The Death of Personal Marketing ?

#51
AZBroker,

You keep referring to successful Realtors. We're talking here about the huge mass of unsuccessful salespeople trying to figure out how to become successful. They are the ones lost in a sea of salespeople; they are the ones following the crowd; they are the ones emulating the others in the office because they believe that's what they're supposed to be doing; they are the ones using the strategies that every other Realtor that isn't successful is using.

My experience is the successful Realtors don't do what everyone else is doing.

As I've pointed out in other posts, the methods being used today still work today. But they are dying.

For instance, there have been several bills in Congress to adopt absolute No Call legislation, outlawing any cold call of any kind, as some European countries have. If that is adopted which will probably happen at some point in the future, I'd say cold calling is dead.

Many cities either have or are looking at outlawing all the cheap signs salespeople stick up on street corners and other public places.

Congress--and other countries--are trying to figure out how to catch and stop spammers--including anyone who sends any unsolicited email of any kind that is designed to market something or someone.

Many of the other basic marketing tactics are also under siege from various sectors. The basic problem is people are sick of traditional marketing. -pmccord
#52
I have no doubts that skillfully executed personal marketing will flourish in the future just as it flourishes today. Will some marketing methods eventually become obsolete? Yes. Will new/redesigned marketing methods arrive on the scene? Yes. Personal marketing evolves it doesn't die.

I refer to successful salespeople because that is the benchmark I measure against. Show me a real estate agent who washed out of the business and I'll show you someone who failed to understand and/or execute the basics (fundamentals) in any or all of the following core areas: business, marketing, selling, real estate.

IMO, people aren't sick of traditional marketing their sick of marketing that holds no value to them. -AZBroker
#53
Quote:
The short answer is...

...stick with the basics.
What basics AZ? -Calvin
#54
Quote:
What basics AZ?
My reply to Realtor was about the basics of designing a marketing message specifically, "WIIFM". Another example is the "AIDA" model.

The message you send is usually more important than how you send the message so understanding the basics (WIIFM, AIDA...) of crafting an effective marketing message is essential. -AZBroker
#55
Quote:
My reply to Realtor was about the basics of designing a marketing message specifically, "WIIFM". Another example is the "AIDA" model.

The message you send is usually more important than how you send the message so understanding the basics (WIIFM, AIDA...) of crafting an effective marketing message is essential.
I see that. How about an example of Selling basics? -realtor
#56
Quote:
Do you think in the future if you're not an 'expert' you'll be out in the cold?
No. Today the decision of who to use is most often influenced by referrals, word of mouth and/or other forms of marketing (Internet, Signs, etc.). I believe this won't change too much in the future. -AZBroker
Principles of Selling #57
Quote:
I see that. How about an example of Selling basics?
'Inspire trust' is a selling basic. Listing the various principles of selling is a excellent idea for a new thread. -AZBroker
#58
Quote:
'Inspire trust' is a selling basic. Listing the various principles of selling is a excellent idea for a new thread.
I saw the new thread. Good idea. thmbp2; -realtor
#59
Being something of a seasoned veteran in the sales game I'm going to risk sounding like a complete idiot on this subject.

The population of the US is now something over 3.3M souls. This number increases at about 11 net new souls per minute.

I'm talking about the US. Not the world.

Attitudes can change on a minute by minute basis. What and who's hot today won't be hot tomorrow.

Collectively I don't know how many souls provide for their families by selling goods or products, but I bet it's a sizeable number.

What we think we see may not be so. The forces in motion are too great to assume that prospecting and sales will be outlawed.

