The Death of Personal Marketing ?

There was a new article posted today by Paul McCord called "The Death of Personal Marketing" and I wondered what others opinions were on the article. -SpeedRacer

Personal marketing done right has, does and will continue to thrive in the future and there is a LOT more to personal selling than educating the consumer. -Houston

Houston,

You're right. Personal marketing has worked in the past. To a large extent, it works today. The future is going to be substantially different.

As I mentioned in the article, personal marketing isn't going away. It will simply have to become ancillary to developing a public reputation as an expert. It becomes secondary to supporting the image and reputaton the salesperson builds. There is more to personal marketing than education, but we are moving into--actually already there--an enviornment where consumers no longer need salespeople for most of their purchases. And if they do choose to work with a salesperson, they are looking for the cheapest price on the solution they've already decided upon or they want someone who has the image and reputation equal to the experts they read and listen to via the media.

When I speak with executives, one of their concerns is how to stop the commodization of their industry. And this is true whether I'm speaking with executives in the financial services, IT, consulting, mortgage, real estate, insurance, data processing, and most other industries.

The problem is they can't stop it. All they can do is prepare for it by either giving in or finding ways to decommoditize their own products or services. The way to decommoditize a product or service is to reverse the process and turn it back into a decision that is based on expert advise.

The problem then becomes the salesperson, not the company, must be viewed as an expert. Marketing won't do that because everyone else is making the same claims. When everyone is making the same claims, no one believes anyone because the noise is too loud. The salesperson simply becomes a faceless salesperson in a sea of faceless salespeople, all trying to sell the same stuff, to the same people, at basically the same price, the same way.

This is the reason the USP is basically dead as a strong marketing tool. Years ago the USP was a powerful tool. It was a new concept to sales taken straight out of the pages of Madison Avenue. It worked and it worked very, very well. Today, everybody is encouraged to develop their own USP. However, no matter what you sell, there are only a few dozen or maybe a few hundred ways to express what you do--no matter how unique you try to be. With thousands upon thousands of salespeople in each industry using their own version of the same statement, it loses its impact. Prospects have heard it all before. This isn't to say it isn't helpful for salespeople to develop a USP. It is simply to say that it no longer has the impact it used to and that is was intended to have.

Differentation for salespeople has always been difficult. Even more so in a world where salespeople are perceived to be not needed by more and more consumers and where consumers have become numb to marketing. How then do you differentiate yourself? One way--publicity, becoming recognized as an expert, by literally taking yourself out of the crowd and putting yourself in a different group.

Unfortunately, commodization is a reality. One that is growing and will continue to grow. Of course, in a commodized world, consumers still want and need products and services, they just believe they no longer need or want someone they perceive to be biased involved in the purchase. -pmccord

What are examples of the "personal marketing" that you're talking about Paul? -Mikey

I gave a number of examples in the article, but here's a short list: cold calling; fliers; signs; emails; direct mail letters; magnetic signs on the side of your car; postcards; virtually anything that promotes you that is designed to highlight you, your product, your company.

as I mentioned, these are useful for supporting a public reputation but becoming increasingly ineffective by themselves because increasingly consumers are coming to the conclusion they don't need salespeople because they can get "expert" advice without the attached prejudice of someone seeking a commission from magazines, books, TV, radio, etc. -pmccord

Cold calling, direct mail, etc. (personal marketing) are channels or delivery methods for a message. I don't believe these channels or delivery methods are at risk of dying anytime soon. -Mikey

The delivery channels are the way salespeople market. Their message must be carried someway and it is the channel that gets the message out. The message is virtually identical from one salesperson to another.

How soon they die is dependent upon what you mean by soon. They are already in the process of dying. As I said, it will take years, but the process has already started.

The problem isn't with the channel--it is with the consumer--many, and a growing number all the time, don't want to deal with salespeople. They'd rather do it themselves based on the information they gather from sources they trust. The point isn't the channel, its the way people make purchasing decisions is changing--and we can't stop it or slow it down. But we can recognize it and make the necessary changes to take advantage of it. -pmccord

Do you agree that the problem isn't with 'personal marketing' but instead the 'message' being sent via 'personal marketing'? -Mikey

Not really. The problem is a growing number of people don't want to deal with salespeople. It isn't a problem with the channels, nor is it a problem with the salesperson's message in the sense of what we're talking about (the typical salesperson's message is a totally different topic and within the way prospecting and marketing is done today by the majority of salespeople it's a huge problem, but that's another thread). The problem is a shift in the way people buy. Salespeople are no longer needed except to fill out the paperwork--and many companies are making it so that even then they aren't needed.

