stare or I draw a laughter.

As a former head of a solution practice in a boutique consulting firm, it was in my remit to create marketing assets. Through this, I gained some practical experience how to create them so that sales people made use of them. That is also when I started to use the term Marketing Assets instead of Marketing Collateral. This might seems dwelling in semantics.
To me however it is the symptom of a mind set.

If you are interested in a methodologically sound but pragmatic approach to help bridging some of the marketing and sales divide, you can join me

In my Masterclass ?Why do Salespeople Make Little Use of Marketing Assets? on August 20, 2009 at 11 a.m. US Eastern, 4 p.m. UK, 17:00 CET. Readers of this blog can register for free.

There are studies out there telling us that in the web 2.0 world up to 90 % of purchases today start with an internet search.

This searches will end on someones landing page and can be interpreted as a lead generated by unaddressed attraction. As landing pages are usually owned by the marketing department of the respective organization, these leads can therefore be considered to be generated by marketing.

In contrast to this, CSO Insights in their Sales Performance Optimization ? 2009 Survey and Analyzes, report that about 52% of the leads salespeople are working on, are self generated by the salespeople. This figure actually has risen over recent years. In 2006 only 40% of the leads were self generated.

How can we reconcile these two views?

One possible explanation for this discrepancy could be that a shift has already occurred how field sales forces are used. They might increasingly be used only for offerings where the customer needs help early on to understand that there is a problem and how it could be solved. It seems plausible that for this scenario, generating leads directly by the sales force might be more effective. The majority of respondents to the CSO Insights study operate in B2B selling environment , whereas it is not so clear whether the studies claiming the percentage of buying cycles started with an internet search are making this distinction between B2C and B2B selling.This could be another reason for the discrepancy of the two trends.

You can read here, enableyoursales why I think the question is relevant.

How is it managed? Is it through CRM systems? You can read my blog post discussing this question also here.

The 3 C?s of Knowledge

For a successful sales campaign, adequate knowledge is needed about:

1. The customer?s/prospect?s situation
2. The competitive landscape
3. The supplier?s capabilities

How do CRM Systems Support These Domains?

Using the above framework, we can make the following observations.

1. Customer Knowledge

One of the primary purposes of CRM systems is to provide data structures allowing tracking every relevant interaction between the companies customer facing people with the customers/prospects, they look after. Thus a body of situational knowledge is created. Consultation of this knowledge is then particularly valuable in the maintenance of a customer relationship.

This body of knowledge is however not sufficient when building or expanding a customer relationship. In this case, the following additional elements are needed:

• Background information about the prospect
• The current situation the prospect is in
• Trigger events causing sales people to want to build the relationship to eventually close a deal.

While CRM systems might provide a structure to capture this information for ready reference, the original source is outside of such systems. What is captured is the knowledge salespeople have gained through research activities such as: General searches on the internet, reading general printed press or specific trade journals and increasingly through the use of specialized systems made available in a Sales 2.0 context. CRM systems support the research activity through specialized systems by providing embedded links to such system. The research can be conducted without leaving the CRM systems context. Some of those specialized systems can also automatically push information into CRM data structures.

2. Competitive Knowledge

For building and consultation of competitive knowledge, CRM systems are used pretty similar to what is described above for customer knowledge. In large companies, there might though also be dedicated people researching the competitive landscape and making it available for ready reference in CRM systems, together with the knowledge built up by sales people themselves from information learned through customer interactions.

3. Capabilities Knowledge

Was one to ask salespeople where they get the information about their companies and product and services capabilities so they know what to say in a particular sales situation, they hardly would answer, that the CRM system is the primary source. Most CRM systems do though hold some capabilities knowledge usually referred to as company literature. The original design idea for this was to enable sales people to easily and efficiently answer fulfill information requests from their customers. There are though two factors that limit the usefulness of such company literature repositories. First, the internet has caused the number of such direct information requests from customers to drop drastically. Second, it is a well known fact that salespeople consider such literature not to be of much use in their campaigns anyway and make thus little to no use of it.

Capabilities knowledge is probably mostly stored in Sales Portals. These portals are often built from a product marketing perspective. Salespeople are thus left on their own to match the complexity of the customer requirements and the complexity of their companies capabilities to propose a valuable solution to the customer. Furthermore, customers today do not tolerate salespeople being simple conveyers of canned marketing prepared standard value propositions anymore. Salespeople are expected to be able to add value to the interaction. The messaging has to be adapted to the individual customer and to the current context of a sales campaign.

