Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Gary Boye
There is a school of thought that suggests that a sales methodology based on "persuading and convincing" is, in itself, tantamount to performing poorly.
|
We don't try and trick or pressure our clients into doing anything but we do use persuasion tools every day. Here are a couple of examples of persuasion tools that we use at our brokerage:
- "Contrast" when determining the order homes will be shown in.
- "Authority" everyday by requiring our agents to adhere to a strict professional image (education, automobile, office, paperwork, etc.).
- "Scarcity", when it applies, by letting the buyer know the potential for the property to sell quickly (limited time) and if interested to make an offer ASAP.
- "Social Proof" by showing the "demand" for a certain community or area. This is even more important in New Home subdivisions.
- "Consistency" by securing commitments throughout the process.
The more I think about your post the more I think we're talking apples and oranges. I think you're talking about techniques to get people to do something they don't want to do and I'm talking about persuasion principles. Maybe this is just about semantics, I don't know.
What I do know is this... one of the most common questions new agents ask when failing is the field is, "What am I doing wrong?" If I was to give the generalization below... I could very well be pointing them in the wrong direction.
Quote:
"Sales Resistance is caused by persuading and convincing. So, it's not likely that doing more of what causes resistance will "break the resistance."
My guess is that you either started with a low probability prospect or that you are pushing too hard - probably both"
|
These type (unqualified and no referent) of generalizations, in my opinion, can be harmful and probably account for a lot of the problems inherent in many sales training programs.