Sales and Sales Management Blog

January 25, 2011

Is It Really a 2.0 World for Sellers?

Filed under: branding,business,Client Relationships,developing expert reputation,marketing,prospecting,sales,Sales 2.0,selling,small business — Paul McCord @ 9:33 am
Tags: , , , , , ,

The hype is everywhere: if you’re a salesperson or company without a blog, you’re totally out of today’s marketplace and are losing position to the competition hourly because unlike them, you’re not establishing your image as an expert; if you’re not active on Twitter, Facebook, MySpace, and/or Youtube, you may as well concede that you won’t be in sales 6 months from now; if your focus is anywhere besides online, you completely misunderstand 21st century buyers.

The message from so many is simple: we live in a 2.0 (going on 3.0) world, and anyone who doesn’t recognize that and realign their business to focus on the enormous and exponentially growing online business opportunities is a dinosaur and cannot possibly be successful in the future—and the future is defined as tomorrow, the next day at the latest.

Certainly this is a message that many businesses and salespeople want to hear.  No more having to cold call.  No more having to figure out where to advertise—yellow pages? Magazines? Newspapers?  Nope.  No more having to network through physical groups and events.  Focus on social media and the virtual world and grow your business without having to invest a dime or spend hour after hour prospecting and hearing ‘no’ after ‘no.’  Finally, a free–and rejection free–way to sell and make more than you ever dreamed possible.

What a crock.

It’s also a message that a great many people have a very vested interest in spreading.  Take a look at the incredible number of social media, internet marketing, and online business “gurus” and “coaches” trying to connect with folks on Twitter.  It appears that everyone who’s ever signed up on Twitter and successfully created a tweet considers themselves to be social media experts, ready and willing to charge the next sucker a buck to teach them how to create a tweet also—and promise them instant millions without having to work. 

Then there are the “futurists,” predicting how technology is going to change the world of selling, virtually destroying the sales profession while creating untold opportunities for companies to increase sales and profits.  These are the same futurists who upon the invention of the telephone predicted that salespeople would never again meet face to face with prospects; and who upon the arrival of the fax machine predicted that mail was no longer necessary; who upon being introduced to email declared that surely this time business mail really was dead.  Now, with the gazillions of social media options, they’re proclaiming that this time technology really is going to completely revolutionize the world of selling.

And, of course, there are thousands and thousands of companies joining the chorus of social media and internet hype who must sell their products and services to the businesses and salespeople who want to be in the vanguard of the new sales world order. 

Before I go any further let me say that despite the above, this isn’t a polemic against the internet or social media.  My Sales and Sales Management blog is entering its fifth year of publication; I am active on Twitter and Facebook; I participate on LinkedIn and Focus and many other social media sites.  I believe there is much of value and much to be gained from these technologies and you should be involved with them just as I am—but I don’t believe that they’re decreasing the need for massive traditional offline marketing and sales activities.  If anything, the hype surrounding social media has lured many competitors away from traditional prospecting and marketing, giving those who recognize the current limitations of social media a distinct advantage over those who have bought into social media as the ANSWER.

I’m also not by any means trying to say that all trainers, coaches or advocates of social media are hyperbolic in their views of the role of social media.  There are many great trainers and coaches who understand social media’s place in the marketplace and do a superb job in guiding and directing sellers and business owners in how to use and gain value from them. 

The Reality of the Internet and Social Media

That being said, there’s still far too much unfounded, wishful thinking about the power of social media.  A recent post by Brian Carroll demonstrates the lack of business generated by social media—Brian was quoting Sergio Balegno, Director of Research for MECLABS, the parent company of InTouch of which Brian is President.

MECLABS surveyed 2,300 marketers and discovered that by the end of 2010 only 6% were generating enough business leads to track ROI.  Only 25% of marketers even have clear objectives and practices for engaging social media.

Those surveyed were marketers of good size companies, not small businesses and individual sellers.  Sergio’s conclusions are very different from mine.  His conclusion is that 6% of companies realizing enough sales to track ROI with such a new medium is impressive.  That conclusion is all well and good–for a company that can afford to assign someone to managing an aggressive social media campaign.

My conclusion is that only 6% of sizable companies producing measurable ROI with a marketing department behind their activities indicate that a small business or individual seller is so far behind the 8 ball with social media that investing significant amounts of time trying to create business through it is a monumental mistake.

Further, if only 25% of the marketing departments of companies using social media have developed clear objectives and practices of how to use it, how many small businesses and individual sellers who don’t have the time or research resources of a fully fledged marketing department have developed such?  How many can spend the time and effort needed to develop such a plan and still maintain their sales volume, much less increase it?

In addition, Dave Stein of ES Research Group, Inc, the only independent source of intelligence and advice on sales training approaches, programs and the companies that provide them, forwarded to me the following graph that indicates that there is still a huge segment of society that relies little or not at all on the internet for information and decision making help.

 

Although this chart tracks only three items; how many in each age group go online for any reason; how many in each age group access a government website; and how many in each group access financial information, it does give us some idea of how many use the internet for non-government oriented research and information.

According to the above study 79% of the population above 12 years of age goes online, yet only 38% of the population above 18 uses it for financial research and information, which is one of the top research topics on the internet.  This correlates well with a study by Ruder Finn Internet Index which found that 80% of all internet users go online to socialize but less than half that number uses the internet for shopping and/or research.

If we assume there are about 235 million Americans 18 or older and 79% go online but only 50% of them use the internet for shopping and research, there’s only 93 million adults online shopping and using it for research (39.5% of the total adult population).  That means there are still 142 million Americans (60% of the adult population) not buying online or using the internet for research, i.e., 142 million Americans that you won’t be reaching online no matter what you do.