The role of the salesperson as provider of information and advice is being replaced with media--tons and tons of media that offer expert advice on every subject under the sun. So, when the salesperson's expertise and counsel is no longer needed, the only thing the prospect needs is a place to buy and the best price they can find.

And, again, this isn't to say there won't always be a segment of the buying population that wants the expertise and advice of a salesperson. There will always be that segment. But it is shrinking. And even then, they are increasingly wanting to work with someone they believe is as knowledgeable--and objective--as the experts they read and listen to. -pmccord

Paul, I have to agree with you on this. It started in the mid 90's with the automobile buyer becoming more informed on product. I am sure that if you looked at consumer magazine sells, they have gone down due to the internet. It has be become a "consumer aware" society (sales practices, some of them, are often mocked - ie Seinfield's "what do I have to do to get you in this car today")

You are right, there will be those who want the personal attention. But in a society that has their kids in 3 sports, 4 clubs, and sets play dates - time is important to the consumer. I have heard people say they do not want to go to a store to purchase anything due to the time spent with a sales person going through the norm of upsales, etc.

I would have to say, as I know you know, that the internet changed sales. -Ed Callais

I read the article - you can make any kind of statement with any kind of point to it that's going to have some truth to it. Some are better written or more truthful than others but that doesn't matter much.

I make a living in network marketing also called multi level marketing also called direct sales. I sell nutritional products directly to consumers and I sell the business directly to people also.

I don't know about any other kind of personal marketing - I only know that I sell directly and market personally and for what I do there's a market. It's a very challenging business I'm in and peresonal attention is a big part of it.

The best of the best to everyone.

MitchM -MitchM

As Sharon Drew Morgan routinely points out, most people will try to solve a problem on their own before they seek outside help. This is another reason why some people don't want to work with a salesperson (outside help) if they don't have to.

With more and more information on almost any subject becoming readily available and recent advances in technology which facilitate the purchase process it is true that many people who otherwise would have sought outside help will attempt to solve their problems on their own.

These are the people who believe they know what they want/need and will shop around for the provider with the deal (not necessarily the cheapest price) they like the most.

Does this mean the death of sales, the salesperson or personal marketing? Does this mean salespeople will be replaced with experts?

No.

I already know how to mow my grass but I pay a landscaping company to do it for me. I could have learned from the Internet how to paint my house but I paid a professional to do it for me because I wanted professional results. In both of these examples I did not seek out a perceived expert. Instead I looked for a provider whom I thought would do a good job and who would give me a good deal. -AZBroker

AZBroker makes a good point - a glut of information signifies a glut of information - people still seek what they want and when they find or are found by that person who has it they get what they want.

MitchM -MitchM

AZBroker,

For the examples you cite, I agree. Most people don't look for experts for getting their lawn mowed or to paint their house. Unfortunately, not only are those simplistic examples, they are also are not the realm of most professional salespeople.

In the realm of financial services, real estate transactions, sophisticated IT applications, and many others people are looking for experts--or the best price if they already know their needs and wants and the solution.

There will probably be little change in the typical areas of the retail store clerk or the typical skilled laborer. But even with the examples you gave there is some application of the expert vs do-it-yourself movement. Change your examples to a complete landscape and the homeowner wants an expert--or they go to Office Depot, purchase a landscaping program, design their own, and then head to Home Depot to buy the merchandise--and then maybe get their lawn guy to do the labor. Or if they are looking at a faux leather wall, they want an expert, or they head to Lowes and buy the kit and do it themselves. If they have to settle for less than an expert, they may as well do it themselves.

I realize that for many the idea that the landscape is changing is uncomfortable and hard to grasp. The changes we've seen in purchasing behavior have only really been moving for a very few short years, yet it has already had a tremendous impact in many industries.

And even your real estate industry is seeing commodization taking place which is inevitable since every Realtor sells the same product. NAR and the state associations are fighting desperately to keep it from happening and have been fairly successful to date through a combination of legislative maneuvering and peer pressure, but it will happen eventually. Does that mean that every Realtor will simply be relegated to selling discounted commissions? No, just the majority will. There will be some who stand above the rest and will command higher commissions because of their reputation and image. -pmccord

In my experience with real estate, the majority of people who utilize the services of a real estate agent rarely seek out "Experts". Instead, when the decision is made to use the services of a professional real estate agent (outside help) to buy or sell a home the decision of who to use is most often influenced by referrals, word of mouth and/or other forms of marketing (Internet, Signs, etc.). When a homeowner chooses to use the services of a professional landscaping company (outside help) for complete landscaping I would expect a similar selection process. In many sales scenarios once a short list of candidates has been determined I would expect the prospective client to shop the candidates for the deal (not necessarily the cheapest price) they like the most. -AZBroker

I agree. The question is in the future who is going to be on the short list?

