Sales and Sales Management Blog

August 15, 2008

How to Destory Your Credibility without Even Trying

China wowed the world last Friday evening with their spectacular opening ceremonies for the Olympics. Those ceremonies had been in the works for two years. And for several years prior to that they had been building the sites, preparing their cities, and promoting not just the games but their image. These Olympics were to be their coming out party to showcase China to the world. This was the time for them to shine.

They promised these would be the best games ever held. Not only would the games be the best, the atmosphere and the spectacle would do both China and the Olympics proud.

Although the immediate lead up to the games was shaky with arrests of dissidents, preventing some foreign protesters from protesting, and a number of other issues, the games got off with a magnificent start. The world was wowed and hopes were high that these really would be the greatest games ever.

Then the trouble started–just little signs that maybe all was not what it seemed. Some of the opening night fireworks had been faked-just to make them stand out better on TV. Then the girl who sang wasn’t really the girl who sang. Then questions about the eligibility of some of their athletes. Now questions about whether the kids carrying out the Chinese flag were what the Chinese said they were.

There seems to be new questions daily about what was real and what that opening night wasn’t. As the questions mount, the press is looking more closely at not only the opening night ceremonies but at other aspects of the events–the Chinese teams and coaches, the officiating, and the presentation of China the country is putting on.

Most of the issues uncovered have been relatively minor-fireworks enhanced to make them standout better on TV, a girl substituted for the real singer because they felt the substitute represented China’s image better, kids from a single ethnic group representing all ethnic groups in the country because it was easier to get an existing troupe to perform.

Yet these small incidents accumulate and cause many to question just how much of what they are seeing is real and how much isn’t. Years of preparation and credibility building brought down in just a few days because of a series of small, meaningless, unnecessary incidents.

This on a big scale before the eyes of the world, but this same dynamic can destroy our credibility just as quickly. Ours may not be fakery. Ours may not be smoke and mirrors. Ours may simply be a series of small promises not kept, dates missed, phone calls unreturned. But the damage is the same. Those small promises, those unimportant dates, those too busy to return phone calls can destroy us more quickly than anything else because we think no one will notice. The problem is-they will notice.

August 13, 2008

Guest Article: “Winning a New Client When There is an Incumbent,” by Andrew Sobel

Filed under: Client Relationships, sales, selling — Paul McCord @ 7:04 am
Tags: , ,

Winning a New Client When There Is an Incumbent
By Andrew Sobel

Breaking into a new client requires skill and perseverance under any circumstances, but especially so when the client already has a strong relationship with a firmly entrenched competitor. If the client is satisfied with an existing provider, there has to be a compelling reason for them to shift their business to you. It can and does happen, however. After enjoying the fruits of a relationship for many years, an existing advisor can get complacent, leaving room for an energetic, creative, and determined newcomer to capture the client’s imagination.

Here are 9 principles that can help guide you in trying to win business from a new client which already has strong, existing relationships with the competition:

1. Look for trigger events. There are a number of circumstances that will make it easier to build a relationship. There could include things such as:

** A conflict. Due to a conflict with another client, your competitor may find itself unable to execute a piece of work. This can most commonly occur with investment banks and law firms, but similar situations can arise with other types of advisors.

** Executive changes. The individual who has a strong relationship with your competitor may leave or be reassigned elsewhere.

** Reorganizations. This may cause the client to rethink how it distributes its business among outside firms.

** Economic events or shocks. Sometimes, a profit crunch or loss of market share will trigger a company to rethink its use of advisors (e.g., clients will often change advertising agencies for these reasons).

** Turnover or retirements at the competition. If a lead partner or key relationship manager retires, for example, this may be an opportunity to press your case and invest in trying to capture some share of wallet.

** A service or quality failure on the part of your competition. One of my clients won over a new client despite that company’s 10-year relationship with another advisor. They were told that the incumbent, in 10 years, had never learned anything about the client’s business, and the client was tired of their complacency and of the generic advice they were getting.

2. Try to identify something small or non-threatening that you can work on. If, in order to hire you, a client has to dump an existing provider with whom they have a good relationship, your chances of success are very small. How would you feel if someone you just met said, “I want to be your friend, but you have to get rid of your best friend in order for us to build a relationship”?