The question is simple: do you want the opportunity to reach 40% of your market (online), 60% of your market (offline), or 100% of your market (both segments)?  If you concentrate on those who are online, you’ll be eliminating 60% of your potential market (these numbers do not include businesses which would add many more millions to each category).

Now, take 60% of your potential market away and then realize that only 6% of companies with a marketing department that has the resources to aggressively work social media have generated enough business from it to be able to track results.  What are the realistic chances that social media is going to become a significant income stream producer for you or your small business?

I know, I hear the answers now—“I’m not online to sell, I’m looking to develop relationships; sales are secondary and hopefully will come someday.”  Really?  You’re spending two, three, four, five hours a day online to develop relationships with people or companies not to sell–but to maybe sell someday?  What would a sales manager say if when she asked you how you spent your week you said something like, “Well, I spent about 10 hours this week on the phone calling and meeting with prospects and clients, and I spent 20 hours online trying to develop relationships.” 

“I see,” your manager says, “what are your sales projections from spending so much time online?” 

“Oh, you misunderstand,” you answer, “I’m really not trying to sell, I’m developing relationships with lots of folks that maybe in the future might someday be prospects.  See, social media isn’t for selling, it’s for relationship development and to do it right I’ve got to spend a good deal of time interacting with them.”

“I’m sorry,” your manger responds, “I was under the impression your job was to sell.  How did I get such a wrong impression?”

“I know,” you respond, “it’s hard for you to grasp the new sales paradigm.  Things have changed, we now sell by not selling, we engage with people who might want to buy at some point in the future.  With social media I can engage hundreds of these companies.  One day, if I continue to spend half my time engaging this way I’ll be a big producer, I’m sure.  You’ll see.”

“Uh, huh,” your manager stammers.  “How much business have you gotten so far?”

“None, but don’t worry, it’s the wave of the future, everybody says so.”

“So is unemployment,” your manager responds, “it’s the wave of today.”

Sounds silly?  Yes.  Real?  Yep, there are lots of sellers spending huge amounts of time engaging in social media when they should be selling.  But, hey, social media’s easier and safer—and everybody’s doing it.

The Real Role of the Internet and Social Media in Sales and Marketing

What does this mean for sellers and small business owners?  It doesn’t mean ignore social media.  Not by any means.  Social media can play a real role in your marketing—and it will become more important over time; just take a look at the percentage of each age group that is plugged into the internet.  As you would expect, it gets bigger and bigger as the ages get younger, and, of course, those youngsters will become oldsters one day.  Likewise look at their activities.  Those in the 18 to 34 age group aren’t that far behind the older age groups in using the internet for financial research.  As they age, more and more members of this age group will engage the internet for reasons other than socializing.  By the time they reach the 65-73 age group, their financial research numbers could well be almost twice what that current age group’s numbers are.

But that’s a good ways away.

Unless you sell only to internet users—say you’re selling SEO services, website design, and such—your market is more offline than online (even if you only sell to net users you still have to spend a good deal of time selling offline—EBay and Esurance are good examples).

For most of us the internet is a viable marketing tool if used correctly.  (For an interesting current discussion of using blogs to establish credibility and expert status, see Dave Brock’s post and the comments here.)  Unfortunately, it can also be the ruination of us if we allow it to eat up too much of our time hoping for easy, faceless, no rejection sales.  There’s really no magic bullet to get around the fact that selling success has, as Tibor Shanto of Renbor points out, “always come down to planning, discipline and execution.”  Tibor goes on: in B2B sales “most buyers are not plugged in to the [internet] echo chamber to the degree 2.0 gurus would lead you to believe.  Speak to most office supply sales people, speak to buyers in the transport trade, or a vast majority of buyer and sellers, and they are not in the 2.0 lane, some are not in any lane at all.  Even many of the buyers who are ‘tuned in’ find themselves with information overload and contradictory input, as a result studies show that they still turn to direct interaction with trusted sales professionals.”

I think that in today’s world investing a few minutes a day in social media makes perfect sense and is a commitment almost every seller should make; making social media a major time and effort commitment doesn’t. 

Where you invest your time—and how much you spend–is the real question.  Most salespeople need to engage social media as a prospecting and marketing tool. More than that, they need to engage social media as a tool to develop and strengthen relationships with their prospects and clients who are tuned into technology.  Linda Richardson of Richardson, one of the leading sales training companies, put it well:

“Selling is about relationships and competency.  Sales 2.0 does not take the place of relationships, but it does give salespeople and customers a new platform for building relationships and increasing competency.  Sales 2.0 is more than technology. The tools enable collaboration, better preparation, and create a more effective and efficient way to sell. 2.0 is about reaching and connecting with the right people, getting a lot smarter and engaging in more meaningful conversations.   Of course not every company or buyer is leveraging 2.0 but by waiting on the sidelines sales organizations and salespeople are placing themselves at a serious disadvantage and risk.  Sales 2.0 is transforming sales and opening up possibilities never before seen.    It is a fast moving 2.0 Sales World and with the ever increasing number of tools there is a real need to help salespeople learn how to use them to reach their buyers.”

Where are buyers today?  Certainly there’s a large contingent that engage the internet, yet most are there not to buy or to do research or inquire about products, services, needs, or wants, but to connect with their circle of friends—to socialize with their group.

That recognition means we have to consider just how much are we willing to invest in the 2.0 world when we are not going to be able to engage with the majority of our prospects.  Can we connect with prospects?  Can we even make an occasional sale?  Yes.  Is it going to produce the business that could be otherwise produced in strategic offline prospecting and engaging of prospects?  Testimony and research to date seems to indicate the answer is a resounding no, not now.  Are the hoped for relationships that will result in future sales worth spending large numbers of hours on social media sites?  Not if your paycheck relies on sales.  Unfortunately you can’t cash a relationship, no matter the future potential. 