For example, in the future in the real estate industry, once the commodization process has fully kicked in and the standard listing commission is in the area of 1 to 1 1/2, maybe 2%, the selection process will be the same--with the exception of a few high profile Realtors who will still be getting substantially more than that. The question isn't whether or not Realtors will get business, it's which side of the commission fence one will be on. Who will be making money and who will be fighting for the leftovers. Now, NAR and the state associations will fight to hold this off as long as possible, but eventually, it will happen. When? Don't know as the real estate industry has a very powerful lobby. But eventually they'll lose the battle with banks, the discount brokers will become more accepted (maybe hated, but accepted) and expand, and commissions will start to decline substantially. Even then, the FISBO segment of the market will continue to grow due to the help of the various FISBO marketing companies. Today the average agent and the high profile agent both can list a home at about the same commission rate. The average agent may give a slight discout, may not. The high profile agent probably won't unless it is a very high dollar listing. In the future, the average agent will be scrimping for a 1 or 1 1/2% commission, selling price, while the high profile agent is substantially higher in their commission structure, still much closer to their current commission structure. The high profile agent who has built their image and reputation as an expert will be able to hold their ground much better than the others. Because their are a better agent? No. Because they are known and recognized as a leader in their industry.

Other industries are experiencing the same dilemma.

This isn't going to happen tomorrow, but I suspect we'll be seeing a substantial change in the market place within 5 years. It won't be in full fruition by 2012, but noticeable more advanced than today in many industries. -pmccord

Commoditization is countered through differentiation. Is "perceived expert" a differentiation strategy? Yes. Is it the only differentiation strategy? No. -AZBroker

Precisely the point. Differentation. In today's selling environment and in the future enviornment one must have a differentation strategy. And my point is that those being used today are dying. They were designed for and evolved out of very different market conditions than what are currently developing.

Now, unfortunately we won't know for several years if I'm right or not. I'f I'm right, as I believe all the indicators point in that direction, those who haven't prepared will find themselves out in the cold. I'f I'm wrong--well, that won't be known for some time to come, but even if I'm wrong and many have taken the opportunity to establish their public reputation, all they've done is make more money than they would have.

Companies are preparing for this monumental shift but unfortunately salespeople aren't. -pmccord

Wouldn't you agree that if the consumer sees the value in using a intermediary they will, no matter what the industry, and that this value can be communicated through personal marketing? -Mikey

Today, still, yes. In the future. No, not as a stand alone marketing method. The point is people are 1) growing very tired of the non-stop marketing; 2) don't believe salespeople are honest in the sense of giving objective information and advice (makes no difference whether their belief is factual or not, we have to deal with their beliefs as they are, not as we wish they were); and 3) they don't need a salesperson any more. They want expert advice and guidance, not sales. They view expert guidance as being objective, and sales by its very nature isn't.

With the proliferation of highly targeted expert advice, more and more people are demanding that the people they deal with be experts. Marketing doesn't establish expertise, it establishes only that the salesperson exists, which is no longer good enough. The problem with marketing is not only that people are tired of it, but everyone looks the same. They can't pick the expert from the crowd because everyone claims to be an expert; everyone claims to be unique; everyone claims to be the best. And they know that if everyone is, then no one is.

This, of course, could become an issue with those who work to create the image and reputation of an expert. The advantage is that few will do it--it's too hard, too much work, too difficult, takes too long. They have to learn a new set of skills and the skills they currently have are working at least well enough that they don't want or feel they need to change.

The executives I speak with recognize the change and are trying to figure out how to either diminish the issue or take advantage of it. Some, of course, are deciding their solution is to get rid of sales and cater to the do-it-yourself buyer. Others are trying to have it both ways as they figure out their future strategy. And, still others, are sitting, contemplating their direction.

It's a problem companies are addressing or trying to figure out how they are going to address. Unfortunately, few salespeople are looking that far ahead.

