Who is your sales presentation about?

Selling doesn't require heroics, but it does require that the salesperson understand the needs and desires of the prospect, thus the need for dialogue about them.

As I said, my previous comments weren't about me or "my selling system" they're about mainstream thought in the community of sales experts & high performers (minus contrarians or fringe people). Don't take my word for it:

"We all know by now that the success of our sales presentation depends upon serving the needs of our customers. Regardless of your product or service, regardless of your industry, your company, the economy, geographic location or any other factor, there are five basic steps you must take to develop and understand your customer's real need. You must identify the problem before you can solve it."

"...you build credibility when you skillfully match your product features and benefits to the specific needs that have been identified in your questions..."

"The more accurately you can diagnose the needs and wants of your customer, the more appropriately you can prescribe the right product or service. Don't ask just any questions, but questions that will help you to understand the needs, wants, and situation of your buyer"

__________________

We weren't talking about branding and the history of business of sales. We were talking about buying a soda out of a machine.

There's no need to get personal in your postings.

Please do not post any messages that harrass, insult, belittle, threaten or flame another member or guest. Personal attacks against people, or sites will not be tolerated. If you have an issue with someone or their site, take it up with them personally.

http://www.salespractice.com/forums/...ral_site_rules

Gee, I missed the fireworks and I am glad.

I too have been sucked into, what started out as a discussion, and ended up as a high-school debating team contest.

My position is that it is okay for people to defend "the sales process" as if there is only one sales process. The "main stream” sales process started out as "Needs Selling" in the 1950's and is now called "Consultative" or "Solution" selling by its advocates. In spite of all of the world’s monumentous changes in past fifty plus years, the main stream sales process has hardly changed at all.

While some people might say that is a good thing, it overlooks an important consideration. That sales process has enabled sales to gain the number one position among all major business functions as having the highest failure and turnover rates. No amount of verbose, clever arguments can change that fact.

When you convince new salespeople that there is only one correct sales process, how does your conscience deal with that fact? Of course, I am aware that there are fundamentalists and true believers in many fields who can only see one reality.

Skip, that's an oxymoron.

Do you really believe that sales experts and high performers act, think, and behave, like the mainstream?

Skip, you impress me as a sincere person who loves selling and wants to give something back to his profession.

In your well-written and positive blog, you use the words "typical sales-speak bull".

Explain the difference between "mainstream" and "typical".

You've credited the mainstream as having a handle on effective sales conversation, ie. needs/want. How does that correlate with your referring to "sales speak bull" as typical?

JC, thanks for your nice comment.

Without giving it a great deal of thought, I would say that "mainstream" and "typical" are synonymous. Do you agree?

Your post raises seems to raise two separate issues:

1. What is "bull" and what isn't "bull"?

My opinion is that bull is bull. Period.

2. What is mainstream and what isn't mainstream.

This discussion in this thread started with your earlier post where you asserted that a "Needs and wants discussion is not a fixed principle of selling."

To review my opinion: I believe it is universal in mainstream selling (and we've already had the debate about what is and what isn't mainstream - so I don't know if we want to go there again). #2 has nothing to do with #1, in my opinion.

Was the response to Joe's commentary (above) intended as an example of "typical sales-speak bull," or what?

Jacques, I'm going to take the high road here and not respond to your post.

Skip

Most of your previous posts are exceedingly verbose, feature thorough defenses of your positions, and sarcastic remarks aimed at those that disagree with you.

Could your sudden move to the “high road” mean that you can no longer defend your contradictory statements?