Selling as a Science

The last 50 years have seen more changes in the profession of sales than arguably at any point in history. Some changes were good and of course, some were bad. The end of World War 2 brought a huge influx of dollars, customers, salespeople and opportunities. The economy of the world had changed forever. It continues to evolve and grow at what can only be described as a staggering pace. Over this last half century we’ve seen marketing innovation, product explosions, the dawn of the information age and the growth of sales as a profession. We’ve also finally seen the first significant commitment to meaningful sales research; both obtaining it and using it. Formalized selling “systems” have been developed and implemented as the next best thing. Who hasn’t listened to a selling skills audio tape or watched a how to close video? The teaching of selling skills has become an industry in and of itself, a veritable landslide of opportunity for trainers and training organizations. If you have a system, someone will want to use it.

The last fifty years have also included a complete transformation of the sales professional. The Science of selling has evolved from the days of the high pressure, ultra-aggressive “slick” salesperson, through the kinder, gentler consultative account manager to today’s solutions based selling professional who has extensive knowledge and background to boot. And now, the twenty–first century offers a whole new set of obstacles. The challenges are more demanding, more complex and require superior skills than those approaches could only hope to solve. For example, today’s sales professionals need to call on the right level of buyer, perhaps multiple levels. And, they need to penetrate accounts more deeply than ever before. They need to interact with customers more strategically and position themselves as business professionals who provide long-term, effective, beneficial solutions. This process has gone far beyond the face-to-face phase of the sale and now includes everything before and after.

Even though tremendous effort has been made over the past 50 years to professionalize sales, the true growth of the sales profession has stalled because to many old practices still exist. The Market has changed so significantly over the past few years that if organizations revert to those “old-fashioned” techniques then they are risking losing the race for new business and retention.

Here are a few changes that make old-fashioned techniques somewhat irrelevant and even counter-productive.

1. Trust is now even more essential to the sale- If your customer can’t trust you than what is the point?
2. The marketplace has become more crowded, more competitive, more mature and much more sophisticated. If sales professionals don’t, they will lose!
3. Purchasing decisions have become more consensus-based and less about relationships. Nobody wants to be the “Joneses”
4. The ability to focus on value rather than price has become more significant than ever. Sticker shopping is not what drives today’s customer.
5. Buyers are looking for advisors or business experts who deliver results that are beyond expectations. They don’t want salespeople who present themselves as salespeople.
6. The buying process is much more complex and exists at multiple levels.

The Science of selling must take into account the changes or risk creating more bad habits that will affect negatively the business climates in the future.

Is Your Organization Slowly Dying or is it Deeply Changing?

I’ve spoken to many business leaders about many serious topics. None more serious

than this. Is your Organization slowly dying or is it deeply changing? Most often the reaction I get is one of defense and denial. Who wants to even consider the slow death scenario? Well, I ask you to pay attention to what actually may be happening.

Consider the following statements I’ve heard from top executives at two different organizations:

· I’ve been in this position for four years, and every year the work pressure has increased. My people are doing all they can just to hold on. I’m fifty-seven, and I’m doing all I can to hold on. I know we need to implement this thing. I just don’t think we can do one more major change.

· From a long-run perspective, there is no choice. But, to tell you the truth, I’m not sure I have it in me. Of the eight vice-presidents, three are simply not up to taking this on. We’re all around the same age, and we’re all thinking, “If I can hang in just a couple of more years, this problem will belong to someone else.” The issue is not what’s good in the long run; it’s how to survive right now.

While both executives have recognized that a deep change is needed in their organizations, both have opted to do nothing. They have chosen short-term personal survival over long-term collective responsibility. The problem will eventually become a crisis.

The practical implementations of this deep change, or slow death dilemma, are illustrated by the following statements:

· Slow death is what we are about – little long-range planning; no vision; denial of all external criticism. We are on a course that is clear to all.

· We are dying. In the meantime, my boss goes around reducing everything to numbers and charts. He leaves the real task of leadership to others.

· I think our company has about twelve to eighteen months, and then it will be too late. I think we keep very busy because it’s a kind of opium. We don’t know how to confront the deep change process. There is no vision from the top, and the changes continue to be incremental. We are very clearly choosing slow death.

Slow Death: The Organizational Phenomenon

Slow death begins when someone, confronting the dilemma of having to make deep organizational change or accepting the status quo, rejects the option for the deep change.

The process of slow death has a number of common characteristics.

Pervasiveness:

It is especially common in conservative, “don’t rock the boat: cultures. It is not unusual to find pockets of experienced, competent, and well-intentioned people who have opted for slow death. Change is needed, but this need is denied.

Violation of Trust:

The decision makers may fully recognize the pressures for change. Instead of initiating the change, however, they choose to do other things. In this sense, the phenomenon of choosing slow death is not the same phenomenon as the often-told boiled frog story.

The boiled frog story is based on a laboratory experiment. A live frog is placed in a container of water that is gradually heated. Eventually, the water boils and the frog dies. In contrast, if a frog is taken from the cold water and placed in a container of hot water, it immediately jumps out and thus manages to survive. Organizations are said to be like the frogs in the experiment. They are likely to be unconscious of slowly evolving changes.

When an executive admits that a change is needed but opts not to make it, the executive is making a conscious choice. “If I can hang on just a couple of more years, this problem will belong to someone else.” When the executive leaps to safety, the rest of the workforce is left with the problem. This might be referred to as the “dead tadpole story”: the frog leaps to safety and the tadpoles are left to boil. Self interest triumphs over collective responsibility.

To avoid that slow death you must be committed to making the hard choices. Good leaders surround themselves with talented, open-minded, dedicated peers that can help navigate the waters of a difficult situation. Lean on them. Rely on them. Don’t let your own ego get in the way of progress.

Good News on the Employment Front Lines

Tired of all the gloom and doom? I know I am. My company just released this little nuggett.

New England’s #1 Recruitment Resource shows record growth in monthly traffic and job postings.

Westbrook, ME. April, 3 2009— For 10 years the JobsinTheUS.com (JiUS) network of state specific, online recruitment resources has helped hundreds of thousands of local jobseekers find the best local jobs. With its latest trend numbers just released, New England’s recruiting experts are beginning to see some very positive signs.

With the largest applicant pool in years, and jobseekers aggressively looking for the best local employment opportunities, the JiUS network recorded nearly 1.8 million visits in March. This represents a 13% growth over February 2009 and, is one of the single largest months in the company’s history.

Job losses may still be on the rise but local employers posted nearly 8,000 open positions on the JiUS network in March. This marks a 10% increase over February and is the second consecutive month of growth in this very important statistic.

“We only allow job postings from legitimate, in-state employers, so the increase in postings is truly reflective of the increase in actual employment opportunities.” said Jason C. Blais, Director of Business Development.

He added, “What this tells us is that the confidence among employers is growing. For the past few months, many businesses were holding their breath. Two consecutive months of growth in online postings indicates that employers are beginning to collectively exhale and get back to the business of doing business”

Blais advises businesses regularly on the importance of staying out in front of jobseekers.

“During this transition, businesses that have operated conscientiously and have remained focused on their brand will have a significant advantage in attracting top talent. In fact, from the job seekers perspective, companies that are hiring during this transition period must be doing something right.” He said.

JiUS has been operating state specific job internet sites since 1999 and remains at the forefront of the industry through innovation, solid sales, distinguished marketing techniques and there-when-you-need-us customer service.

The JiUS network of state specific resources includes JobsinME.com, JobsinNH.com, JobsinVT.com and JobsinRI.com

Contact:

Steve Dodge,

Director of Marketing and Sales

JobsintheUS.com