The internet and social media will continue to grow in importance.  You need to have a presence and grow that as the influence of the technology grows.  But if you want to be in business long enough to see significant business come from it, you have to be fully engaged in the business of selling—offline.  That hasn’t changed and it won’t change for many, many years to come.

The Major Role of the internet and Social Media for Most Sellers Today

That doesn’t, however, finish the discussion of the role of the internet and social media for us sellers.  Although the chart Dave sent me points out the limitations of social media and the internet for marketing, Dave emphasized the very real benefit of them for virtually every salesperson to significantly change and improve their prospecting research, for learning and sharpening sales and product knowledge, and for the fast and inexpensive (often free) opportunities for great training and skill development through blogs, article sites, webinars, forums and groups, and the other platforms available on the net.

Webinars offer unbelievable training and learning opportunities and should be a core resource for every company and seller.  You can get guidance and training from some of the best trainers and thinkers in business and sales without having to leave your office; whereas in the past you couldn’t get their training unless you were lucky enough to have your company bring them in or you lived in or were willing to travel to a place where they were presenting a public seminar—if they gave public seminars.  The internet has opened those opportunities to every seller in the world that has a computer and internet connection–and often at no cost.  (Webinars are also one of the best resources for sales and customer service as the uses for selling, customer and internal training, and servicing customer needs is endless.)

LinkedIn groups and sites such as Focus offer sellers the opportunity to ask questions and get answers from some of the top sales minds in the world, as well as from other sellers.  These forums and groups make it possible to get world class answers to virtually any question a seller could possibly have—free of charge.

For most of us the internet has opened tremendous new doors for researching our markets, for identifying quality prospects, for doing competitor research, for obtaining training and developing new skills.  As Linda indicated above, it can help us create a more effective and better way to sell—both online and offline.

The 2.0 world does have a tremendous impact on how we sell.  Its influence will continue to grow.  Right now it can open doors to opportunities in training and research that can change the very basic nature of how we do things.  The only thing it can’t do is help us reach that more than 60% of our market that doesn’t use the internet or social media outside of socializing with their group.  For that—for the lion’s share of our market—we have to hit the street in the same manner we’ve always done.  And that means it really isn’t quite a 2.0 sales world–yet.

January 6, 2011

Guest Article: “Brandwashing?,” by Roger Dooley

Filed under: branding,marketing — Paul McCord @ 10:41 am
Tags: , ,

Brandwashing?
by Roger Dooley

I’ve been hearing the invented word “brandwashing” for years now, but this combination of “branding” and “brainwashing” received new exposure when the New York Times suggested it as a synonym for neuromarketing.

But should we worry that a technique that probes subconscious brain patterns might be used to unduly influence consumers, turning them into shopping robots without their knowledge and consent? Indeed, neuromarketing is setting off alarm bells among some consumer advocates, who call it “brandwashing” — an amalgam of branding and brainwashing. [Emphasis added. From The New York Times - Making Ads That Whisper to the Brain by Natasha Singer.]

The article also quotes Penn prof Joseph Turow as saying, “There has always been a holy grail in advertising to try to reach people in a hypodermic way,” he says. The neuromarketing techniques described in the article are the use of EEG and biometrics to analyze consumer reactions to ads, as performed by firms like Neurofocus, Sands Research, and others.

Sadly, this juxtaposition of describing passive market research (like EEG ad studies) while talking about “hypodermic” persuasion and “brandwashing” provides fuel to crackpot conspiracy theorists.

EEG Studies Do Not Equal Brainwashing

Neuroalarmists generally are clueless about the details of neuromarketing as practiced today; they just know that it sounds scary. Seeing how people react to ads, brands, and packaging is something that marketers have been doing for decades, albeit with mixed results.

This does NOT mean that ads found to be more engaging will turn consumers into mindless drones. For many decades, marketers have been doing their best to develop powerful and effective ads. Sometimes, they succeeded in establishing awareness of a brand or product, or causing an uptick in sales. Never, though, have they taken over the brains of consumers in the way some people think neuromarketing can. NEWS FLASH: If there was a way to make ads effective enough to take over the brains of consumers, that would have happened long before EEG and fMRI arrived on the market research scene.

Why Wouldn’t We Want Better Ads and Products?

Most new products fail, and many ad campaigns have so little effect on sales that they are a total waste of money. Ultimately, consumers pay for these failed marketing efforts in the form of higher prices. In addition, we all have to put up with watching ineffective, boring ads because some firm’s marketing team launched the campaign without adequate testing. Personally, I like ads that engage me. While I fast forward past the endless stream of repetitive dreck that populates most commercial TV, I watch the Super Bowl more for the ads than for the game. Not all Super Bowl ads are winners, but their originality and creativity make them a lot more engaging than the usual fare.

If one takes the position that using neuromarketing studies are wrong, what one is really saying, “We want more boring ads, more new products that fail in the marketplace, and fewer products that people really like!”

The truth is that people are often incapable of articulating what they really like. EEG, fMRI, and biometrics may provide a somewhat more accurate way of measuring their preferences when compared to focus groups or surveys. These technologies do NOT inject brand preferences into consumer brains, so let’s lose the “brandwashing” idea before it gains more currency.

Roger Dooley writes and speaks about marketing, and in particular the use of neuroscience and behavioral research to make advertising, marketing, and products better. He is the primary author at Neuromarketing, and founder of Dooley Direct LLC, a marketing consultancy.