Chuck -Sales Pro 1000
#60
Quote:
The population of the US is now something over 3.3M souls. This number increases at about 11 net new souls per minute.
303M. You put a period where the zero went. ;wi

Quote:
Attitudes can change on a minute by minute basis. What and who's hot today won't be hot tomorrow.
I think prospecting and sales will be around as long as their is something in it for the consumer. -Houston
The Natural Evolution of Personal Marketing #61
I think we're seeing the natural evolution of personal marketing not the death of personal marketing. thmbp2; -SpeedRacer
#62
According to the U.S. Bureau of the Census, the resident population of the United States, projected to 11/03/07 at 14:54 GMT (EST+5) is 303,279,186

Thanks Houston. Here's the actual # taken from the US Census Website.

Chuck -Sales Pro 1000
#63
Quote:
As Sharon Drew Morgan routinely points out, most people will try to solve a problem on their own before they seek outside help.
When people reach the point where they will consider outside help I think they first try to solve the problem through an insider or friend in the business. What's the lesson? Get connected!
-Liberty
#64
Quote:
When people reach the point where they will consider outside help I think they first try to solve the problem through an insider or friend in the business. What's the lesson? Get connected!
Excellent point, Liberty. -Skip Anderson
Discern #65
Skip discerns the meaning of a cliche better than I do. What does "get connected" mean? Connected to whom? How? Advisedly in what way?

I've watched people get connected meaning find someone, something that promises help only to remain unhelped.

MitchM -MitchM
#66
In reading Mr. McCord's article I'm thinking that if I were to feel the same way he does then I'd better not even get out of bed in the morning. He's touting that the glass is half empty, not half full.

Any thoughts on this?

Chuck -Sales Pro 1000
#67
Quote:
In reading Mr. McCord's article I'm thinking that if I were to feel the same way he does then I'd better not even get out of bed in the morning. He's touting that the glass is half empty, not half full.

Any thoughts on this?

Chuck
Paul I can't help but think you've left much out of the equation when predicting the affects of commoditization and disintermediation on the future of sales and personal marketing. :sa -Calvin
#68
Quote:
Skip discerns the meaning of a cliche better than I do. What does "get connected" mean?
"Get Connected" is about Networking (Social and/or Business). -Liberty
Networking #69
Networking is a fascinating subject - getting connected as you say - I'm aware of in the context of one group I belong to - BNI - and the business I'm in called direct sales/network marketing.

The forms and agendas both hidden and obvious to networking of any kind - not just what I've alluded to - are where lies the dynamics.

Also, the motives and tensions, the urges and plots behind the practice of formal networking is also a fascinating study.

Then come the online social and business networking configurations involving personas and posturing, candid and contrived personalities.

Aside from the business I'm in which is about the formation of a distribution network, networking i.e. social and business connections such as Chamber and country club events or online sites for such activity is sometimes contrary to smart sales activity.

I didn't know the expression "get connected" referenced the concept of "networking"which also has varied definitions.

MitchM -MitchM
#70
Let's make a math problem out of this question.

I tend to use the rule of $1000.

Which is to say: That I need to find out what it takes to make $1000 per week at what I'm doing.

Let's say for example that I sell mutual funds. Let's also say that when I sell funds I splt the commission with the house 50/50.

Let's guess that the gross commission to the house is 3% on the funds, which means that I make 1.5%. The math shows me I have to bring in $66.6K of new money for me to make my $1000 that week.

Now, we multiply the $1000 x 52 weeks per year and what do we get? A measley $52K for the year. I spend 50% of that on what it costs me to book that business and now I have $25K for the wife and kiddies.

I'm a member of the chamber of commerce which gives me two networking events per week. On Monday I'm at the Ambassador meeting and on Thursday I'm at a ribbon cutting for a new business. I also belong to a franchised networking group, so on Wednesdays I'm at breakfast with 20 or 30 other folks like myself.

On Monday at the Chamber Ambassador meeting I'm with most of the same people week in and week out, so the chances of creating a new client from that experience is next to nil. Same way with the franchised networking group on Wednesday.

If I do these same activities over and over I'm confirming what Albert Einstein said, which is, "The definition of insanity is to do the same thing over and over and expect different results".