Now, will there still be a small segment that won't care either way? Of course. Unfortunately, these will more than likely be consumers who are very price sensitive. Those aren't the consumers that will be providing salespeople with the incomes they desire. -pmccord

In the future you envision if a salesperson/company markets a unique value proposition are you saying it will fall on deaf ears for no other reason than it is viewed as 'marketing'? -Mikey

I'd argue that the USP as originally intended is already dead. Still a useful side tool to help people remember you, but as a marketing tool--dead as doornail.

Certainly, there was a time when the USP was a powerful tool. Taken from the marketing guys on Madison Avenue and applied to sales, it worked extremely well for two or three decades. Then it begain its growth in popularity to the point today that everyone has their own USP.

The problem is just how many ways can a Realtor, insurance agent, attorney, networking salesperson, telephony salesperson, or anyone else describe the results of what they do? A few dozen? A couple hundred? There's no longer anything unique about a USP. They are accepted as just another way someone describes themselves. Although when adopted from marketing it had great impact, today it is useful primarily to help a prospect remember you--if they don't get it mixed up all the other same sounding USP's they've heard.

Does this mean it isn't still being preached as part of the gospel of sales by many? Certainly it is. And I don't disagree that it's a somewhat useful tool. But it isn't going to get anyone to stop and say, "Wow! How do you do that!" anymore. Today, the typical response is "Oh, you sell insurance, huh?" -pmccord

In the future you envision what type of personal marketing will still be in use by the "experts" and how will it be different from what we see today? -Mikey

Many of the same things as used today: referrals and networking will be prominent. highly targeted direct mail, targeted advertising, highly specific email, event sponsorships, and newsletters will be heavily used. The difference is they will promoting the salesperson's reputation and image, not their "sales" aspect. They draw people to themselves because of their status and reputation, not because they sell.

The very things they use to build their reputation is also their marketing--the articles they publish, the speeches they give, the white papers they publish, the interviews they give, the quotes in news articles is more effective marketing then marketing is. Marketing is used to give information on how to get hold of them, not to sell. The educational stuff they do does the selling, the marketing simply makes the available. -pmccord

The experts will use many of the same personal marketing channels however their message will shift from a "sales" aspect to promoting their reputation and image. Is that right? Could you please give an example of promoting reputation and image through highly targeted direct mail?

How will these 'experts' reach the market that doesn't read the articles they publish or listen to the speaches they give, etc.? -Mikey

1) Highly targeted: local investors with an estimated portfolio of over one million. Promoting reputation: instead of the typical direct mail piece, the piece could promote a local news interview scheduled, an upcoming newspaper or magazine article, an upcoming educational seminar sponsored by the chamber or other organization.

2) Same as above. -pmccord

I'm struggling with this. :dun

If people hate marketing as you say, how is it that the 'experts' unsolicited marketing receives any better reception than any other unsolicited marketing? -Mikey

One is selling--a biased activity from another salesperson just trying to make some bucks.

One is offering an opportunity to learn something from an expert on the subject.

You don't see a difference between someone trying to sell you something and someone offering to educate you? -pmccord

I get plenty of phone calls, emails, and direct mail pieces inviting me to this, that or the other each offering free information/education from some well known 'expert' or 'guru'. This is still SPAM. Unsolicited marketing is unsolicited marketing. -Mikey

I guess personal marketing doesn't work and is dead then, hun? Thank you for proving my point. -pmccord

It's funny how anything can be taken to prove this or that when nothing is ever proved from one or a small sample of anything other than it's funny what people do to prove - in their mind truthfully or sarcastically - this or that.

It's also funny what people consider spam or not spam - when something is emailed it might be called spam by someone who wants to judge it a certain way - when it's the same thing in the mail or on TV, the internet ads, the radio - whatever form - it's called something else entirely.

I do personal marketing and what I do works meaning through what I do sales are made.

Everything does begin to sound the same and melt into the same running colors of blobs and blurs in people's minds mostly fixed on fleeting images and dominated by emotional and instinctive urges and drives, needs and fears.

Still, some want and others don't want what I offer and whether I use the radio to advertise/promote/market or classified ads or phone calling - if what I do is called direct marketing [that's what I call it] it works for me.

BUT again, I'm not in conventional sales like I believe most are who post here - I've found the discussion on real estate one of the most instructive so far.

Good luck everyone - well, make it a great day!

MitchM -MitchM

People see what they want to see Paul. msnwnk;

... which is exactly why well targeted messages make it through people's selective perception and why personal marketing is not dead or dying. -Mikey

Mikey,

Neither one of us is going to change the other's mind. Unfortunately, we won't really know for some time to come just what the radical changes in the selling environment will bring. I, of course, think it imperative for salespeople to begin thinking in much broader terms than they are today. You are very satisfied that there won't be much change.