Conclusion

While CRM systems are configured to guide salespeople in what needs to be done in a sales campaign through the implementation of sales processes, they provide no support for the sales people of what is best said to the customer in a particular phase of the process. Sales portals are also no help for this as capabilities knowledge is stored under a different view point there. It becomes thus pretty obvious that sales enablement systems guiding salespeople in what needs to be said in a particular phase of the sales process and allowing furthermore the tailoring of the messaging to the specific customer context can significantly improve the productivity of salespeople, while maintaining image integrity required from a marketing perspective.

to add value to the conversation with and informed self driven prospect.

Reading a contribution by Paul McCord to an interesting discussion on sales force ineffectiveness started by Dave Brock over at The Customer Collective, lead me to this question. I think it is a real challenge we have to become aware of and have to have answers to if we want salespeople to be able to continue bringing value to their interactions with such prospects. Bringing this value is key for the salesperson to build credibility and establish a relationship to generate sustainable revenue streams.

Most buying processes, today, start by a search on the net. This allows prospects to form an opinion about a product or service and its potential suppliers without needing the help of the salesperson. Before the Internet, salespeople were the gateway to this information. What is left now is the mistrust and fear from prospects to be manipulated by the sellers. Before they did not have the choice than engage with the salesperson anyway. Today, prospects are given means to form the opinion keeping the salesperson out of the loop until late in the buying process. .

As if this were not enough, new lead generation and lead nurturing tools, mostly operated by the marketing organizations, cause that the initial contact between the prospect and the salesperson is even later in the buying cycle.

When a sales person finally can establish contact with the prospect, this prospect is already very advanced in the decision process. Salespeople just wanting to close a deal, probably will even be happy about this. They run though the risk that they might become obsolete very soon, if all they do is taking the order. The number of purchases customers are able and willing to make via the Internet without direct human intervention from the seller is growing daily.

For purchases where the customer is not willing or able to make the purchasing decision without a salesperson's help, we have to consider modifying the approach of needs analysis as it is taught today.

While a patient, seeing a doctor, will accept that the doctor goes through his/her diagnosis procedure despite the fact that the patient formed an own opinion about his/her state of health, a prospect having formed an opinion about a solution is very unlikely to accept the standard needs analysis procedure from a sales person. Such an analysis would be perceived as a waste of time. Studies done with buyers in the IT sector revealed that they already think salespeople are making the sales cycle too long compared to how they want to buy.

Why is it more difficult for a sales person to use the classical needs analysis scheme with an informed self driven prospect? Prospects rarely see a sales person as a trustworthy authority for where they seek help. Their impression will be reinforced by the fact that chances are high the salesperson will not be able to help immediately. Prospects will ask for help in their decision on a level where the salespersons first must consult with other functions within their organization. Salespeople risk giving the impression of 'just being a conduit without much value added'.

Nevertheless, a salesperson seriously interested in building a relationship instead of closing a deal,has to make sure that the prospect has not formed any wrong perceptions about a certain offering. Purchases done on wrong perceptions will end up in customer dissatisfaction.

Guess who the customer is going to blame if this were to happen, the sales person. ?He/she should have told me so that this offering does not fit my needs?. It is an irrational reaction. First the prospects mistrust salespersons and make it difficult for them to fulfill their role of a consultant. When expectations are not met, customers need somebody to blame. Ironically, they accuse the same person, that they before did not let do the job properly. We cannot change the customer. So we have to adapt the behavior of the salespeople.

The remedy, I suggest is to modify the questions we ask informed self driven prospects.

Using confirmation questions could be the way forward to provide value for interaction with such prospects. Why not start with something like ?I assume you have set your mind on this solution X to help you improve your business in area Y.? I think few prospects would object being asked this type of question . It acknowledges the fact that the prospect is already far advanced in the decision process. It also signals that the sales person is focused on the customer's business outcome and wants to make sure that the solution meets the prospect's expectations in this respect.

For such an approach to work, we not only need to focus on the questioning technique used by the salesperson. Being able to ask this simple question requires, that the salesperson understands what business problem a particular offering solves.

Ask yourself where the salesperson can get this information within your organization? I would not be surprised if no place could be found where this is readily available. Salespeople, aware of the need for such information, will thus have made up their ideas by themselves. Leaving salespeople alone in this important task, creates the risk of ending up with unsatisfied customers. Sales people might have formed wrong perceptions for themselves and despite good intentions will end up perpetuating their wrong perceptions to their prospects. The customer will thus end up with unmet expectations.