To grow my business I need to break out of the mold. To do that means I have to change strangers into customers. Not just a few, but a lot of them, and in short order.

I have to get my message through all of the other noise out there, which means I have to market, market, market, and then do some more marketing. I have to play with the rules as their handed out, but in the same breath I have to bring home the bacon.

Chuck -Sales Pro 1000
Less & More Networking #71
My limited observation is that the higher the sales income the less time is spent on networking and conversly the lower the sales income the more time is spent on networking - of course there are exceptions to everything.

MitchM -MitchM
#72
Quote:
My limited observation is that the higher the sales income the less time is spent on networking and conversly the lower the sales income the more time is spent on networking - of course there are exceptions to everything.
You mentioned BNI and Chuck mentioned the Chamber of Commerce so it's probable that my interpretation of networking isn't the same as others. Networking for me isn't about lead swapping. Networking for me is about developing supportive relationships and expanding my sphere of influence. -Liberty
Networking #73
"You mentioned BNI and Chuck mentioned the Chamber of Commerce so it's probable that my interpretation of networking isn't the same as others. Networking for me isn't about lead swapping. Networking for me is about developing supportive relationships and expanding my sphere of influence." -- Liberty

I believe all of the above is what many average income earners do while high income earners - over $200,000 yearly give or take some thousands of dollars - don't.

Obviously exceptions exist because of personal abilities and specific sales niches.

MitchM -MitchM
#74
Quote:
You mentioned BNI and Chuck mentioned the Chamber of Commerce so it's probable that my interpretation of networking isn't the same as others. Networking for me isn't about lead swapping. Networking for me is about developing supportive relationships and expanding my sphere of influence.
I agree, Liberty.

Also, in my experience, groups like the Chamber of Commerce are overflowing with members looking for leads (many are salespeople or entrepreneurs in the early stages of their careers or businesses), not filled with people who are potential customers (for most of us). If a salesperson is going to join an organization where the main purpose is advancing their business, it would be wise to join a group that has a large number of potential customers, not just a large number of other salespeople looking for leads. -Skip Anderson
BNI Is The Same #75
BNI - Business Networking International franchise, is the same. A few do well - everyone needs a handy man who does great work, cleans up, and charges "reasonable" but competitive rates. Same for an auto mechanic. Same for someone who can sae you money on auto insurance with a good company.

But house painters - in a down economy especially - hair cutters, remodelers, builders - I could go on - I've seen them all join and quit with little to negative to show for their efforts.

The personal marketing I do is making a direct sale - obviously in network marketing you seek people who will also become direct sellers and so on. I've tried and have known many who believed they could do well on line flop flop flop. The exception is a little international business we've generated using SKYPE for contacts.

So in my limited experience of eleven years with our company direct selling - personal marketing - is a face-to-face ear-to-ear activity alive and well.

There are some who would say network marketing/multi level marketing is not true direct sales - I disagree. I sold a kit of weight loss products last week.

Anyway, this thread has lots of twists and turns - that's mine.

The best to everyone.

MitchM -MitchM
#76
Quote:
In reading Mr. McCord's article I'm thinking that if I were to feel the same way he does then I'd better not even get out of bed in the morning. He's touting that the glass is half empty, not half full.

Chuck
Why in the world would I want to stay in bed? You’re the one reading negatives into this. I think this is the most exciting time in history to be in sales. The challenges are great and getting greater all the time. The strategies and concepts must change to meet those challenges. But the potential is also greater than ever.

Many have given some great advice such as to focus on the prospect’s needs, not the salesperson’s. To get connected. Etc. Those are great things to do. The problem is you gotta have someone to talk to.

As has been pointed out, hanging at BNI and the chamber isn’t going to do it. Sending unsolicited emails isn’t going to it. There are certainly more effective ways of finding prospects than spending hours on the phone setting up 2 appointments—where one is a no show.