If I'm right, there are a ton of salespeople who will be in serious trouble if they don't change their thinking. If I'm wrong but some have implemented new, powerful marketing strategies, they simply make more money. -pmccord

I'm sure there will be change.

I'm not sure that in the future if you're not an 'expert' you'll be out in the cold or that contacting the right person at the right time with the right message (personal marketing) is dead or dying. -Mikey

I would agree with Paul. I have tried 2 approaches with my business. The first was local sales coaching for businesses in my area. The second was targeting myself to those selling high end luxury goods.

The local sales coaching was a bust. As soon as I started marketing myself to a very specific niche, I started getting coaching clients. It's because people in that niche see me as a credible expert and are willing to pay my fee for training.

I think if you have a message targeted at a specific niche that will see you as an expert, you're likely to be in demand with that market.

Susan -susana

If you have a message targeted at a specific niche that does not yet perceive you as an expert would you be out in the cold? -Mikey

Hard to say. If you have good credentials and can communicate well (phone and print), I don't see why you'd have a problem setting yourself up as an expert. You also have to gain exposure with the right group of people. This can be done throug advertising, speaking and networking.

Susan -susana

What would 'good credentials' be for someone who sells used cars, insurance, real estate, etc.? -Mikey

I'm sure everyone has their own benchmark, but for me it would be someone who has been succesful in that particular field. And, can clearly communicate ideas and principals that helped them be succesful.

Susan -susana

The answer is: a lot of satisfied customers and very few unsatisfied customers. Also, the person I buy something from can be brand new in sales and not an expert at anything other than being attentive and assisting me in getting what I want.

For the past eight years I've done hundreds of trainings face-to-face and in conference calls and my experience leads me to believe that most people aren't attentive to simple things which make all the difference in the world. Also, attention time or focus for anyone beginning something is generally three days - three weeks is long, and three months is exceptional.

The reason is people continually distract themselves from the essentials of what they have to know about their business and what they have to know about people when it comes to making a sale.

Lack of focus, lack of paying attention, and letting the imagination over run and fog up the mind and hence communication is what's commonplace.

AND that often comes from the inability or unwillingness of someone to be trainable and teachable. Letting go of bad habits and replacing them with good habits produces lots of problems as everyone knows usually from looking at the motes in everyone else's behavioral eyes yet totally missing the big chunks of rock in their own.

I speak from experience having experience both big chunks and little motes and lots of observation.

The best of the best to everyone.

MitchM -MitchM

What should us real estate agents be doing to get on the short list? -realtor

The short answer is...

...stick with the basics. The marketing message needs to answer the prospect's spoken/unspoken question of "What's in it for me?". When the answer is right you'll be on the list. ;)

Here are two real estate specific examples:

• "Why should I hire an agent to sell my home when I can do it myself?" (Translation = WIIFM?)

• "Why should I hire you to sell my home instead of Agent X? (Translation = WIIFM?)

-AZBroker

Do you think in the future if you're not an 'expert' you'll be out in the cold? -Mikey

The definition of credentials that I can relate with is "letters depicting recognized skills, competency or status". How do you define credentials and for salespeople without credentials how do you recommend they set themselves up as an expert? -Mikey

Realtor,

I'd advise you to look beyond just the basics and learn some more sophisticated and effective marketing methods than the worn out basics.

Just look around you. How many tens of thousands of Realtors are beating their heads against the wall working the basics hard and starving to death?

Is it because they just aren't working? For some, yes. But thousands upon thousands are working their tail off and getting nowhere.

Is it because they have the wrong message? For some, yes. But frankly, there are only so many ways to say you sell real estate, period.

Is it because they are scatter shooting instead of concentrating on a target market? For some, yes. But there are thousands diligently farming their chosen neighborhoods and selling zip.

Is it because they can't differentiate themselves? Yes. How can you differentiate yourself when you do and say the same thing as one million other people?

Why do the real estate schools have enough new candidates looking to get their real estate license to stay profitable? Because real estate has one of the highest failure rates of any sales profession because every soul does the exact same thing. In many parts of the country it seems that every other person you meet has a real estate license. They're easy to get. The real estate schools and firms promise big money. 70% failure rate.

If you do exactly what the majority does why do you expect a different outcome? -pmccord

Quote:

I'd advise you to look beyond just the basics and learn some more sophisticated and effective marketing methods than the worn out basics.