November 24, 2010

Book Review: The New Experts: Win Today’s Newly Empowered Customers at Their 4 Decisive Moments

Filed under: Book Reviews,branding,marketing,sales,selling — Paul McCord @ 2:14 pm
Tags: , ,

For the last several years I’ve argued, along with many others, that selling and marketing are changing rapidly because buyers are changing.  No longer is the salesperson needed to educate the prospect; marketing is having an increasingly difficult time breaking through the noise to capture the prospect’s attention.  With the immense amount of information every prospect has at their fingertips, many times the prospect knows far more about their issues and potential solutions than the salesperson they’re dealing with.

In this new marketplace the question becomes how do you gain the prospect’s attention and then put your product or service in first position.

Robert H. Bloom in The New Experts: Win Today’s Newly Empowered Customers at Their 4 Decisive Moments (Greenleaf Book Group Press: 2010) offers an answer to this problem.  Bloom is the retired US Chairman and CEO of Publicis Worldwide, a global marketing services company and advises companies on their business growth strategies.

Bloom argues that technology has empowered buyers and “ultimately {their} loyalty died” because of the immense number of choices they now have along with an enormous amount of detailed comparison information, along with the ability to purchase anytime, day or night, and from a growing number of vendors, all vying for their business. 

Consumer loyalty, according to Bloom, is a thing of the past.  In today’s marketplace companies can no longer count on loyalty from their customers, but they can still become the preferred product or service by creating Customer Preference.  Customer Preference does not guarantee a sale as there are other factors at work, but preference opens doors, allowing you to charge a bit higher price and still get the business, to not have the exact desired color and still get the sale, to not have the best product and still get the sale, and to not be the best known brand and still get the sale.

Creating Customer Preference involves giving the prospect a real or imagined benefit that is different from and more valuable to them than those given by your competitors.

Further, Bloom argues, there are 4 decisive moments when you can make your business 1st choice for the prospect:

The Now-or-Never Moment—the first brief contact with the prospect

The Make-or-Break Moment—during the transaction process

The Keep-or-Lose Moment—the period when the customer is using the product or service

The Multiplier Moment—the chance to convert a one-time user customer into a repeat customer and gain a customer advocate and referral

Becoming the preferred product or service need not be expensive and can be accomplished by any size company since consumers, both business and individual, no longer care about who they purchase from—big or small; local, national, or online; old-line established or new start-up—as long as they provide the sought after benefit.

The New Experts is a very interesting read and provides a thought provoking argument about not only how buyers are changing but how companies must respond to the change.  As Bloom states at the beginning of the book, the root for change is beginning to think like a customer, not a seller.  Once we begin to think like a customer we can begin to understand the change in the marketplace and how to deal with it—at each of the 4 decisive customer moments.

The New Experts is avaiable at Amazon, Barnes and Noble, Books-a-Million, and all fine booksellers.

May 6, 2009

FREE is the New Business Black

Filed under: branding,business,marketing,sales,Sales Resources,small business — Paul McCord @ 11:27 am
Tags: , ,

A few days ago a friend of mine, Jonathan Farrington, posted a question on a LinkedIn group’s discussion page: “Evidently, we are living in a FREE world when it comes to online sales events. Have we seen the end of ‘paid for’ webinars? In what circumstances would it be appropriate to charge for attendance?”   Jonathan’s question reminded me of a blog post by another friend, Dave Stein, from several months ago wondering if anyone would pay to read a blog.

It should be obvious to anyone skimming the internet that ‘free’ is now the one essential element of business for training and consulting companies.  In the vernacular of fashion, free is the new business black—the most basic and essential garment of business.  And free doesn’t mean just articles or blogs.  Internet users are expecting a great deal more for free than a few dozen or even a few hundred articles.  They expect white papers, webinars, blogs, videos, podcasts, eBooks, and even one-on-one coaching consultations.

From my interactions with salespeople, small business owners and professionals, there seems to be a rapidly growing segment of internet users who no longer believe they need invest a dime in order to get all of the management, sales, marketing, communication, leadership, or other training they need because everything they could ever ask for—and more– is free for the taking on the internet.

Although neither Dave or Jonathan have come to a definitive answer that I’m aware of about charging for content, their questions, along with some of the comments and questions I’ve received from readers of my books, articles, and blog, as well as attendees of my teleseminars and webinars, have me wondering if the volume of free information is not only hurting the service firms that do training and consulting, but more importantly, is it hurting the salespeople, professionals, business owners, and executives that are relying on it?

Whilea great many of the readers of the articles, viewers of the videos, and attendees of the free webinars have been convinced that they are getting the training they need, I believe they’re getting duped.  Not intentionally—at least not by most trainers and consultants.  But they are duped none the less because they have been convinced—most often by our hype when we promote our blogs, websites, free webinars, videos, and our other materials–that they’re getting the real deal, the real training.

They’re not, of course.  (Yes, I know ther are exceptions, but they are few and far between)

We’re not non-profit organizations giving our skills, knowledge, insights, and wisdom away for free.  We’re trying to give them enough information to grab their interest, to demonstrate what could be, to convince them to pop for the real deal.  Most of the time, they get an appetizer, but not an entrée.  They get enough information to spur thinking but not enough to fully implement the skill or the strategy.

That, of course is intentional on our part.  We want to impart real information but we can’t give away the store.  Even if we were willing to give it all away for free, it would be difficult to do.  For instance, my book on referrals, Creating a Million Dollar a Year Sales Income: Sales Success through Client Referrals takes 4 hours and 13 minutes to read (audio book version length).  Obviously I can’t really do justice to the whole book in a free hour webinar.  But even those 4 hours doesn’t do justice to the subject of referrals.  I have a two day, 14 hour workshop that goes into much greater depth than the book could ever think of doing.  To convert that workshop into a book would require a 900 page book.  Who is going to read the equivalent of War and Peace on referrals? And we haven’t talked about coaching the behavior; we’re just talking about the information–learning the academics of referrals.

