Why Do Sales Teams LOSE? – Lack of Responsiveness (7-10)

As mentioned, I’m going to present reasons why companies win and lose sales deals. These reasons were outlined by Ron Sathoff, a colleague of mine, in a great article for SAMA magazine called “Five Ways to Bolster Your Strategic Account Strategy, and Five Ways to Sabotage it.” (The article is available for download HERE)

This article was written to help answer the ultimate sales question, “How can we win a lot more deals?” In order to find the answer, Ron started by addressing the questions, “Why do we win and why do we lose?” Each of these points were taken from a library of thousands of win loss sales debriefs and compiled into performance rankings.

7. Take your time responding to requests.

One of the surprises of this study’s findings was the fact that many of the criteria associated with Strategic Account Managers (SAMs) (such as responsiveness, the relationship with the account team and presentation) showed negative gaps. From these findings, it appears as if the best account managers often go unnoticed, whereas any negative behavior in the sales process is remembered by the potential customer. Nowhere is this more evident than in responsiveness. Very few respondents mentioned the responsiveness of the SAM as a reason for selecting a supplier. Problems with responsiveness, however, were noticed and mentioned as a primary reason for eliminating a supplier from the evaluation process. An example of how to create a negative impression was provided by a respondent, who explained:

“[Company 1] was slow in getting around to pricing. The people that put on the presentation basically said, ’We will have to get back to you on that,’ and they never got back to us on that. It seemed very lethargic about getting back to us and getting us figures. It was like it was saying, ‘Let us go back and sharpen our pencils some more and take another two or three weeks.’”

The issue of responsiveness seems to be like a car engine: you don’t notice how it is performing until something goes wrong. A lack of responsiveness could quickly erode any sort of relationship that has been carefully built, regardless of other factors. Customers want to receive value sooner rather than later, and if the customer experiences responsiveness problems during the evaluation process, it can indicate that there may be problems with the supplier later in the relationship.

Competitive Intelligence Newsletter – Before Battle, Know Your Competition

This week, the cover story by Thayne Johnson provides an insightful look into competitive intelligence methods that show competitor movements in real time.. You’ll also find information on how Sales Intelligence matters to your success. Finally, a report from ES Research Group will help your sales leadership make sense of sales effectiveness enhancement companies.

Cover Story
Sun Tzu Says Know Your Competition
By Thayne Johnson, Primary IntelligenceThe war of business may not be carried out with weapons of war, but battles over prospects, budgets and market share are fought every day. The casualties of war are growth, personal opportunity and in some cases, companies that fall by the wayside. Just like in an army, every member of a business has to take a part in the competitive nature of the business battleground...(For more, click here)

Announcing the 2008 Sales Training Vendor Guide
Corporations continue to spend a significant portion of their revenues on sales training. Unchanged from last year, enterprises spend between $4 billion and $7 billion per year training sales professionals. Of all the excellent sales training vendors out there, only a few are a fit for your organization. This ESR/InDepth™ Report is designed to help your organization increase the return on your sales training investment.
ES Research Group has compiled their findings into a 200 page report. This 3rd party evaluation is a “must read” for companies seeking sales performance enhancement.
For a free summary, CLICK HERE.

BlogCentral
What is Sales Intelligence and Why Does it Matter?
If a business exists to make money (and really, what other purpose does the business entity have?) as efficiently as possible, and the role of sales is to create the revenue streams as effectively as possible, then isn’t sales intelligence...(For more, click here)

The A-List Archive
Brookhaven Memorial Hospital Selects Siemens. What Were the Key Value Factors?
Originally Published in December 2004.
Executives at Brookhaven Memorial Hospital wanted to enhance their medical information systems by upgrading and expanding their current technology. An evaluation of MEDITECH, Eclipsys, and Siemens resulted in the selection of a number of Siemens applications, including several from its Soarian product line. Although Siemens was the incumbent provider, this had very little to do with the decision...(For more, click here)

Why Do Sales Teams LOSE? – Clients Think “Price” Rather than “Value” (6-10)

As mentioned, I’m going to present reasons why companies win and lose sales deals. These reasons were outlined by Ron Sathoff, a colleague of mine, in a great article for SAMA magazine called “Five Ways to Bolster Your Strategic Account Strategy, and Five Ways to Sabotage it.” (The article is available for download HERE)

This article was written to help answer the ultimate sales question, “How can we win a lot more deals?” In order to find the answer, Ron started by addressing the questions, “Why do we win and why do we lose?” Each of these points were taken from a library of thousands of win loss sales debriefs and compiled into performance rankings.


