Controlling The Conversation: Is It Ethical?

In a way a sales call is like the first meeting with a doctor. The patient is a vital part of the diagnosis, but it's the doctor who is qualified to lead the diagnostic process.

Otherwise patients would be in the doctor's office for hours, talking about their favourite pet parrots and grandchildren.

It is the doctor (salesperson) who keeps the conversation on track.

And I think this is not manipulation but merely pragmatism.

The typical one-hour sales call costs (McGraw-Hill study) $259. An out of town sales call costs over $1,000. So, the salesperson had better be on track, otherwise the costs can skyrocket.

Thoughts.

I love the fact that we’re digging deeply into a critical issue, in what feels like an open, positive exchange of differing perspectives.

My book (and website) is called The Tao of Sales, which suggests that I approach selling more from the perspective of Mr. Miyagi from “Karate Kid” than, let’s say, Zig Ziglar or Tom Hopkins.

Here are some quick additional thoughts. About sales “experts” “leading” the conversation. (No reason to walk away from “expertise.” Most of us work too hard to develop it. Of course we trust it.) Here’s what Lao Tsu says about “leadership:” When the best leaders do their work, the people say “We did this ourselves.”

What I sense from the conversation about “ethical control” is an “either/or” dilemma. EITHER we, as sales professionals, control the conversation OR it degenerates into time-wasting chit-chat (or a narrow focus on price). That's a "lose-lose" trade-off.

Suppose we approach the same question from a “both/and” framework? How can I BOTH ensure the conversation stays on target AND at the same time, stay totally open to what the customer is contributing to the discussion? (Ask a better question, get a better answer.) Suppose “control” is not something to be seized but, rather something to skillfully share?

Good points, Tom.

I also maintain that if prospects refuse to go through my diagnostic process, I instantly kick them out of the office and reject them as clients.

Why? because if I refuse to open my mouth when I go to the dentist, the dentist will throw me out if his clinic. No begging and arguing. As Trump says, "You're fired!"

Quote:

Originally Posted by tom behr

What I sense from the conversation about “ethical control” is an “either/or” dilemma. EITHER we, as sales professionals, control the conversation OR it degenerates into time-wasting chit-chat (or a narrow focus on price). That's a "lose-lose" trade-off.

What I've found that real buyers are pretty much on track.

It's pretenders who ask retarded questions like...

How do you do it?
How long will it take?
How much does it cost?
How do you measure it?
Where else have you done it before? (Even so-called innovative companies want to know this: How can we imitate what you've done before?)

Real economic buyers think in terms of results and ROI, not methods and costs.

Tom,

I can't see that we're differing at all. You're goal is to keep the conversation on track and be aware of the customer's contribution. That's the whole concept behind controlling the conversation--only stated in different terms.

Controlling the conversation doesn't mean ignoring the customer or his concerns. It doesn't mean not allowing the customer to contribute. It doesn't mean taking draconian measures to keep the customer in line. It means giving form, substance, and direction to the conversation.

As a sales manager I've gone out with too many salespeople who couldn't control a conversation. We'd show up at the appointment with the VP of Operations, go into his office and immediately the salesperson would start some general small talk to break the ice. We'd talk about everything under the sun for quite some time and then without warning, the guy would look at his watch and say, "I'm sorry, I have another meeting in 10 minutes, so I've got about 5 minutes left. What can I do for you fellas?" Great, enjoyable conversation, nothing accomplished. A follow-up meeting? Probably not as there wasn't enough time left to discover how we might be able to help the prospect, much less get to anything that might interest him enough to spend more time with my salesperson.

Controlling the conversation is simply making the best use of the time. It isn't manipulative and it isn't ignoring the prospect--it's having a mutual conversation with a definitive purpose and direction.

Quote:

Originally Posted by pmccord

Tom,

I can't see that we're differing at all. You're goal is to keep the conversation on track and be aware of the customer's contribution. That's the whole concept behind controlling the conversation--only stated in different terms.

.

Hi Paul -
We do agree. My experience has been that knowing how to manage such a purposeful conversation with customers -- and having the confidence to do it -- is not a "natural" behavior for a lot of salespeople. I've certainly worked with a lot of salespeople who handle the inescapable tension by either defaulting to a pleasant social interaction (no sale) or getting instantly too pushy (no sale).
Thanks,
Tom

	#21
Bald Dog	In a way a sales call is like the first meeting with a doctor. The patient is a vital part of the diagnosis, but it's the doctor who is qualified to lead the diagnostic process. Otherwise patients would be in the doctor's office for hours, talking about their favourite pet parrots and grandchildren. It is the doctor (salesperson) who keeps the conversation on track. And I think this is not manipulation but merely pragmatism. The typical one-hour sales call costs (McGraw-Hill study) $259. An out of town sales call costs over $1,000. So, the salesperson had better be on track, otherwise the costs can skyrocket. Thoughts. __________________ Raise your sight! Blaze new trails! Compete with the immortals! Tom “Bald Dog” Varjan Request your free copy of "B2B Online Business Development Insider For Wise Buyers" at http://www.varjan.com

	#22
tom behr	Sharing Control I love the fact that we’re digging deeply into a critical issue, in what feels like an open, positive exchange of differing perspectives. My book (and website) is called The Tao of Sales, which suggests that I approach selling more from the perspective of Mr. Miyagi from “Karate Kid” than, let’s say, Zig Ziglar or Tom Hopkins. Here are some quick additional thoughts. About sales “experts” “leading” the conversation. (No reason to walk away from “expertise.” Most of us work too hard to develop it. Of course we trust it.) Here’s what Lao Tsu says about “leadership:” When the best leaders do their work, the people say “We did this ourselves.” What I sense from the conversation about “ethical control” is an “either/or” dilemma. EITHER we, as sales professionals, control the conversation OR it degenerates into time-wasting chit-chat (or a narrow focus on price). That's a "lose-lose" trade-off. Suppose we approach the same question from a “both/and” framework? How can I BOTH ensure the conversation stays on target AND at the same time, stay totally open to what the customer is contributing to the discussion? (Ask a better question, get a better answer.) Suppose “control” is not something to be seized but, rather something to skillfully share?

	#24
pmccord	Tom, I can't see that we're differing at all. You're goal is to keep the conversation on track and be aware of the customer's contribution. That's the whole concept behind controlling the conversation--only stated in different terms. Controlling the conversation doesn't mean ignoring the customer or his concerns. It doesn't mean not allowing the customer to contribute. It doesn't mean taking draconian measures to keep the customer in line. It means giving form, substance, and direction to the conversation. As a sales manager I've gone out with too many salespeople who couldn't control a conversation. We'd show up at the appointment with the VP of Operations, go into his office and immediately the salesperson would start some general small talk to break the ice. We'd talk about everything under the sun for quite some time and then without warning, the guy would look at his watch and say, "I'm sorry, I have another meeting in 10 minutes, so I've got about 5 minutes left. What can I do for you fellas?" Great, enjoyable conversation, nothing accomplished. A follow-up meeting? Probably not as there wasn't enough time left to discover how we might be able to help the prospect, much less get to anything that might interest him enough to spend more time with my salesperson. Controlling the conversation is simply making the best use of the time. It isn't manipulative and it isn't ignoring the prospect--it's having a mutual conversation with a definitive purpose and direction. __________________ Paul McCord Best-selling author, Speaker, Sales Trainer, Management Consultant Power Selling

Controlling The Conversation: Is It Ethical?

Persuasion and Influence