I don’t see this as alarmist, defeatist, or depressing. I see it as an incredible opportunity to make more than ever before. Do I expect a large number of salespeople to hurt? Yes. But that’s simply because they refuse to change or don't see a need to change as the selling environment changes. Those that learn to capitalize on changes will create great sales businesses for themselves.

A recent non-scientific survey by my company showed some of the inefficiencies of the way salespeople market. This survey was a small sampling of random consumers—150 individual consumers and 75 businesses across the US. By no means am I claiming this to be a scientific study.
  • On average, they receive 11 cold call solicitations a week. Less than 8% will accept a cold call of any kind. Only 2% have acted on a cold call in the last year (business is, by the way, more likely than individuals to respond to cold calling).
  • On average, they receive over 87 pieces of direct mail a week (direct mail was from both individual salespeople and companies--and companies receive far more than individuals). Less than 12% read any direct mail solicitation. Less than 6% have acted on any direct mail piece in the last year.
  • Only one of those surveyed has ever called a number off of a sign on a street corner
  • About 30% of the business respondents have been approached at an event of some kind by a salesperson trying to establish contact. Less than 5% have purchased based on any contact met at an event (does not include requested information at a booth at a show or convention)
  • Of the 75 business consumers, only 4% have read any of the fliers faxed to their office in the last year with none purchasing a product or service from an unknown vendor or salesperson
Even if you assume that the respondents to this unscientific study are only half as responsive as the average consumer (highly unlikely they are that far off the norm), then only 4% of consumers will respond to any cold calling; only 12% will respond to any direct mail; and only 10% of business contacts through networking will ever buy a product or service from anyone. Even by doubling the numbers from the survey, it’s pretty slim pickins.

Is it any wonder the average salesperson’s hourly income is only $23.30 or about $48,100 annually? This average income does not include retail store salespeople. There are other studies that show the average sales income in the low to high 30’s, but these studies include retail store salespeople, bringing the average down by 10 to 15,000 a year. This average income has been inching up annually for the last several years. The average should begin heading down again. Partly because we’re heading into a recession which will make selling tougher, but also as time goes on, more and more salespeople will find themselves selling a commodity. -pmccord
#77
The skill level that works today might not work as well in the future. One personal marketing strategy is cold calling. The days of cold calling anyone and everyone are mostly behind us. The bar has been raised. This raising of the bar doesn't affect salespeople who have been operating at a high skill level nearly as much as the amateurs who were doing it wrong from the start. -Mikey
Stats #78
Paul's non-scientific stats reflect reality with a capital REALITY. I meet these people every day. I've used: radio, print, cold calling, leads lists, classified ads, hand outs and these stats prove true for me too.

Knowing from the beginning that I'd have to make lots of contacts to be successful gave me hope that I could do it if that's all I had to do - having worked ten - fourteen hours a day in other professions, in labor - what's work?

Today I work in that cliche "smarter not harder" meaning for one thing ending prospecting activities very quickly when ther's a NO. Nor do I work all those hours.

MitchM -MitchM
Bigger - Faster - Stronger #79
Quote:
The skill level that works today might not work as well in the future. One personal marketing strategy is cold calling. The days of cold calling anyone and everyone are mostly behind us. The bar has been raised. This raising of the bar doesn't affect salespeople who have been operating at a high skill level nearly as much as the amateurs who were doing it wrong from the start.
Agreed. The skill level of many salespeople will need to increase if they want to be competitive. -AZBroker
7 Characteristics #80
What would be 7 Characteristics - to pick a number - of people operating at a high skill level?

MitchM -MitchM
#81
Quote:
What would be 7 Characteristics - to pick a number - of people operating at a high skill level?
To stay ahead of the curve many salespeople will need to increase their proficiency in each of the following areas:
  1. Targeting (Who)
  2. Timing (When)
  3. Message (What)
  4. Medium (How)
-AZBroker
4 Characteristics #82
  1. Targeting (Who)
  2. Timing (When)
  3. Message (What)
  4. Medium (How)
How does one increase profisiciency in these? For example, for 1. would that be knowing who has already used or needs what you have to offer or something else?