Nevertheless, I have attendees of my free webinar thinking that after 60 minutes they’ll know all they need to know about referrals.  And from a basic point of view they do—they just can’t generate referrals because although they have the basic information, they don’t have the necessary behavior.

We have the same problem with the articles and blogs and videos and podcasts that we do.  We give tidbits and pieces of training and advice, yet we hype it as though it’s going to change their career. We give the information for free but it isn’t usable because the behavior change and the specific application doesn’t come with it, not to mention the fact that the reader or listener many not have the background to understand how to tie the information into their larger business or sales picture. It isn’t personal, it doesn’t fit, it’s not a designer fashion but a Fredericks of Hollywood one size fits all and all of us who have bought a one size fits all garment know that most of the time it really doesn’t ‘fit’ anyone.

A growing number of our target audience isn’t investing in the behavior change, the personalization, the specific application because we’ve hyped our one size fits all material to the point we’ve convinced them they don’t really need it.

In addition, there are a number of users who question what, if anything, we have left of value to sell.  Chris Brogan relates this story: “I finished a conference call a few hours ago with someone who said something that took me aback. Essentially, she said that I share so much on my website that she wonders what else I have to offer. Meaning, if everyone has access to the information I’m providing, why bother going further with me?”

This morning I spoke with a small business owner who corresponds with me via email on occasion but has never engaged my services, who when asked about the topic of this post responded that “if you guys are dumb enough to give everything away for free, I’m not stupid enough not to take it.  I may have to read more or attend more webinars to put it all together, but I can spend a few hours and get for free what you guys want to charge me thousands of dollars for.  Good luck with that.”

Reducing the amount of free content isn’t going to happen.  In fact, the amount, type, and depth of free content will continue to expand.  I doubt that reigning in the hype about the value, content and applicability of the free content will happen either. 

But I can’t help but wonder if our good intentions and desire to compete via demonstrating our value, knowledge, and wisdom is doing more damage to both ourselves and our potential clients.

May 2, 2009

Thought Leadership Ain’t What It Used to Be

Filed under: branding,Leadership,management,marketing — Paul McCord @ 2:10 pm
Tags: , , ,

In 1994 when Strategy and Business coined the term thought leader to identify the subjects of its interviews who had made substantial new contributions to the idea base of business.  Those thought leader interviews reserved for a very few and only after they had a serious body of published work in their field that changed their field.

Today everyone claims to be a thought leader.  If you’ve had an article published—or if you’ve just managed to write a coherent sentence on your blog– you’re probably a self-proclaimed thought leader.

Although today I can think of 8 to 12 true thought leaders in business, maybe two or three in marketing and sales, I can find thousands who proclaim themselves to be thought leaders.  I can think of a great many who are effective, who have contributed, who have changed people’s behavior.  But I can only think of a very small handful that I’d consider thought leaders.

As soon as someone called me a thought leader, I made the mistake of claiming that role for myself, just as many others have done.  I wanted to think of myself that way and when someone pinned that term on me I grabbed it.  I claimed it for my own.

Then at some point reality set in.  I realized that as nice as it was to have someone say that about me it wasn’t true.  I wasn’t a thought leader.  Heck, I don’t even personally know any thought leaders.  I know lots of people who have been called thought leaders.  I know many who call themselves thought leaders.  I don’t know any thought leaders, though.

Originally thought leadership was a term earned because of the uniqueness, value and scope of one’s contributions to business, it meant you’d changed business.   Today, it’s just a marketing concept that has caught on very well.

In 1994 the term wasn’t bestowed just because the recipient of the term had had an original thought.  A great many in business have had original thoughts.  Those thoughts might be slight changes in a process or a better way to explain a process; they might be a new way of looking an aspect of a problem or a way to combine a couple of different ideas to better solve an unrelated problem.  All of these new ideas and solutions are worth being recognized, but simply finding a better way to explain something or a little better way of doing something doesn’t rise to the level of thought leadership.  Only when one’s body of work rises to the point of changing the field they are engaged in do they become a thought leader.  Those men and women are few and far between.

In only 15 years we’ve managed to dumb down the idea of thought leadership from someone who has changed their area of business to someone who can create a marketing plan that implants the idea that they are a thought leader.

When everybody’s one, nobody is one.

 

February 23, 2009

Turning a Serious Concept into Marketing Pulp

Filed under: branding,business,Client Relationships,marketing,sales,selling — Paul McCord @ 9:42 am
Tags: , , , , ,

If you’ve been selling for any time whatsoever, I’m sure you’re familiar with the concept of being a trusted advisor.  I’m also sure you’d like your customers and clients to view you as one of their trusted advisors. 

Although the concept of being a trusted advisor has been around for centuries, Charles Green and David Maister in their book, The Trusted Advisor, began the popularization of the concept in the professional sales arena.  Today Charles is still one of the leading advocates and counselors of creating trust-based relationships in business.

Since the publication of The Trusted Advisor the concept of being a trusted advisor has grown to the point that I suspect it would be very difficult to find a professional salesperson that isn’t at least familiar with the term.  Just a few years ago, the concept of trusted advisor was new for many in sales.  As more and more people became familiar with the term, it began to appear frequently in literature and in sales, marketing, and management training sessions and has now entered the marketing world as a sales tool.

The root of the trusted advisor concept is action-what we as salespeople do with and to our prospects and clients.  How we treat our clients, how we relate to them, and who’s good we seek is paramount in developing a trusted advisor relationship.  Developing the trusted advisor relationship has far more to do with what we do than what we say, and it certainly has nothing to do with how we describe ourselves in our sales and marketing materials.