6. Let the customer think in terms of “price,” rather than “value.”

The number one reason for not selecting a supplier was price, which in and of itself is not particularly surprising. When examined in relationship to the criteria of “value offered,” however, an intriguing pattern emerges. Price, on its own, had a significant negative gap score, meaning that price was mentioned more often when discussing reasons why a supplier wasn’t selected. Value, on the other hand, had a positive gap score; in fact, value was only mentioned when respondents explained why a supplier was selected. In other words, when eliminating a supplier, respondents thought in terms of price. If the respondent thought in terms of value, they were more likely to select the supplier in question. This corroborates the ongoing movement in strategic account management to create value for customers.

As some of the previous examples in this article illustrate, customers were often willing to ignore the strict price of offerings if they were able to see the overall value of the partnership. Customers make decisions based on the value that can be created for the enterprise. A focus on price indicates that the customer is unsure of how the offering will create value—how it will solve a compelling need or produce a desired result. Customers who are unsure about how the product will do either of these are more likely to think in terms of price than in terms of value.

Of course, whether or not a customer thinks in terms of price or value was not entirely dependent upon the whims of the customers themselves. SAMs who do not construct a strategy based upon showing the overall value of the partnership (whether through ROI, added value or other means) do themselves a disservice, and seriously handicap their ability to develop successful accounts.

Why Do Sales Teams Win? – Fix Problems Now (5-10)

As mentioned, I’m going to present reasons why companies win and lose sales deals. These reasons were outlined by Ron Sathoff, a colleague of mine, in a great article for SAMA magazine called “Five Ways to Bolster Your Strategic Account Strategy, and Five Ways to Sabotage it.” (The article is available for download HERE)

This article was written to help answer the ultimate sales question, “How can we win a lot more deals?” In order to find the answer, Ron started by addressing the questions, “Why do we win and why do we lose?” Each of these points were taken from a library of thousands of win loss sales debriefs and compiled into performance rankings.

5. Address needs and problems before they become disasters.

With any account, it is inevitable that problems will occur. According to the interview responses, what distinguished a strong account strategy from a weak one was how the SAM addressed these problems. Respondents indicated that openness about problems, and a proactive approach to addressing them, overcame any negative impressions that came from the problem itself.

In one set of interviews, respondents discussed how their chosen supplier addressed a serious problem. This supplier, rather than trying to hide the problems of its project or offering a bandage approach by fixing symptomatic problems only as they appeared, stopped the project so that it could address the fundamental issues completely. While this caused some initial disappointment, the supplier actually gained in credibility with its decision:

“We thought [Company 1] was showing its partnership ability by being more open than some of the other suppliers. I would rather have my suppliers say, ’OK, we have a problem and we have to fix it,’ than just pretend it is not there, which makes us suffer through it. So, I appreciate the supplier’s honesty. I feel it was the right thing to do, and that [Company 1] is the right partner.”

Respondents explained that the supplier’s openness in addressing the problem prevented a much larger delay from occurring later on. In addition, this approach demonstrated the supplier’s dedication to the success of the project and the customers’ satisfaction.

As an added benefit, using this approach also tells customers that any future difficulties will be handled in an open and professional manner, easing any fears that they may have about getting into a situation where they will not receive support. If they know that their problems will be solved, they will be more confident about the offering and the supplier, and more likely to report difficulties, which can help account managers prevent similar problems occurring with other customers.

Why Do Sales Teams Win? – Create a “Dream Team” (4-10)

As mentioned, I’m going to present reasons why companies win and lose sales deals. These reasons were outlined by Ron Sathoff, a colleague of mine, in a great article for SAMA magazine called “Five Ways to Bolster Your Strategic Account Strategy, and Five Ways to Sabotage it.” (The article is available for download HERE)

This article was written to help answer the ultimate sales question, “How can we win a lot more deals?” In order to find the answer, Ron started by addressing the questions, “Why do we win and why do we lose?” Each of these points were taken from a library of thousands of win loss sales debriefs and compiled into performance rankings.