Preparing salespeople to add value to informed and self directed prospects will require new approaches for sales enablement. Teaching people what a product does, how it compares to competition etc. is relevant because salespeople are expected to know more if they want to gain credibility with their prospects .But it is not sufficient. Sales people also and maybe first need to understand what business outcome a customer can expect from buying a certain offering. I consider it a task of marketing to create this understanding.

Successful sales enablement will thus start with marketing expanding their focus and understanding themselves as a service provider to the sales force. After all they were instrumental, with their websites, lead generation and -nurturing systems, creating the new environment salespeople have to live in.

in this down economy. On April 30, 2009, I will hold a webinar over at the Top Sales Experts entitled ?Where is your revenue Growth to come from??. Having lived almost an equal amount of years in the corporate strategy sphere as I live now in the Sales Consulting, Teaching and Coaching world, I have helped many Sales Executives and Managers to get more clarity on their Sales Growth Strategies.

Based on this experience, I have now develop a new road map to clarity. I will present this for the first time to a wider audience on said occasion.

Lots of advise is available to salespeople and how to adapt to these turbulent times. For example, I have heard Jill Konrath saying in her fist Sales Stimulus preview call that salespeople need about 50% more leads to have a chance to make their numbers this year. I will show you on a high level where to look for those leads without running the risk of creating collateral damage. Getting clarity on this will also help you to work smarter instead of harder. Others have suggested you should prune your pipeline and focus on the best opportunities. These can seem as contradicting suggestions. I will show you that the question is not either/or but doing both and assuring on strategic level, that your pipeline does not fill with hopeful but with realistic opportunities

I will introduce you to four generic sales growth strategies. which you select based on where you are finding your leads you want to covert into revenue sources Although defining strategies is important, their flawless execution is the real key to successfully grow your revenues. I will therefore discuss key success factors helping you for flawless execution. Knowing those factors can also help you to have meaningful discussions with marketing on how they can support your strategies.

Depending on where you find your leads, the time it takes to turn them to revenue contribution will differ. Being aware of this, will help you to have more realistic revenue projections.

Sales managers will learn what type of people resources they need for flawless execution of the four generic strategies.

Often, I hear sales people saying, that they could be more successful if the company were to provide them with the right products at the right price points. You need not necessarily to wait for these things to happen to execute your growth strategies. I will help you to get clarity where you can act alone and where only a tight alignment between your strategy and the corporate strategy well lead you to success.

This is not a promise for the silver bullet. All it is, is a framework pointing you to the aspects that you have to consider when defining successful, executable revenue growth strategies for your business. Although Sales executives and managers are profiting more from this concept, particularly B2B sales people with account management or territory management responsibility can also apply parts of the concept.

Developing strategies is often perceived as an abstract task aloof from reality. I promise you that I will make it come to life through examples.

If you are interested to learn more, you can register here for the webinar taking place on April 30, at 1 p.m. US Eastern Time/ 7 p.m. Central European time

Yes, but not in the form we know and practice selling today. This is one of my takeaways from the round table discussion between Nigel Edelshain, Jonathan Farrington, Jill Konrath, Linda Richardson and Dave Stein over at the Top Sales Experts. Especially ?order takers? and 'glib talkers? will have a bleak future according to Jonathan Farrington. Intelligent strategic orchestrators and business advisors looking to develop long term allies however will have a bright future according to him. Jill Konrath seconded that she hopes that sales is really changing that much.

So we should expect a lot of organizational transformation within sales forces. However, and this is my second take away, the salespeople are not the primary target for this transformation. The sales profession -if we want to use this term despite the fact that from a scientific standpoint 'sales' is not yet a profession- faces not only a leadership crisis but a disaster as Dave Stein put it.

The transformation has to start at the very top with company leaders. They should get rid of the myths that super salespersons make good sales managers and that the necessary competences come with the title. Sales Management is an occupation in itself requiring different specific skills than those of a sales superstar.

Relying just on tribal wisdom, where newly appointed sales managers draw on what they have observed their own managers doing, will not bring the desired result as it is very likely that these managers were not properly prepared for the job either. In addition their understanding of selling and of their job role might be outdated and not fit in today's unforgiving economic context.

In my own opinion there will be no room left for purely action and result oriented managers trying to manage outcomes. It makes little difference if they rely on data from their own home grown spreadsheets or on sophisticated analytical CRM tools in their attempt to manage these outcomes. Outcomes are lagging indicators even if they come in the disguised form of forecasts. Management actions based on these metrics will always be too little too late. The future belongs to sales managers being able to interpret leading indicators helping them to derive coaching needs of their sales people.