For 2. would that be knowing when someone needed and wanted what you offered and was willing to buy or something else?

For 3. would that be having a clear generic message or something tailored to a specific target you know fits perfectly with what the target wants?

For 4. is that a reference to making a telephone call or sending a brochure or something that brings calls to you?

In your business AZBroker how do you accomplish these 4 Characteristics?

MitchM -MitchM
#83
Quote:
How does one increase profisiciency in these?
Skill training and education. Just like anything else you might want to learn how to become good at.

Quote:
1. would that be knowing who has already used or needs what you have to offer or something else?
It's about working with highly targeted prospects.

Quote:
For 2. would that be knowing when someone needed and wanted what you offered and was willing to buy or something else?
It's about being in the right place at the right time.

Quote:
For 3. would that be having a clear generic message or something tailored to a specific target you know fits perfectly with what the target wants?
It's about a targeted message that converts well.

Quote:
For 4. is that a reference to making a telephone call or sending a brochure or something that brings calls to you?
It's about choosing the right medium for the message. -AZBroker
Cliches #84
Great cliches - generalities, AZBroker - don't take that pejoratively speaking rather as a definition of a commonplace statements good for the grounds of which one might speak with more substantually.

I learn best with specific, concrete examples. If you would speak from your sales perspective:

1. Where does your training and education come from?

2. How have you found highly targeted markets?

3. What do you do to position yourself in the right place at the right time?

4. What converts best for you -can you give one example?

5. What mediums work best for you and do you know why? -MitchM
#85
Quote:
1. Where does your training and education come from?
My training and education comes from the classroom, on-the-job, seminars, workshops, in-services, coaching, personal study and good old fashion trial-and-error.

Quote:
2. How have you found highly targeted markets?
By looking. In real estate "Expired Listings" are a highly visible and targeted market which can be found with a minimum of effort.

Quote:
3. What do you do to position yourself in the right place at the right time?
Constructive and continuous contact with the homeowner. This contact could be in the form of a telephone call, direct mail, in-person visit, etc.

Quote:
4. What converts best for you -can you give one example?
One of my best converting scripts centers on the fact that I specialize in selling homes that were previously listed and did not sell.

Quote:
5. What mediums work best for you and do you know why?
Face to face works best for me. Why? Among other things Confidence and Professionalism. -AZBroker
Clear Picture #86
That gives me a clear picture of how you see yourself working to your best capability - when people post clearly it can help everyone.

MitchM -MitchM
#87
What's so hard to understand that it takes a superior marketing program, a superior sales system and an unlimited amount of prospects to attain a 7 figure annual income?

Never mind these statistics. Why waste your time trying to figure out what the underachievers fail at?

Geeez guys, sales is the million dollar skill regardless of what you sell. -bluenote
#88
Quote:
What's so hard to understand that it takes a superior marketing program, a superior sales system and an unlimited amount of prospects to attain a 7 figure annual income?

Never mind these statistics. Why waste your time trying to figure out what the underachievers fail at?

Geeez guys, sales is the million dollar skill regardless of what you sell.
You’ve missed the object of the survey. It wasn’t intended to find out why the vast majority of salespeople are not earning superior incomes, it was looking at how people react to marketing.

The questions about whether people took cold calls or read direct mail were important, but the questions to us that were most important were the ones about whether or not the respondent had bought anything in the past year from a contact made through the particular marketing method. How many people will accept cold calls or will read direct mail or will read fliers is interesting, but somewhat immaterial. What is material is how many actually buy something based on a contact through that media.

The object wasn’t to analyze what salespeople do but to look at what consumers do. But by understanding better what consumers do, we can also understand better ways to communicate with and market to consumers.