4. Create a “Dream Team” for the account.

One of the important criteria mentioned by respondents was developing an early relationship with the entire support team. For strategic account managers, this meant introducing key technical personnel during the evaluation process. As one respondent explained, working with the people he would be relying upon for technical support made him more confident entering into a relationship:

“[Company 1] was more than willing to send out some of their best technical guys to work with my developers. [Company 2] would not. So, [Company 1] was much more responsive. It wasn’t price; it was the people.”

By embracing a “team approach” early in the account strategy, SAMs in these cases were able to demonstrate that the totality of their organizations were dedicated to serving the customers’ needs. As with the prior principles, this strategy is based on reducing the ambiguity of the business relationship for the customer. By introducing key members early in the interaction, customers can be assured that they aren’t getting Prince Charming in the negotiations and a bunch of frogs when it comes to ongoing or technical matters.

Competitive Intelligence Newsletter – Tips for Beginners

This week, the cover story provides some of the basics that even seasoned competitive intelligence veterans need. You’ll also find information on why sales doesn’t receive as much intelligence as you might like. Finally, a report from ES Research Group will help your sales leadership make sense of sales effectiveness enhancement companies.

Cover Story
The Top Three Box Office Flops for Beginning CI Researchers
By Ron Sathoff, Primary Intelligence
For a lot of people (myself included), a good piece of Competitive Intelligence research can have all the beauty of a piece of art, such as a poem, a painting—or even a film. Like these art forms, CI can inspire or instruct those who take the time to understand it, and can even effect significant change. However, unlike a beginning filmmaker, whose poor initial efforts may only result in a bit of ridicule at a local film festival, a “flop” from a beginning CI specialist may have some significant consequences—for both the researcher and his or her organization (For more, click here)

Announcing the 2008 Sales Training Vendor Guide from ES Research Group
Corporations continue to spend a significant portion of their revenues on sales training. Unchanged from last year, enterprises spend between $4 billion and $7 billion per year training sales professionals. Of all the excellent sales training vendors out there, only a few are a fit for your organization. This ESR/InDepth™ Report is designed to help your organization increase the return on your sales training investment.
ES Research Group has compiled their findings into a 200 page report. This 3rd party evaluation is a “must read” for companies seeking sales performance enhancement.
For a free summary, CLICK HERE.

BlogCentral
Why Doesn't Competitive Intelligence Flow to Sales?
Only 56% of sales managers claim competitive intelligence as one of their tools. A higher percentage of sales reps (68%) say that they use competitive intelligence to sell. All this seems to beg the question… why isn’t the sales department organizing competitive intelligence initiatives more often (For more, click here)

The A-List Archive
A-List – R-G Crown Selects S1 over Fundtech for Online Banking Services
Originally Published in June 2005.
R-G Crown Bank acquired 18 banks from SouthTrust Bank in October 2004 and wanted to implement new online banking solutions in order to provide better service to its customers and satisfy federal banking regulators (For more, click here)

Why Do Sales Teams Win? – Let your past success lead to future success (3-10)

As mentioned, I’m going to present reasons why companies win and lose sales deals. These reasons were outlined by Ron Sathoff, a colleague of mine, in a great article for SAMA magazine called “Five Ways to Bolster Your Strategic Account Strategy, and Five Ways to Sabotage it.” (The article is available for download HERE)

This article was written to help answer the ultimate sales question, “How can we win a lot more deals?” In order to find the answer, Ron started by addressing the questions, “Why do we win and why do we lose?” Each of these points were taken from a library of thousands of win loss sales debriefs and compiled into performance rankings.

3. Let your past success lead to future success.

Strong relationships and successful partnerships not only lead to future sales with the customers themselves; they also serve as the foundation for accounts with other customers. Whether it is through word-of-mouth, seeing what other companies in the industry were using or by checking with reference companies that had been provided by the supplier, many respondents mentioned that the knowledge that a product was being utilized successfully in other locations was a factor in their decision to select a supplier.

References were the deciding point in several of the interviews. In one case, a supplier was chosen because of the references it provided, even though its product was significantly more expensive than its competitor’s offering:

“We narrowed it down to [Company 1] and [Company 2], and their products were almost identical. What separated [Company 1] and [Company 2] were customer support issues. Every [supplier] that we considered on the short list gave us references, and then we went out and found install sites on our own. [Company 2]’s references, including the ones that they provided to us, were terrible.”

