Who is your sales presentation about?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Skip Anderson

Joe Closer, please define "fixed principle of selling".

Then please share with us what you believe fixed principles of selling are.

Thanks.

Excellent question, Skip.

A fixed principle of selling is an element in an effective sales process that is shared universally with other effective sales processes.

The principle of Qualifying would be an example. For those that prefer think in terms of Qualifying as really Disqualifying, I'll acknowledge my awareness and respect for that---but the principle remains solid.

I hope the definition and example serves your query.

There are, of course, effective selling systems that use needs/wants as a term (yours might be one of them) and component, but because there are other effective systems that do not, the component is not universal, and therefore is not a fixed principle.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Joe Closer

Excellent question, Skip.

A fixed principle of selling is an element in an effective sales process that is shared universally with other effective sales processes.

The principle of Qualifying would be an example. For those that prefer think in terms of Qualifying as really Disqualifying, I'll acknowledge my awareness and respect for that---but the principle remains solid.

I hope the definition and example serves your query.

There are, of course, effective selling systems that use needs/wants as a term (yours might be one of them) and component, but because there are other effective systems that do not, the component is not universal, and therefore is not a fixed principle.

I disagree, J.C.

How is determining prospect needs and wants not universal in the realm of selling? How can one possibly successfully sell without that information? Please explain.

In fact, I believe the single biggest factor in determining sales success is a thorough understanding of prospect needs and desires (once you have an audience). Our sales training teaches that there are macro-needs, micro-needs, and one super-macro need that is the underlying motivation of every purchase of high-end or mid-end goods. My area of expertise is in consumer sales (in-home sales, retail sales, showroom sales, financial and insurance sales, real estate), but this applies to b2b selling as well, I believe.

Also, please define "qualifying" so we know your definition. Thanks, J.C.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Skip Anderson

I disagree, J.C.

How is determining prospect needs and wants not universal in the realm of selling? How can one possibly successfully sell without that information? Please explain.

In fact, I believe the single biggest factor in determining sales success is a thorough understanding of prospect needs and desires (once you have an audience). Our sales training teaches that there are macro-needs, micro-needs, and one super-macro need that is the underlying motivation of every purchase of high-end or mid-end goods. My area of expertise is in consumer sales (in-home sales, retail sales, showroom sales, financial and insurance sales, real estate), but this applies to b2b selling as well, I believe.

Also, please define "qualifying" so we know your definition. Thanks, J.C.

More excellent questions, Skip.

Qualifying is generally accepted as a process to determine whether a prospect is ready, willing, and able to buy. A variation on this is Disqualifying, and its been discussed on this forum so you can search the topic if you want.

Suffice to say that I respect, but don't agree with you, on the needs/wants discussion issue. If you teach it, you'll probably find customers who will buy it. So keep it---makes no difference to me.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Joe Closer

Suffice to say that I respect, but don't agree with you, on the needs/wants discussion issue. If you teach it, you'll probably find customers who will buy it. So keep it---makes no difference to me.

Thanks for your response, JC.

But one more question comes to mind. Help me understand how can you can determine if a prospect is ready, willing and able to buy if you don't have knowledge about what they need to buy or want to buy?

Skip

Skip,

With due respect, is there an element of sarcasm floating within your posts and with the questions you ask? To me, you seem to reply in an odd fashion that I wouldn't expect to hear from someone with your experience.

Quote:

Originally Posted by bluenote

Skip,

With due respect, is there an element of sarcasm floating within your posts and with the questions you ask? To me, you seem to reply in an odd fashion that I wouldn't expect to hear from someone with your experience.

Blue, sometimes I can be sarcastic but I usually am not. In this case I am not. I'm attempting to understand Joe Closer's comments. I'm not always right, so if someone has an alternate point-of-view from mine, I like that. On the other hand, either Joe or I could be incorrect. But it appears we can't both be correct since our opinions are opposite.

Joe's point, as I understand it, is that understanding a prospect's needs and wants assessment is not a core element in the sales process, nor is it recognized as such by various sales methodologies universally. My view is that it is vital and central to the process and in fact the single most important part of the selling process.

Now either he is wrong or I am wrong, or one of us (perhaps me) doesn't understand some piece of what the other is saying. That's what I'm trying to determine.

I apologize if my posts appear odd - I don't intend them to be, but perhaps I'm just an odd dude.

Skip

Quote:

Originally Posted by Skip Anderson

Now either he is wrong or I am wrong, or one of us (perhaps me) doesn't understand some piece of what the other is saying. That's what I'm trying to determine.

I apologize if my posts appear odd - I don't intend them to be, but perhaps I'm just an odd dude.