The marketing individual salespeople do is much different from the marketing corporations do. Corporate marketing has been studied to death. Hundreds of millions of dollars a year is spent on studying corporate marketing. Very little has been done in studying the impact and consumer response to individual salespeople’s marketing.

For instance, the direct mail individual salespeople do is very different from the direct mail corporations do. We tend to take the metrics derived from corporate direct mail marketing and apply it to the direct mail of individual salespeople because corporate metrics are really the only ones that exist. But the marketing itself is very different. The direct mail piece the individual sends out is usually much less sophisticated than the corporate piece. Obviously, the quantity the individual sends out is just a tiny fraction of a corporate mailing. And the message itself is very different.

Is it reasonable to assume the metrics for the two are going to be the same? No. But the research hasn’t been done because of money. Corporations spend hundreds of millions each year on their marketing research. Individual salespeople don’t get the same information because they don’t have the bucks to have the research done.

Our survey didn’t tackle that problem either. We looked at direct mail as a group, not breaking out the mail from individuals. One reason was time, another was we were dealing with such a small sample of people.

But even within our survey there is actionable information. For instance, the numbers on cold calling. From a pure numbers standpoint, the survey simply confirmed that cold calling is very inefficient. Nothing new there. However, if one does want to cold call, there is information that is of value. First, they know that only 8% of the people they call will even accept their call and that only 2% have bought anything over the past year from a contact initiated by a cold call. On the other hand, they also know that of the people who will accept their call, 25% have bought something in the last year from a contact initiated by a cold call--they have bought via this method of introduction within the past 12 months.

Did the survey take time and money? Yes. Was it worth it? From my perspective, yes. From yours, no. That’s fine.

But companies like mine, Jacques’, Sharon Drew’s and many others are trying to help understand how consumers buy, how they react to marketing, how they make the decisions they make and many other aspects of selling. We are all small companies. We can invest a few thousand, some maybe even a million or two in a really “big” project. But none of us will be able to do the multi-million research projects that are funded by corporations. But we all contribute our little bit to the understanding of how individuals sell and how consumers deal with our efforts to sell.

These small surveys and research projects have changed and will continue to change the sales industry and the process. Some will find one survey or research project to be of value, others won’t. And certainly lots more needs to be done. The focus of this survey needs to be studied much more. This is one survey with only a small sampling. It would be very interesting to have others do it and compare results. It would be very interesting to see a much larger sample taken. It would be very interesting to see a detailed survey on just individual direct mail. There is a ton to be done and very little time and money to it because the companies that are doing it are doing it with their own money and their own time. -pmccord
#89
Thanks for taking the time and giving a detailed explanation Paul. -bluenote
#90
Paul,

Thanks for your clairification of what you were writing about in your article. Much clearer now.

Chuck -Sales Pro 1000
#91
How would the results of your survey change, how would people react differently-how many would actually buy someting, if it was a highly skilled sales and marketing professional conducting the campaign? -SpeedRacer
#92
Quote:
How would the results of your survey change, how would people react differently-how many would actually buy something, if it was a highly skilled sales and marketing professional conducting the campaign?
You're asking an almost impossible question--one based on trying to randomly survey the marketing activities of only highly skilled salespeople.

Now, it is more than reasonable to assume that some of the calls these 225 people received were from highly skilled salespeople; and they received direct mail from highly skilled salespeople; etc.

Based on their average of 11 cold calls a week received, that's a total for the group of 128,700 cold calls. Very high chance that highly skilled cold call salespeople made some of those calls. Direct mail is more difficult as it was a mix from individuals and companies. But with a combined total of 1,017,900 direct mail pieces, there is an excellent chance some of those were from highly skilled salespeople.

This was a mix of highly skilled to probably the newest of the new. To try to isolate only highly skilled contacts is virtually impossible. First, you'd have to rely on the consumer identifying who was and who wasn't highly skilled. Since 92% won't even take the call, that'd be impossible to figure out even if you had the confidence the consumer could make the determination accurately enough to differentiate the two.