It has been said that greatness comes from executing the basics (fundamentals).

In my experience the majority of real estate agents who wash out do so because of a failure to understand and/or execute the basics (fundamentals) in any or all of the following core areas: business, marketing, selling, real estate.

I'd advise you to learn and apply the basics BEFORE moving on to more sophisticated methods.

You ARE sending the wrong message if that message is about you (so many ways to say you sell real estate) instead of focusing on what's in it for the prospect. Again, back to basics. ;) -AZBroker

"Not so fast, not so fast You're going to fast." Max Magee -pmccord

I believe many people would say the same thing when presented with the basics.

P.S. In my previous post "skillful" execution/application of the fundamentals was intended. -AZBroker

The problem salespeople have is that they are lost in a sea of salespeople, all selling the same thing, to the same people, at basically the same price, using basically the same message.

You can use different pictures, different words, different color paper, a different phone, or different color pen, but it still comes down to you've got a 70% chance of failing in real estate if you do what everyone else is doing.

I work with a lot of Realtors, some extremely successful, some on the verge of washing out of the business when I start to work with them. Most of the successful ones discovered early in their career that emulating what wasn't working for others wasn't going to get them anywhere. The ones struggling begin to put their career in order when they come to the realization that spending hours walking their farm--right behind two other Realtors from the two brokerages down the street--isn't going to generate enough income to sustain them.

Does everyone I work with end up making a lot of money? Of course, not. Some get into using new methods and decide they just aren't comfortable using them. Some get in thinking it's going to be easy and when they find out its work decide it isn't for them. Some, when the methods don't produce immediate results run off looking for the miracle cure.

Now, do I advocate dropping everything and moving straight to the more sophisticated marketing methods? No. When one institutes these methods there is a ramp-up time of weeks or more likely months. Obviously, the Realtor has to continue doing the marketing they are doing to eek out a living until the new methods kick in. But the object is get away from those worn out methods as quickly as possible and to start making money. The goal isn't to make a living, it's to make an extraordinary living. -pmccord

I do not know any successful real estate agents that match that description.

If the blind (figuratively speaking) choose to follow the blind that is their choice and they will reap the consequences.

Most successful salespeople I know chose carefully the role models and methods they emulated.

If a salesperson can't cold call effectively does that mean that cold calling is "worn out"? If a salesperson can't create effective direct mail pieces does that mean that direct mail is "worn out?" If a salesperson doesn't understand or cannot skillfully execute any of these "worn out methods" does that mean that Personal Marketing is dead? -AZBroker

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

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

What basics AZ? -Calvin

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

I see that. How about an example of Selling basics? -realtor

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

'Inspire trust' is a selling basic. Listing the various principles of selling is a excellent idea for a new thread. -AZBroker

I saw the new thread. Good idea. thmbp2; -realtor

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

303M. You put a period where the zero went. ;wi

I think prospecting and sales will be around as long as their is something in it for the consumer. -Houston

I think we're seeing the natural evolution of personal marketing not the death of personal marketing. thmbp2; -SpeedRacer

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

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

Excellent point, Liberty. -Skip Anderson

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

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

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

"Get Connected" is about Networking (Social and/or Business). -Liberty

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

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

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

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

"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

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 - 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

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

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

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

Agreed. The skill level of many salespeople will need to increase if they want to be competitive. -AZBroker

What would be 7 Characteristics - to pick a number - of people operating at a high skill level?

MitchM -MitchM

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

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

Skill training and education. Just like anything else you might want to learn how to become good at.

It's about working with highly targeted prospects.

It's about being in the right place at the right time.

It's about a targeted message that converts well.

It's about choosing the right medium for the message. -AZBroker

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

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.

By looking. In real estate "Expired Listings" are a highly visible and targeted market which can be found with a minimum of effort.

Constructive and continuous contact with the homeowner. This contact could be in the form of a telephone call, direct mail, in-person visit, etc.

One of my best converting scripts centers on the fact that I specialize in selling homes that were previously listed and did not sell.

Face to face works best for me. Why? Among other things Confidence and Professionalism. -AZBroker

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

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

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

Thanks for taking the time and giving a detailed explanation Paul. -bluenote

Paul,

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

Chuck -Sales Pro 1000

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

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

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

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

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

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

The same could be said for "Cold Calling" and other forms of self-marketing. -SpeedRacer

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

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

Okay this thread is entirely too long. hpy3; -Jolly Roger