3. Focus on an area where you are clearly differentiated or have a tangible strengths vis-à-vis your competitor. I’ve seen firms make inroads because they had a strong presence in a particular market or country, or had done some unique research around an issue of importance to the client. Ask yourself, “Where do we have a particular strength we can leverage?”

4. Invest to earn their trust and respect. The incumbent has the advantages of knowing the client better than you and having built up a repository of trust that you lack. You’re probably going to have to go above and beyond in terms of making an up-front investment in understanding the client’s issues and organization.

5. Identify executives in the client organization who are not so loyal to the other provider. You’ll certainly be able to capture the attention and interest of these executives more easily, potentially dividing and conquering.

6. Emphasize innovation and new ideas. Clients are always looking for fresh perspectives, and they will usually not let an existing relationship get in the way of at least listening to someone else’s good ideas. One of my own clients aspired to work for a major global company based in London, one that was the largest client of their direct competitor. Their ticket to entry was a bold strategy which involved leading with a controversial but well-developed and innovative viewpoint on the future of the industry. They also leveraged strategy (5), above, by appealing to a senior executive who was less tied to the other firm. Once inside, they all but entirely displaced the competition.

7. Be patient and persistent. Usually, it will take many visits and many conversations over a long period of time–months not weeks, certainly‹to find the right opening.

8. Stay in touch so you are there when your number comes up. This applies to any new business development situation, but even more so when there is a major, established competitor. You may get lucky and receive what seems like a call out of the blue because a client’s advisors have an unforeseen conflict, but even such a call is likely to be the result of your systematic relationship-building efforts rather than serendipity.

9. Pick your shots. When there is a strong incumbent, breaking in can be an uphill struggle, and it’s no fun to bang your head against a door. Be selective about investing your time, and focus on those few opportunities where the potential payoff (future revenue, opportunity to serve a marquis client, etc.), multiplied by the probability of success, suggest a worthwhile goal. Sometimes, until there are some major personnel changes, the client just isn’t going to give you any business under any circumstances. If that’s the case, move on.

Relationships do change–they aren’t cast in concrete. Remember, this very week, your competitors are calling on your own best clients, trying to capture some of their business–the least you can do is return the favor. Don’t just play defense.

Andrew is the author of two acclaimed, best-selling books, Making Rain: The Secrets of Building Lifelong Client Loyalty (John Wiley) and Clients for Life: Evolving from an Expert for Hire to an Extraordinary Advisor (Simon & Schuster), as well as over 75 articles on building long-term relationships. Andrew has worked for 25 years as both a strategy advisor to top management and an executive educator, designing numerous, leading-edge programs for senior professionals. Visit his website at www.andrewsobel.com

July 10, 2008

Guest Article: “Does Your Customer Trust You? The Acid Test,” by Charles H. Green

Does Your Customer Trust You? The Acid Test
By Charle H. Green

The acid test Most salespeople will agree—there is no stronger sales driver than a customer’s trust in the salesperson. Further, the most successful route to being trusted is to be trustworthy—worthy of trust. Faking trust is not easy—and the consequences of failing at it are large.

But is it possible to know if your client does trust you? Is there one predictor of client trust? Is there a single factor that amounts to an acid test of trust in selling?

I think there is. It’s contained in one single question. A “yes” answer will strongly suggest your customers trust you. A “no” answer will virtually guarantee they don’t.

The Acid Test of Trust in Selling

The question is this:

Have you ever recommended a competitor to one of your better clients?

If the answer is “yes”—subject to the caveats below—then you have demonstrably put your customer’s short-term interests ahead of your own. This indicates low self-orientation and a long-term perspective on your part (I’m assuming sincerity), and is a good indicator of trustworthiness.

If you have never, ever, recommended a competitor to a good client, then either your product is always better than the competition for every customer in every situation (puh-leeze), or—far more likely—you always shade your answers to suit your own advantage. Which says you always put your interests ahead of your customers’. Which says, frankly, you can’t be trusted.

Here are the caveats: don’t count “yes” answers if:

a. The client was trivially important to you
b. You were going to lose the client anyway
c. You don’t have a viable service offering in the category
d. You figured the competitor’s offering was terrible and you’d deep-six them by recommending them.

The only fair “yes” answer is one in which you honestly felt that an important client would be better served in an important case by going with a competitor’s offering.