Skip

Skip,I challenged you on the wants/needs discussion component which you introduced to the topic Blue Note had initiated. It was not to challenge the method you advocate. But Blue Note uses a different method of selling which some people, upon examination, would believe in more than they believe in yours. If you think that wants/needs discussion cannot be absent in a good selling process, there are those that will disagree who are successful without that component. Therefore, your method might be good, but it is not universal.

I don't want to debate, but if you'll allow me to answer your question with the common debate tactic of using an absurdity, Coca Cola machines move billions of dollars worth of product with no internal mechanism that can provide a needs assessment. People who want a drink put the coins in and buy.

But let's get out of the realm of absurdity. You say you have direct sales experience. You've heard the jargon word, "laydown". If somebody simply wants to buy, as a lot of people do, are we to say, "Hey, wait a minute, I haven't done my spiel yet!"?

I think your methodology might be valuable and effective. But nobody has a lock on one best method.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Joe Closer

If you think that wants/needs discussion cannot be absent in a good selling process, there are those that will disagree who are successful without that component. Therefore, your method might be good, but it is not universal.

I don't want to debate, but if you'll allow me to answer your question with the common debate tactic of using an absurdity, Coca Cola machines move billions of dollars worth of product with no internal mechanism that can provide a needs assessment. People who want a drink put the coins in and buy.

But let's get out of the realm of absurdity. You say you have direct sales experience. You've heard the jargon word, "laydown". If somebody simply wants to buy, as a lot of people do, are we to say, "Hey, wait a minute, I haven't done my spiel yet!"?

JC, I suppose nothing is totally universal in selling.

But here's the point I was trying to make: Call it whatever you want, but dialogue about needs and wants of the prospect is as universal in the process of selling as anything. I'm not talking about "my" sales system, I'm referring to teachings of top sales trainers and sales managers and sales experts, and the behaviors of top-performing sales professionals.

Having said that, I'm aware that there are contrarians in every field of endeavor (that small group of people who goes against opinions of the masses in order to stand out - Ann Coulter and Dennis Kucinich in the political realm in the U.S. for instance). There are contrarians in the sales field, too, and lots of those contrarian views about selling are discussed profusely in this forum. So some contrarians believe some very out-of-mainstream ideas. So maybe that's what you're referring to: that contrarians don't see understanding prospect needs as necessary. But let's focus on the mainstream views of the sales industry, not the small group of contrarians. That's as close to "universal" as we're going to get.

[I always smile when someone says they don't want to debate, but then proceeds to debate. But hey, debate isn't bad, as long as it's done respectfully, which you did and hopefully I do. That's part of the value of this forum, that we can debate issues to learn, share, and persuade.]

I don't understand how your soda machine analogy fits our discussion, as a can of coke is not sold by a salesperson. This forum is not devoted to discussion about "selling" hamburgers at McDonalds or toothpaste at Walgreen's or toilet paper at Target or Coke out of a machine at SalesPractice because there isn't a salesperson involved in selling those products so I don't get why you brought that up in your post.

Regarding your reference of a "laydown:" At that point, of course, a salesperson becomes an order-taker and writes up the order and then moves on. Of course a needs assessment is not in order in that scenario, but neither is any other "universal sales step" necessary in a "laydown" scenario.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Skip Anderson

Regarding your reference of a "laydown:" At that point, of course, a salesperson becomes an order-taker and writes up the order and then moves on. Of course a needs assessment is not in order in that scenario, but neither is any other "universal sales step" necessary in a "laydown" scenario.

Why would a "salesperson" morph into an "order-taker" in those circumstances? Those circumstances are not cause for changing who you are, or to be labeled differently.

Is "needs and wants discussion" the turf you are defending, or is really a view that selling requires heroics, or a measurable effort? If so, I have a question for you. Just what is that measurement of effort? Is there a particular hardship that must be overcome to win your merit badge, and shed the label of order-taker?

Contrarians and mainstream---more labels. The majority in selling, what you refer to as mainstream, either fail or just get by. I won't belabor the impact that contrarians have had on just about every field of endeavour since history began. Your choosing the two political figures above ranks with my inclusion of the Coca Cola machine.

You can't truly understand selling unless you understand buying. Two of the sales trainers that have posted here, more well known than yourself, have demonstrated their knowledge of how people buy. I'm referring to Morgen and Werth. I have read their posts, learned from them, and respect their viewpoints. Because of that respect, I will not use labels for them. Or for you. Or for anyone else.

My two cents; even with a laydown the customer let's you know what they want.

Who is your sales presentation about?

Sales Presentation Forum