In another example, a respondent used references as a way of obtaining direct comparisons of competing suppliers. In this case, the references were especially powerful because they came from organizations that had experience with each of the competitors:

“[Company 1]’s references were extremely strong. One reference company had actually worked with [Company 2] previously and within the previous year had moved over, so it was a good company to talk to about the two competing suppliers, and be able to really compare apples to apples.”

These cases illuminate the role of references in a well-developed account strategy. They not only provided examples of satisfied customers and successful relationships; in cases where they were chosen judiciously, they demonstrated industry expertise and experience, and provided objective, third-party comparisons of the competing offerings.

Because of the importance of references, it is vital that account strategies include a carefully designed system for developing and using references. A solid reference program allows a supplier to produce powerful, compelling and current references whenever requested, and prevents the problems that will come with “crossing your fingers” and hoping that your reference will give you a good recommendation.

Why Do Sales Teams Win? – Think Relationship (2-10)

As mentioned, I’m going to present reasons why companies win and lose sales deals. These reasons were outlined by Ron Sathoff, a colleague of mine, in a great article for SAMA magazine called “Five Ways to Bolster Your Strategic Account Strategy, and Five Ways to Sabotage it.” (The article is available for download HERE)

This article was written to help answer the ultimate sales question, “How can we win a lot more deals?” In order to find the answer, Ron started by addressing the questions, “Why do we win and why do we lose?” Each of these points were taken from a library of thousands of win loss sales debriefs and compiled into performance rankings.

2. Focus on the relationship, not the sale.

The heart of strategic account management is developing a strong connection between your company and the customer. By definition, a strategic account is designed to be a long-lasting partnership that is mutually beneficial to both parties. The importance of this relationship can be measured in terms of repeat purchases and customer loyalty. The data confirms the importance of a good relationship: prior experience with a supplier was the second most often cited reason for selection and was mentioned significantly more often in cases where the company was selected as the winning supplier.

While some of these cases of repeat sales were due to organizational inertia, or the unwillingness to change suppliers because it was prohibitively difficult or expensive, many of the comments made by respondents indicated that the repeat business was due to the relationship that had developed between the supplier and the customer. The liaison between the two, of course, was the account manager, and those who made it their job to keep in constant communication had the edge over those who only communicated during new opportunities for sales. As one respondent explained, it was important that the SAM cared about all aspects of the relationship:

“[Company 1]’s support is awesome. We have nothing but wonderful comments for the sales representative. I e-mail or call anybody and it always gets back to the sales representative and I get a call from him to make sure it was all done correctly. It gives me peace of mind.”

One aspect of the respondent’s descriptions of their relationships with suppliers that stood out was the importance of the relationship during difficult times. For example, one respondent explained why her company had created lasting relationships with two suppliers:

“We had built up a very good relationship with both agencies over the years. We have been through a couple of years of tough economic times. Both of these agencies have stuck with us. They have been through good times with us, and will stick around for the next round of good times in the near future. It would be very difficult for any other agencies to take our business away from those two.”

By maintaining the relationship, even when the customer was not be able to give as much business to the supplier as it had in the past, the SAMs were able to create a strong bond that makes it difficult for competitors to win future business opportunities with the customer. The main point of these examples is that corporations do not buy from corporations; people buy from people. As the face of the company, all the interactions with account managers, from the first meeting to the last, set the tone for the entire business relationship.

Why Do Sales Teams Win Deals? Reason 1of 10

Over the next few posts, I’m going to present reasons why companies win and lose sales deals. These reasons were outlined by Ron Sathoff, a colleague of mine, in a great article for SAMA magazine called “Five Ways to Bolster Your Strategic Account Strategy, and Five Ways to Sabotage it.” (The article is available for download HERE)

This article was written to help answer the ultimate sales question, “How can we win a lot more deals?” In order to find the answer, Ron started by addressing the questions, “Why do we win and why do we lose?”

Let’s get started.