If that describes what you did, and it is a fair reflection of how you think about client relationships in general, then I suspect your clients trust you.

This is the “acid test” of trust in selling. To understand why it’s so powerful, let’s consider the factors of trust.

Why Is This the Acid Test?

My co-authors and I suggested in The Trusted Advisor that trust has four components, and we arrayed them in the “trust equation.” More precisely, it is an equation for trustworthiness, and it is written:
T =  (C   R   I) / S

where:

T = trustworthiness of the seller (as perceived by the buyer),
C = credibility,
R = reliability,
I = intimacy, and
S = self-orientation.

Credibility is probably the most commonly thought-of trust component, but it is only one. Think of credibility and reliability as being the “rational” parts of trust. Believable, credentialed, dependable, having a track record—these are the traits we most consciously look for in screening for vendors, doctors, and websites.

The third factor in the numerator—intimacy—is more emotional. It has to do with the sense of security we get in sharing information with someone. We say we “trust” someone when we open up to them, share parts of ourselves with them. We trust those to whom we entrust our secrets.

But all pale beside the power of the single factor in the denominator—self-orientation. If the seller—the one who would be trusted, who strives to be perceived as trustworthy—is perceived as being self-oriented, then we see him as in it for himself. And that’s the kiss of death for trust.

At its simplest, high self-orientation is selfishness; at its most complex, self-absorption. Neither gives the buyer a sense that the seller cares about any interests but his own.

Self-orientation speaks to motives. If one’s motives are suspect, then everything else is cast in a different light. What looked like credible credentials may be a forged resume and false testimonials. What looked like a reliable track record may be an assemblage of falsehoods. What looked like safe intimacy may be the tactics of a con man. Bad motives taint every other aspect of trust.

The acid test aims squarely at this issue of orientation. Whom are you serving? If the answer is, the client, then all is well. No client expects a professional to go out of business serving them; the need to make a good profit is easily accepted.

It’s when the need to run a profitable business is given primacy in every transaction, every quarter, every sale, that clients call your motives into question. How can they trust someone who’s never willing to invest in the longer term, never willing to compromise, never willing to do gracefully defer in the face of what is best for the client? They cannot, of course.

Passing the acid test suggests you know how to focus on relationships, not transactions; medium and long-term timeframes, not just short-term; and collaborative, not competitive, work patterns.

Flunking the acid test means clients doubt your motives. Whether you are selfish or self-obsessed makes little difference to them—the results are self-aggrandizing, not client-helpful.

The paradox is: in the long-run, self-focused behavior is less successful than is client-helpful behavior. Collaboration beats competition. Trust beats suspicion. Profits flow most not to those who crave them, but to those who accept them gracefully as an outcome of client service.

Charles H. Green is a speaker and executive educator on trust-based relationships and Trust-based Selling in complex businesses. He is author of Trust-based Selling (McGraw-Hill, 2005), and co-author of The Trusted Advisor (with David Maister and Rob Galford, Free Press, October 2000).  Visit his website at www.trustedadvisor.com

June 24, 2008

Have You Had an “Uh, oh!” Moment Yet?

My friend Dave Stein of ES Research wrote a very timely post on his blog a few days ago about the battle between salespeople and purchasing agents.  I found it timely because one of my coaching clients needed some emergency coaching yesterday because when he visited with a new prospect, a purchasing manager for a division of a major wood products company, he had an “uh, oh” experience.

My client realized within just a couple of minutes of beginning the discussion that the prospect knew far more about the salesperson’s business, sales process, and even the type of issues his company was having than the salesperson knew about the prospect’s company.  To his surprise and dismay, apparently the prospect was doing more research on the salesperson’s company than he had done on the prospect’s company.  He knew he was in a situation where he was at a distinct disadvantage because his prospect was better prepared than he was.

Over the years I’ve addressed the issue of how prospects—both business and individual consumer prospects—are changing.  No longer do they need salespeople to provide information and guidance because they have at their fingertips mountains of information—from data to case studies to price comparisons to recommendations and guidance by recognized experts about every product and service imaginable.