Inevitably, the term is being hi-jacked by salespeople, marketing departments, and companies as a sales tool.  Salespeople and companies refer to themselves as ‘trusted advisors,’ even to the extent that some companies have included the term in their company name.  Marketing departments have worked the term into their marketing material and tag lines.  It won’t be long and the term will appear in some company’s jingle-if it hasn’t already. 

Many of these salespeople and companies believe the term accurately describes who they are or who they wish to be; others, however, simply seek to take a shortcut and proclaim themselves to be trusted advisors in hopes of attracting business without having to do the work.  But whether used by those who seek to become a trusted advisor or by those who simply view the term as a marketing tool, they both are turning the term-not the concept-into meaningless marketing pap. 

Many react negatively to a salesperson who proclaims themselves to be honest and truthful (“honestly, . . .” or, “to tell you the truth, . . .”).  If you have to tell me how honest or truthful you are, I immediately suspect just how honest and truthful you really are.  The same is true for those who proclaim themselves to be trusted advisors.  Just as honesty, truthfulness, and trust are not things you proclaim but are things you demonstrate, becoming a trusted advisor is an earned position.  If you have to tell your prospect or client what to think of you, you probably haven’t earned it-and they probably won’t think of you in those terms anyway.

It’s sad to see a great term turned into meaningless marketing mush.  If you really want to become a trusted advisor to your clients, forget about marketing yourself or your company as a trusted advisor; instead, do the work, earn the position, and you’ll have a client for life. 

November 28, 2008

Should You Allow Your Sales Reps to do “Personal Branding”?

Filed under: branding,business,Personal Marketing,sales,Sales Management,selling,small business — Paul McCord @ 6:56 am
Tags: , , , ,

I’ve had several sales managers asking about what limitations they should put on their salespeople who are trying to do “personal branding.”

For many industries, personal branding isn’t new. For instance, for years this has been a common factor in the real estate industry. Realtors have always tried to brand themselves as much or more than the company they work for. Other industries have had something of a similar history, though maybe not to the extent as the real estate industry. Mortgage loan officers, bankers, insurance agents and financial services reps have always tried to establish a personal following. These personal followings would, the salesperson hoped, follow them as they moved from company to company

However, in the last few years this idea that the salesperson should be selling themselves and their identification first and the company secondarily (if at all) has begun to enter into a number of industries. Now companies from dozens of industries must make a decision as to just how far they go in allowing their salespeople to overshadow the company in name recognition.

There are three things a company must take into consideration when trying to determine how free a salesperson should be to feature themselves in marketing vs. the company:

Who’s paying? He who pays should determine who gets top billing. This is just common sense (with some limitations below). If I’m going to pay for the ad, the flier, the brochure, or whatever, I should certainly have the option of advancing my name recognition more than the company’s. I certainly must take into consideration my current name recognition vs. my company’s. If I’m a new salesperson with little name identity and I work for a major company whose name is a household name, I might want to feature my company’s name just as much as I do my own. But, at the same time, I ultimately want to spend my money advancing myself more than the company.

If the company is paying for the marketing, then the same logic applies. The company should be advancing their name over the salespersons. In both instances, both the company and the salesperson should have their identities displayed. The question isn’t which to display, but which is emphasized.

Is it legal? If there are regulatory reasons for limiting the “personal branding” then, of course, the question is moot, but the company certainly has no business asking the salesperson to pay for or participate in the cost of the marketing.

What is being sold? If the experience and qualifications of the salesperson are of primary significance in the sale of the product or service, it is to the company’s advantage that the salesperson focus on their name and their experience. Even if the company is a household name. Joining a household name with a salesperson with exceptional credentials will only enhance the company’s sales.

If the product or service is dominated not by the salesperson’s experience and skills, but by the product or service, then it is probably to the salesperson’s advantage for the company and the product to be the primary focus of the piece.

So, the brief answer: based on a combination of who’s paying for the marketing piece, the regulatory situation and whether the salesperson’s experience and skills are the primary sales issue should determine just how much freedom a salesperson should have in “personal branding.”

Companies cannot keep their salespeople from leaving. The fact is that those salespeople most likely to want to brand are those who will have the most direct influence on the quality of a customer’s experience. To a large extent, it is the quality of the Realtor, not their company, that has the most impact on a customer’s experience; it is the quality of the broker, not the company, that will have the most influence on a customer’s satisfaction; and it is the quality of the agent that will have the most influence on a client’s purchase, not the insurance company he works for.

Let your people personal brand all they want-then work to keep them happy and in place as their sales grown.

October 11, 2008

Speak Your Way to Sales Success

Filed under: branding,business,career development,marketing,prospecting,sales,selling,small business — Paul McCord @ 5:10 am
Tags: , , , ,

Salespeople and business owners often overlook one of the most effective and quick ways to both establish themselves as experts in their field and generate a pipeline of quality prospects.

Most salespeople and small business owners are all too familiar with cold-calling; purchasing leads; sending out mass direct mail and email pieces; and using print, radio and TV advertising and other common methods of lead generation.  However, becoming a niche expert and taking that expertise on the road in the form of speaking to groups and organizations is seldom considered.

The natural fear of public speaking is a deterrent for many, but most salespeople simply have not considered the possibility.  When we think of a speaker, most of us envision someone with grand ideas speaking to the most crucial events of the day-or maybe someone who has lead an extraordinary life, regaling the audience with tales of high adventure.  If we do think of business experts as speakers, we tend to think of names such as Jack Welch, Tom Hopkins, Zig Ziglar or some other high-profile guru who commands tens of thousands of dollars per appearance.