Or, you'd have to get the lists from salespeople identified as highly skilled and call those lists, not knowing whether or not you could get cooperation from the consumers, meaning the time and dollar investment could be considerably higher since instead of getting cooperation from random consumers you'd have to get cooperation from a specific list; you'd have to get cooperation from a sizable group of specific salespeople identified as highly skilled--in each individual area; you'd have to merge the lists; etc. A fairly expensive and time consuming operation.

On the other hand, if an individual salesperson wanted to do their own survey they certainly can. All they need do is keep the records over a period of a year. Their numbers wouldn't be the same of course. Instead of knowing how many people said they would or wouldn't take a cold call, they'd know how many of the people they called actually took their cold call, etc. I wouldn't be a usable survey for anyone but themselves, but they would have much more valuable information than a general survey. -pmccord
#93
How would you expect the results to change? I would expect the results to be dramatically different. The more skilled the individual the better the results. This begs the question is the problem with the method or the individual? -SpeedRacer
#94
Quote:
How would you expect the results to change? I would expect the results to be dramatically different. The more skilled the individual the better the results. This begs the question is the problem with the method or the individual?
Expecting is if fine--but all it is is suspicion. That's far different than knowing. The only way to know is for the salesperson to keep accurate records over a sustained period of time.

Suspecting can lead to false beliefs.

Let me give an example. One of my coaching clients had been doing three types of marketing before we got together. She cold called, she networked through an organization that had a good number of prospects for her, and she worked some of the orphan files from her company.

When we started working together she expected very definite results to be revealed about her sales business. Cold calling was by far her best marketing method and the orphan files were a total waste of time.

When we sat down and analyzed her numbers over the past year, we found that she did, in fact, get the majority of her clients from cold calling. We also found that she spent the vast majority of her time cold calling. However, her closing ration with cold calling was only in the high 20 percent range.

When we looked at her networking through the organization, we found that the number of clients she had developed was only about 11% of her total but her closing ratio was a little over 50%. She spent very little time working within this organization.

When she worked the orphan files, her closing ratio when up to almost 65%. But she spent almost no time on working orphan files because it seemed to take so long to go through the files and find viable candidates to call.

It seemed that cold calling was her best source of new clients because it "felt" that way. After all, that's where most of her clients came from.

In reality, spending more time on the boring work of going through orphan files and then working those for referrals has increased her production by over 100% this year. She still "feels" like she is wasting a lot of time. But the numbers prove otherwise. Although it takes time to shift through the files, she can uncover far more viable prospects with the orphan files than she can in the same amount of time cold calling.

Of course, she still does some cold calling and she is still involved in the organization. She has increased her participation in the organization and is seeing an increase in business there also. She is spending more time on those things that actually produce a higher close ratio--and more business, even though she suspected they weren't performing as well as cold calling.

The percentage of business she has closed this year from cold calling is down from over 75% last year to just over 20% this year. Yet, she more than doubled her production. An increasing amount is coming from referrals and from her interaction in the organization and less and less is coming from cold calling and even from the orphan files.

One of our objectives was to get the referrals kicked in because the orphan files aren't going to last forever. She probably has another 5 or 6 months of orphan files to go through then that well will have run dry. So she is positioning herself to be prepared for that.

Sometimes our suspicions aren't very accurate. -pmccord
#95
Do you think it's too far of a reach to expect that someone highly skilled in self-marketing will outperform someone who is unskilled in self-marketing? -SpeedRacer
#96
Quote:
Do you think it's too far of a reach to expect that someone highly skilled in self-marketing will outperform someone who is unskilled in self-marketing?
Certainly I would--but how much is the question. One and half times? Twice? Three? Four? Unless they keep accurate records they'll never really know what they're actually doing. And knowing what is actually working and how well is a key to making a lot of sales.

My coaching client would have continued to emphasize cold calling and blowing off the orphan files if she hadn't seen the numbers for herself.