Salespeople must be better prepared than ever.  Not only are prospects becoming more difficult to connect with—they’ve learned to block out your marketing and advertising and avoid your cold calls–they are becoming far more knowledgeable about their issues and the possible solutions to those issues.  In addition, corporate purchasing personnel are actively engaged in researching you just as you are researching them—and they are being trained on how to counter your sales techniques, negotiate, read your body language, and other methods of out selling the seller.

The world of selling is changing and it is changing rapidly.  More than ever it is imperative that salespeople learn how to find and connect with prospects in ways prospects will respect and accept—and unfortunately, the traditional methods of prospecting just don’t do that.  But in addition, salespeople must learn how to sell in a world where the consumer is as well or even better informed than they are and where the prospect has access to the recommendations and guidance of recognized, ‘objective’ experts.

If you thought selling was a tough job in the past, you ain’t seen nothing yet.

June 16, 2008

Avoiding Uncomfortable Discussions with Your Prospects and Clients Isn’t Going to Build Trust

Are you blind to the political issues and candidates that impact your family, your sales business, and your clients? Even if political, economic, social, and cultural issues aren’t high on your radar, are you going to simply avoid the subject during this election season? Could you if you wanted to? Few of us, no matter how well or ill informed we may be, can honestly say that we have no opinions regarding the candidates and the issues.

As salespeople we spend a fair amount of time trying to develop relationships built upon trust, honesty, and openness with our prospects and clients. We claim that we want to build relationships with our clients, we want to get to know them as people and not just as potential purchasers, we want to create friends, not just accounts. Many of us go to great lengths to learn how to read body language, to communicate in a manner that caters to the prospect’s personality type, to read the unspoken signals the client sends through how they dress, how they decorate their office, what they drive, and what they do for recreation and relaxation. Our goal we say is to treat the prospect as a whole person.

Nevertheless, our holistic approach to sales is one sided. For many of us, there are areas of discussion and interaction that we want to hide from our prospect. Let the conversation get close to the area of political or social opinion and all the sudden many of us no longer are too anxious to build the relationship on honesty and openness. Instead of openness, we seek to avoid; instead of honesty, we seek to muddy the waters to the point our client has no idea where we stand.

Many of us will spend the next few months doing a delicate dance of avoidance, trying to offend no one while insisting that we are open, honest, trustworthy individuals, intent only on meeting the prospect’s needs and becoming trusted advisors. We’ll try to build relationships based on getting to know our client while allowing them to get to know only three quarters of us. We’ll try to balance on the head of pin, afraid that if we reveal ourselves as a political or socially aware person we’ll offend, we’ll step on toes, we’ll lose a sale.

In my opinion–and experience–not only is this behavior ingenuous, but it is itself destructive. Prospects and clients expect each of us to have opinions and they are quite aware that those opinions may be counter to their own.

What are we communicating to prospects and clients when we try to sidestep discussion of the issues or candidates? Many immediately assume we’re avoiding the issue because we hold opinions we believe are counter to theirs—so whether their assumption is correct or not, by avoiding the discussion we risk offending the prospect by unintentionally communicating a contrary opinion to theirs. A few may assume that we’re not informed well enough or care enough to have an opinion. Most will assume that we’re simply trying to play the game, trying to be ‘real’ as long as that reality doesn’t involve anything of substance in our personal lives.

Conventional wisdom has been to avoid political discussion. Conventional wisdom comes from a time when the emphasis wasn’t on building long-term, trust based relationships with prospects and clients.

I’m not advocating you initiate political and social discussion, but avoiding it isn’t going to advance the relationship either.

Seldom have I found discussing these issues to be, well, an issue. I have lost a few sales that I can trace to these types of discussions, but I can identify many more sales I’ve made where the sale had its roots in a willingness to engage in political and social discussions.

As long as you are respectful of the prospect’s point of view, have reasoned arguments for your stance, and don’t engage in inflammatory language, there is no reason to fear alienating a prospect or client. In fact, if you can intelligently discuss the issues in light of how they may impact your prospect’s business, you may find that your discussion instead of being a potential minefield may be one of the most compelling reasons to do business with you. Prospects and clients not only respect honesty, they also respect salespeople who understand their business and the future prospects for their business. By demonstrating an understanding of how political, economic and social issues may affect your prospect’s future, you demonstrate an intimate knowledge of their business—and prospects love to do business with people they trust and who really understand their problems, issues, and opportunities.