Those sorts of people may be the most visible, but they are, in fact, the tiny minority of speakers.  Literally tens of thousands of organizations in the US need speakers on a regular weekly or monthly basis.  A large percentage of these organizations are actively looking for businesspeople that have a message that will appeal to the majority of their members-and you could be that speaker.

You need not be expounding on the evils of the Democratic takeover of Congress, or the how badly the Republicans have governed, or the great coming economic downfall of civilization as we know it.  You do not have to be a stand-up comedian or a storyteller on the level of Garrison Keillor.

Speaking for local groups and originations only requires you to have information that is relevant and interesting.  A realtor client of mine became an expert in the minutiae of every neighborhood in her city and began speaking to groups about the transitions taking place in the city-which neighborhoods are on the verge of taking off, and which in decline.  Her presentation is laced with statistics but also stories and history, with fact and prediction. Within a matter of several months, she became the “go to” person when members of audiences she had spoken to began to think about buying or selling their home, because she is recognized as the expert on where to move, where to build and where to avoid.

Another client of mine, a business insurance broker, began speaking about the issues that businesses in his city face in terms of risk.  His presentation centers on crime, employee theft, and upcoming city ordinances that may affect business, and other, unexciting aspects of risk management.  Although he is a likable and entertaining man, his presentation is hardly worthy of an appearance on The Late Show with David Letterman.  Nevertheless, he has information that is of interest to other businesspeople.  Moreover, he, like the realtor, has become known as expert in his field.  Businesspeople come to him first because of their perception of his extraordinary knowledge of both business risk and how to manage it and the local issues facing businesses.

Neither of these people is exceptional in the sense that they have led extraordinary lives or have mythical business prowess.  In fact, the business agent has only been in the insurance business for a couple of years.  However, both recognized the power of getting in front of groups and presenting themselves as experts.  Their average audience is fewer than 40 people.  Their average talk is less than 20 minutes, and each speaks less than four times a month.  Nevertheless, if they speak three times per month to an average audience of 35 people, they are in front of about 1,200 per year as “the” expert in their field.  Moreover, many of these people are potential prospects.

How do you become the expert?  First, find something about your business that will be of interest to a broad range of potential customers.  Concentrate on areas that could give your audience information on potential risks or opportunities that could expand or enhance their life, open new doors, or increase or protect their wealth.  Once you have found an interesting niche, connect it to your local market.  The realtor deals only with local issues and demographics, but the insurance broker mixes general risk statistics with local business-related issues.  He takes mundane national statistics and brings them home, to a more personal level.

Do your homework on both your subject and your public-speaking skills.  Hone your presentation so that you are confident and do not have to speak with notes.  Work in front of a mirror until you have managed to eliminate all of your nervous movements.  Go over your presentation-both verbally in front of a mirror and in your mind as you drive-until it becomes second nature.  Check and recheck facts and figures. 

Join the Toastmasters.  Most of us probably think of the Toastmasters as simply an organization that will improve our public speaking skills.  It certainly will.  However, it will improve your leadership skills also, not to mention your interpersonal skills in general.  Most every community has at least one Toastmasters club within reasonable distance.  In addition, in a city of any reasonable size, you’ll probably have several options of meeting days and times as there will probably be several clubs from which to choose.

Then, once you have mastery over your subject and yourself, get the word out to groups, organizations and associations that cater to your prospects.  Send a self-promotion package and follow up with a phone call.  As you begin to set speaking engagements, more will follow.

Keep your material fresh and up-to-date.  Look and act like a professional.  Within months, you’ll have gained the reputation of an expert, the image of the guru, and the self-confidence to match.

There are few opportunities to influence potential prospects as powerfully as you can through speaking to them in a forum where you’re “endorsed” by an organization or association they belong to.  Becoming the objective educator and expert has far more power and lasting impact than any marketing or advertising you can possibly do.

October 1, 2008

Guest Article: “Un-spin Your Competitor’s Propaganda,” by Dave Stein

Filed under: branding,business,Communication,marketing,sales — Paul McCord @ 7:38 am
Tags: , , , , ,

Un-spin Your Competitor’s Propaganda
By Dave Stein

Did you ever feel that you are living in a world of spin and hype? With damage control consultants, corporate spin doctors and whole companies out there whose job it is to reconstruct a corporate image, it’s hard to tell “where the truth lies.”

Here are some considerations for getting to the bottom of a competitor’s press release or interview:

1.Why are they announcing now? Press releases and conferences don’t happen by chance. In order to start to get at the truth, you’ll need to question the timing and ask, why now? Perhaps the company is attempting to preempt their opponent. Or are they were caught off guard and are trying to make up for lost ground.

2.Do you hear (or read) new words, concepts or phrases? That’s generally a sign that someone is jockeying for a leadership, first-out-of-the-gate position. The use of generally accepted terms signifies a me-too position, often by someone who is behind the curve and attempting to justify why.

3.If there is a problem, whom are they blaming for it? If it’s your company, you have just been declared the enemy. What is the real reason for the problemﾗthe one they aren’t discussing? There may lay a source of competitive advantage for you.

4.Who might be offended or threatened by any statements made? You always want to imagine who might be threatened or offended by a statement, whether it is written or verbal. Is the person or company taking “a shot” at someone? If so, that is at least part of their agenda. The person or company who is the target of the statement may not be clear at first. Listen and read between the lines.

5.Does the person name names? If so, they may be the enemy. A proven way to spin an attack is to praise your opponent, then diminish what they are doing in the eyes of the audience. “I think ABC Corporation really has done a terrific job building market share. We believe that the quality of our products will have an impact of the success of our customers, which will enable us to achieve our growth objectives during the coming year.” Translation: Take a serious look at the quality of their products.