By way of background, as part of our win loss interviews, respondents were asked for the primary reasons why they did or did not select the supplier. Ron coded and tabulated the open-ended responses, analyzing them for performance gaps, or areas where a response was more prevalent in one situation (selection or elimination) than in the other. This was done in order to determine which criteria had the largest impact for selection or elimination. The criteria with the largest gaps are presented in the table below. Positive gaps indicate that a criterion was mentioned more often as a reason for selection, and a negative gap indicates that a criterion was mentioned more often as a reason for elimination.

For example, industry usage had a positive gap of 2.8%. This indicates that respondents were slightly more likely to mention product features as a reason for selection than they were as a reason for not selecting a supplier. The largest gaps indicate where there are opportunities to stand out in areas that are most noticed by the customer, as well as areas where doing the wrong thing will have a significant impact on your chance for success.

1. Let your product speak for itself.

A product’s features and functionality had the largest positive gap, indicating that respondents were much more likely to mention product features positively, and that product features were more likely to have a positive influence than a negative one. It is therefore advantageous to point out a product’s strengths to a potential customer

Specific features of a product are especially important because the customer will often be concerned about the product’s ability to meet the precise needs of multiple users and locations, as well as the product’s ability to integrate with other systems already in place. It is therefore vital that customers are not only informed about the product’s specifications, but that they have also been shown how those specifications are translated to the reality of the company’s business needs.

One way that Strategic Account Managers (SAMs) have accomplished this is through the use of product-oriented presentations and demonstrations. When used in conjunction with technical materials, these demonstrations helped to make the product features and functionality more comprehensible, and showed that the SAM was not overstating the product’s capabilities. Most importantly, they helped to make the customer feel more comfortable that the product would meet their needs and that their staff would have the ability to use it effectively. For example, one respondent explained that the evaluation team was not confident about its first choice of product until the SAM could organize a demonstration of features and functionality for them:

“We had a demonstration, and that reassured me that we were making the right decision. For one thing, the whole layout of the computer screens was superior. There were just a lot of little things. It reassured me that we were making the right decision.”

By allaying any fears the customer may have had about the product, the SAM in this situation helped boost the customer’s confidence in both the sale and the business relationship. Customers today actively seek solutions that can create value for the organization in the shortest period of time. As a result, account managers need to do whatever they can to prove that their offering will work in the actual usage situation.

Sales Intelligence: Why Do We Win? Why Do We Lose?

A little while back, Ron Sathoff, a colleague of mine, wrote a great article for SAMA magazine called “Five Ways to Bolster Your Strategic Account Strategy, and Five Ways to Sabotage it.” (The article is available for download HERE)

This article was written to help answer the ultimate sales question, “How can we win a lot more deals?” In order to find the answer, Ron started by addressing the questions, “Why do we win and why do we lose?”

Primary Intelligence, a company that specializes in competitive intelligence, sales intelligence and win loss analysis, is in the unique place of having answered the question dozens of thousands of times for hundreds of companies. At heart, our goal is to help companies increase their sales success. This might happen by discovering new markets, improving sales rep performance or showing where company improvement must take place.

(Enough advertisement… for the moment)

The foundation of intelligence that we have built over the past ten years provided Ron with the ability to distill these reasons into the 5 of each (winners and losers). Over the next few posts, I’ll look at each of the ten reasons and provide additional information where possible.

If you have to answer these same questions, stick with me and see what you can learn.

As an introduction, I’ll provide a little bit of numeric information to get whet your appetite.

As part of our win loss interviews, respondents were asked for the primary reasons why they did or did not select the supplier. Ron coded and tabulated the open-ended responses, analyzing them for performance gaps, or areas where a response was more prevalent in one situation (selection or elimination) than in the other. This was done in order to determine which criteria had the largest impact for selection or elimination. The criteria with the largest gaps are presented in the table below. Positive gaps indicate that a criterion was mentioned more often as a reason for selection, and a negative gap indicates that a criterion was mentioned more often as a reason for elimination.



For example, industry usage had a positive gap of 2.8%. This indicates that respondents were slightly more likely to mention product features as a reason for selection than they were as a reason for not selecting a supplier. The largest gaps indicate where there are opportunities to stand out in areas that are most noticed by the customer, as well as areas where doing the wrong thing will have a significant impact on your chance for success.

Over the next few posts, we’ll flesh out each of these ideas until they make lots of sense. If don’t right, you’ll have a much better view of how your company can make improvements with current resources.

Stick with me. I’ll make it worth it.