May 8, 2008

Book Review: PeopleSavvy for Sales Professionals by Gregory Stebbins, Ed.D.

Seldom do I read a book that I consider to be dangerous. Certainly, there are books that once read, you think, “Wow! I hope a new salesperson doesn’t get hold of this and think this is what sales is all about.” We’ve all read the books, the ones that advocate heavy doses of manipulation, browbeating the customers, twisting their arm, hog tying them until they give in.

Nevertheless, PeopleSavvy For Sales Professionals (Savvy Books, 2007) by Gregory Stebbins, Ed.D. is a dangerous book of a different kind, a danger that Stebbins immediately acknowledges in his introduction. PeopleSavvy deals with the psychological strategies and techniques of selling and developing trust—strategies and techniques that can be used to help create a bond–or to manipulate and deceive.

In the right hands, the book can open new ways to build relationships quickly. In the wrong hands, it can reveal ways to out fox, out maneuver, and out and out manipulate. The responsibility for the information’s use lies with the reader, Dr. Stebbins has simply shown how understanding your prospect’s behavior and thinking can help you connect—and an unfortunate byproduct is to show others how they can manipulate.

Stebbins’ thesis is that if your prospects don’t trust you, you cannot sell effectively. That thesis springboards Stebbins in a discussion of how you can read your prospect’s movements, her words, how he dresses, what she has on the walls of her office—even the position of the items in his office, and use that information to build a deeper connection more quickly with the prospect, gaining their confidence and trust at the same time.

Although the book is quite detailed on the ‘how’ to read your prospects behavior and the other telltale signs to help build trust, Stebbins breaks trust into two parts and feeds them to us in bite sized morsels.

Trust is comprised of ‘Rapport’, which itself is made up of compassion, connection and credibility, and ‘Deep Trust,’ which is comprised of competence, commitment and consistency. Stebbins takes the reader through each of these individual components of Rapport and Deep Trust and how each must play a role in developing a relationship of trust with your prospect.

He then journeys through how motivation, communication and behavior can reveal the avenues to developing the rapport and trust you must have to develop a lasting relationship with your prospect.

From mirroring behavior to matching speech patterns and words to understanding personality types to how the prospect thinks and operates, PeopleSavvy covers the gamut from not only understanding your prospect’s behavior, to how they think and why they think the way they do.

Filled with stories and examples, PeopeSavvy is an easy to read—harder to apply—book whose insights, strategies and techniques are grounded in the works of those, including Stebinns, who have spent years studying sales, marketing, and industrial psychology.

If you want to understand how to get inside the head of your prospects and clients, PeopleSavvy will help open the door to their minds. Whether what you learn is dangerous or not depends on your intent and use.

April 18, 2008

Guest Article: “Are Your Policies Hurting Your Business?” by Kelley Robertson

Are Your Policies Hurting Your Business?
By Kelley Robertson

A customer’s purchase is overcharged by $10.00. The store policy is clear… “No cash refunds” so the sales associate refuses to issue the refund even though the mistake was hers. The customer was told he would have to accept a store credit or wait for a cheque to be issued by head office.

A customer wants to exchange a sale item she bought three hours earlier but the store policy states, “All sales are final.” The employee adamantly refuses to exchange the item for the customer. What is the likelihood that these customers will buy from those stores again? I think it would be safe to say they won’t.

We all know that policies are instituted for a reason– to protect the company and reduce the risk and liability. However, in many situations, policies are put into place to manage a tiny portion of the business –people who look for ways to exploit your business or who try to get something for nothing. Unfortunately, these policies are designed to control the minority rather than the majority. And, as a customer, I highly doubt that you like being told, “That’s our policy.” There is no question that some people will take advantage of liberal and flexibly policies. However, my experience has taught me that these individuals are far and few between.

Case in point; when I published my first book, I offered an unconditional money-back guarantee to anyone who did not feel the concepts would help them improve their business. My publisher was distraught about this decision, telling me that I was setting myself up to be taken advantage of. Later, I extended this policy to the products I started selling on-line. In the last four years I have sold over 7000 copies of my book and thousands of dollars of other products but I have only issued 2 refunds. Was the risk worth the reward? Absolutely!