6.In an interview, do they answer questions directly or avoid the answer? Here’s an example: A chemical company executive is asked, “Have there been any other toxic chemical spills that have not been reported to the authorities?” The answer, “Our company has the best record in the industry regarding compliance with government regulations and has been recognized by the Green Fund fifteen times.” What they say is often their message. What they don’t say often indicates where their exposure lies.

7.What does the person say when they are interrupted? Will they allow themselves to be driven off course? Or do they persist and continue to drive forward, even overpowering the interrupter. If that’s the case, what they are saying at that moment is likely the real message.

8.Is their body language incongruent with what they are saying? Learn how to read body language. As experienced and coached as President Clinton was, he still managed to touch his nose an inordinate number of times during his televised testimony about Monica Lewinsky.

9.Are questions planted or is the interviewer free to ask what they please? Whether you like him or not, part of the success of Bill O’Reilly’s TV show is his assertion that he will accept no guests who require adherence to pre-determined interviewing questions or subjects that the interviewer must stay away from. That is opposite from prime-time news and interview shows on network television.

Before founding his sales consultancy, The Stein Advantage, Inc., in 1997, Dave Stein served for more than 20 years in various corporate executive sales and marketing roles. Now, through his coaching, speaking, and training, Dave provides companies with substantial diagnostic and remedial expertise enabling them, among other capabilities, to readily overcome tough competitors, refocus their selling efforts resulting in new levels of credibility and differentiation with high-level executive buyers, and to hire the right sales professionals, all leading to greater and more consistent revenues. Dave is the author of the Amazon best-selling business book: How Winners Sell: 21 Proven Strategies to Outsell Your Competition and Win the Big Sale, (Dearborn Trade Press, May 2004). For more information go to his website, www.HowWinnersSell.com

June 27, 2008

Image vs Substance

Filed under: branding,business,developing expert reputation,Financial Services,marketing,Personal Marketing,sales,selling — Paul McCord @ 9:05 am
Tags: , , , , ,

A couple of days ago I received an email from a financial planner regarding an article I wrote some months ago titled “The Medium, the Message, and the Financial Planner.” The planner brought up a question about the difference between one’s image and the substance of one’s practice and questioned my assertion that a financial planner needs to develop a public image as an expert and that to do that he or she need not be technically the best in their field but rather they only need be competent.

My reader thought that I was way off the mark in encouraging less than the best to become recognized as an expert, and that by becoming so recognized, they would be damaging the profession. His complaint was that:

“(I) have spent years studying tax law, estate planning, investments, insurance, and other areas that are critical to helping a client formulate a financial plan. I’ve invested most of my adult life in becoming a real expert, not an image.

“What you call developing an expert image and reputation I call branding which in my opinion is nothing more than creating a false impression of who the planner is. I see all of this ‘marketing’ to be degrading to me and my profession. I am not a salesperson as you say in your article. I am a skilled, trained professional. I don’t market any more than a specialist physician or attorney markets.

“Certainly, there are financial planners that market their practice and many have very lucrative practices. I equate them more to the ambulance chaser than to a professional. I have no doubt that if I followed your advice I’d make more money, but at the expense of who I am, at the expense of the dignity and respect of my profession, and at the expense of my self-respect. I may not be making a six figure income, but I make a good living and I’ve done it without prostituting myself or my profession. In fact, I believe that if you and the others like you who are advocating financial planners become common salespeople would cease with your self serving attempt to sell your services, I’d be making considerably more because my expertise would come to the surface. As it is with the advice and guidance you and others give on how to market, many of the best financial planners aren’t acquiring the clients we deserve because lesser skilled planners are attracting them through their marketing practices.”

The reader had a few other comments to make, but you get the general drift of his email. Unfortunately, my experience working with thousands of advisors in the financial services industry is that he is not the only one with this view of marketing and sales.

Like most sales trainers, I get a good number of very positive emails and my share of challenging emails, but I’m not sure I get any more honest than this one. This reader is very clear on how he sees himself and his profession—and how he sees salespeople, marketing, and other financial planners who are aggressive in developing their practices.

He is also very clear on his misunderstanding of what sales and marketing is about and how business is acquired. Unfortunately, being one of the best at what you do isn’t going to bring in business. If no one knows about you, then no matter how good you are at what you do, you’re not going to thrive.

There isn’t a dichotomy between selling and marketing and being a professional, one doesn’t exclude the other. Creating an expert image through ethically sound marketing isn’t degrading or deceptive.

However, the arrogance and ignorance to believe that one is above selling and marketing is self-destructive. Being jealous of one’s competition because they are acquiring clientele you don’t think they deserve is self-destructive. Believing you warrant more business simply because you know what you’re doing is self-destructive.

Being technically competent or even being a technical expert is useless if you don’t have clients to practice on. Spending time and energy and using the strategies that create your public image and reputation as an expert is the sign of a true expert; believing you are above marketing is an indication of a lack of understanding of what marketing is and how business works.

Public reputations don’t happen by accident. They have to be nurtured and cultivated. They have to be created.

How many great financial planners are languishing in near poverty because no one knows they exist? If simply being great at what one does was enough, there would be no need for marketing, advertising, and selling. If being good was good enough, there wouldn’t be so many highly proficient technicians in every industry going out of business everyday because they are starving to death.

Success doesn’t happen because one happens to be a highly skilled technician. Success requires the acquisition of a number of skills—from the technical skills of your profession to the skills to get the word out about your existence and how you can serve the potential client. Success happens by intention, not by happenstance. Image doesn’t mean illusion and substance doesn’t mean success. Technical substance must be combined with a public image created through marketing and solidified through selling if you want to create a practice that is both professionally and financially satisfying.

Next Page »

Theme: Rubric. Blog at WordPress.com. Fonts on this blog.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 3,814 other followers