Do I think a more skilled salesperson could have taken the orphan files she is working and closed more business than she has? I would certainly expect so--but we really wouldn't know without keeping accurate records.

And the common "knowledge" in her office was that working the orphan files was a waste of time, just for the desperate. That common knowledge proved costly for many of her co-workers because they could have done the same thing she is doing--except everyone knew it was a waste of time. -pmccord
#97
Quote:
Do I think a more skilled salesperson could have taken the orphan files she is working and closed more business than she has? I would certainly expect so--but we really wouldn't know without keeping accurate records.

And the common "knowledge" in her office was that working the orphan files was a waste of time, just for the desperate. That common knowledge proved costly for many of her co-workers because they could have done the same thing she is doing--except everyone knew it was a waste of time.
The same could be said for "Cold Calling" and other forms of self-marketing. -SpeedRacer
#98
Again, I would expect a skilled salesperson to do better, that doesn't mean that it's reality. Without the data one cannot know-- all one can do is suspect.

Buy even beyond that, one has to define what is efficent and what isn't. Our survey indicated a maximum 2% close rate on total calls with an expected close rate of less then 1%. Some other studies have determined a maximum rate around 1 1/2%. If a skilled cold call person is 5 times more effective than the aveage, they have a maximum close rate of 10%, with an exected close rate of about 7 to 8%. Is that efficient? Obviously, the individual salesperson would have to determine that for themselves. But without the data, you don't know how much more effective--if any--a highly skilled person is over an average cold caller. All you can do is suspect they are to some degree. And just because the highly skilled salesperson makes more money isn't proof--without the data you don't know if the real difference is in skill or that the "skilled" person simply made more calls, thus making more money.

And as for common knowledge, the "common knowledge" is that cold calling is the way to go. Its preached by most companies, by most sales managers, and defended as gospel by many a salesperson. Its cheap in terms of money, very expensive in terms of time; its "easy" in the sense anyone can do it (don't take that to mean anyone can be good at it, just that anyone with a phone can cold call); and it costs the company little other than the salesperson's time and one of the cheapest things they have to spend, especially if the salesperson is commission only, is the salesperson's time. -pmccord
#99
Quote:
Buy even beyond that, one has to define what is efficent and what isn't. Our survey indicated a maximum 2% close rate on total calls with an expected close rate of less then 1%. Some other studies have determined a maximum rate around 1 1/2%. If a skilled cold call person is 5 times more effective than the aveage, they have a maximum close rate of 10%, with an exected close rate of about 7 to 8%. Is that efficient? Obviously, the individual salesperson would have to determine that for themselves. But without the data, you don't know how much more effective--if any--a highly skilled person is over an average cold caller. All you can do is suspect they are to some degree. And just because the highly skilled salesperson makes more money isn't proof--without the data you don't know if the real difference is in skill or that the "skilled" person simply made more calls, thus making more money.
You are right, without hard numbers all I can do is suspect.

Scenario A
  • Highly Skilled: Calls from a list of highly targeted prospects that was compiled based on an ideal customer profile or other specific data.
  • Unskilled: Calls on anyone he or she thinks or feels might be a good prospect.
  • Conclusion: I suspect the Highly Skilled approach will outperform the Unskilled approach.

Scenario B
  • Highly Skilled: Qualifies/disqualifies prospects against minimum requirements - authority, budget, timeline, want ... before investing further resources.
  • Unskilled: Spends resources - time, effort, money ... in pursuit of unqualified prospects.
  • Conclusion: I suspect the Highly Skilled approach will outperform the Unskilled approach.
-SpeedRacer
#100
Okay this thread is entirely too long. hpy3; -Jolly Roger
© 1999-2012 Blackwell & Associates, Inc. All rights reserved.
LinkBacks Enabled by vBSEO 3.0.0 RC6 © 2006, Crawlability, Inc.