The panelist were all in agreement that being able to coach people is a very essential skill for successful sales managers going forward.. There is however a huge skill gap with current sales managers. Linda Richardson's re-edited book on this subject will help fill this gap. As a questions from a listener indicated, a significant number of sales managers has though not only a skill gap but an outright attitude problem towards coaching. Let's hope for them that they can be convinced by appropriate business cases to avoid being phased out.

The dilemma for preparing sales managers for their job is though deeper. While a lot has been written with the salesperson in mind, there is a lack of a body of knowledge from which sale managers can be taught how to do their job. This is the reason why already three years ago, I started my blog with the sales executives and managers in mind.

In a webinar that I will hold on the Top Sales Experts platform at the end end of April 2009, I will introduce a method on formulation of sales growth strategies , which hopefully will contribute a further puzzle piece to this much needed body of knowledge about the sales management process. You can register for this event here.

Dave Stein published a report on this question, warning that the importance of social media in B2B selling situations should not be over-hyped. According to this report, good use of methodologies and CRM systems are still more important for successful B2B selling.

You can imagine, that this conclusion did not sit well with the social media fans. They used the tools they believe in (e.g. twitter and blogs) to make their opposition to be known loud and clear. I do not want to enter into this debate as I think it is of little help for sales leaders looking for guidance on this question.

Why is the question relevant?

From own experience, I know that using social media can eat up considerable time, especially in the discovery phase. It is thus legitimate for a sales leader to be concerned whether the time salespeople spend with social media is time well spent to interact with the prospects and customers in an optimal way to generate the revenue streams expected from them. Leaving the sales people alone in how to integrate social media into their work practice is the least effective approach and will negatively impact productivity. I therefore want to propose a pragmatic proactive approach sales leaders can take to tackle the challenge.

A pragmatic approach to Social Media

For the purpose of this discussion, social media can be understood as a number of different continuous 24/7 networking events in separate venues (platforms) , each with its own flavor and attendance. As with classical networking events, the question is probably not so much whether to attend such events at all but to choose the events provide providing the highest return on the time invested for attending. Common sense would suggest to go there where prospects, customers and respected opinion leaders for your target markets are ?hanging out?. So why should this guidance not be used for selecting the social media best suited to enhance relationships with your clients?

Where can I meet my audience?

This screening of suitable platforms obviously takes time. It should therefore not be left to the individual sales person. Rather task a social media savvy individual or a small team within your organization with finding out where your target audience can best be met. If you have a millennial (generation Y) person in your team, I would delegate this task to him/her. You would not only minimize productivity impact on your team, but a the same time create a valuable learning experience for this individual or small team. A millennial most likely takes it for granted that social media is the first choice also for building and maintaining professional relations. Through these screening task, they could discover the relevance of their assumption. If the targets cannot be found there, then obviously they will see that they need to learn some other methods if they want to be successful in their selling role.

For this screening process, it is also important to use a wide definition for 'social media?. It is not only ?Facebook?, ?LinekdIn?, ?Xing?, ?Twitter? etc. There are many more specialized communities having their own sometimes very sophisticated platforms. In my filed of interest ?The Customer Collective? is an example of this category. ?Sales Management 2.0? is another one in my space who uses ?Ning? . Most likely you will discover, that there is more than one platform that needs considering.

How to use the platforms?

Knowing only where your audience can be met is not enough to let your salespeople loose on using social media. There is still too much of a danger that individuals might waste their time not only in the initial discovering how to use the media, but they might also develop sub optimal habits that become time wasters on the long run.

Figuring out the right use is a much more complex task than the screening process. The sophistication of those platforms creates a lot of overlap functionality especially when several platforms are relevant to reach your audience. Each platform tries to offer a wide range of functionality because their primary purpose is to generate captive audiences which attract advertising dollars.

Millennials or social media enthusiasts are not the best suited people for this task. Here pragmatists with a broad business perspective but at the same time sufficiently detailed knowledge about the platforms to be used are needed to reduce the complexity to a palpable level for the individual sales person. Chances are that such individuals cannot easily be found within the organization or building the expertise internally will take too long and you will need some external help.

Conclusion

The best way assuring that social media does not distract your salespeople is to take a proactive role and figuring out how best to use it specific for your organization and then give clear guidelines how you want your people and provide them with help to use these media to become more effective .