In another situation, a participant in one of my public workshop expressed his disappointment because the program did not address his specific expectations even though full details of the program were provided before he registered. While I considered the possibility that he was trying to take advantage of me, I still offered a refund because it made good business sense.

The easier you make it for someone to do business with you, the more business they will generate, providing of course, you offer a good product at a fair price. I firmly believe that flexible policies can help a business increase their market share.

Here is something else to consider. When your policies change (which is not uncommon), don’t force existing customers to adhere to the new policy immediately after it has been implemented. Give them a grace period to help them adjust to the new procedures.

I also think it is important to give employees some latitude. I’m not suggesting that you allow everyone to make their own decision but I do know from experience that most people will make good business decisions if given the opportunity.

Many people are hesitant to do business with someone they have not purchased from in the past. And for good reason, they have been sold goods and services that have not lived up to their expectations. Reduce their concern and hesitation by making it easy and risk-free to buy from you.

One of my first clients expressed concern about doing business with an unknown vendor (me). When she asked what would happen if she wasn’t satisfied with the program I was going to develop for her, I told her that she wouldn’t pay. I even agreed to include this in my contract with her. Several years later, her company is still a client and I have since extended this policy to all new clients.

Another aspect to consider is the fine print you include in contracts. Why force your customers to review paragraph upon paragraph of text that can only be read with a magnifying glass. State your terms up front and believe that the more fine print you have, the more you are trying to hide from your customer.

I remember my wife talking to a computer company we were leasing from after we discovered that we had made two extra payments even though the lease had ended. She was told, “Your contract clearly states that you are responsible for contacting us to terminate the lease.” I have also seen this type of clause for extended warranty programs. Some companies offer a rebate on the warranty if you do not use it. However, the caveats usually require the customer to submit the original receipt within 30 days of the warranty expiration.

Evaluate the policies you have implemented over the years and look at them from a customer’s perspective. They may be costing you business.

Kelley Robertson works with businesses to help them increase their sales & profitability and motivate their employees. Receive a FREE copy of “100 Ways to Increase Your Sales” by subscribing to his newsletter available at www.RobertsonTrainingGroup.com. Kelley speaks regularly at conferences, sales meetings, and corporate functions. For information on his programs contact him at 905-633-7750 or Kelley@RobertsonTrainingGroup.com.

April 12, 2008

Help Your Small Business Clients–Team Up with a Lending Partner

Banks and other lending institutions have taken serious hits over the past few months with more to come. Upcoming earnings reports will be bloody. Their capital ratios are not only threatened but are under siege.

As the securities they own are downgraded, they must increase their reserves, liquidate the offending securities, or cut back on other lending activities. Most banking institutions will probably do a combination of the above.

What does that mean for your clients? For many it means potential disaster. As credit gets tighter and tighter, the source for your clients to find funding for growth and operations gets tighter also. Many may well find themselves in a few short months locked out of the credit market even though they have sterling credit. For some that will mean they can’t take advantage of new business opportunities; for others, it may be as drastic as closing the doors on their business.

Now would be a good time to find a quality business banker to team up with to begin talking to your clients about the direction of the economy and what they need to do now to insure their viability in the coming months.

If they have strong credit, now just might be a great time to acquire a line of credit while banks are still lending, assuring themselves of some access to credit in the coming months. If they need it, they have it. If they don’t, they haven’t risked anything to protect themselves.

This isn’t the first credit crunch American business has faced and it won’t be the last. But preparing for what looks like many months of tight—or even impossible to acquire—credit is not only prudent, but it could mean the difference between growth and stagnation—or worse.

Team up with a good, knowledgeable business banker from a rock solid banking institution and begin letting your clients know they have an alternative to sitting and waiting. Not all small companies are aware of how tight things might get. Many assume that they’ll always have access to funds through their banking relationships. Helping them prepare for what appears will be a tough lending market will not only help you solidify your relationship with your client, it just might help your client have the funds to purchase your products or services.

April 11, 2008

Guest Article: “The Value of Trust, A Client’s Perspective,” by Joe Heller

Filed under: Client Relationships, sales, selling, trust — Paul McCord @ 5:01 am
Tags: , , , ,

The Value Of Trust, A Clients Perspective
By Joe Heller

One of the most challenging, if not the most difficult piece of the business development puzzle in a sale is - Trust. Trust today is truly the pivotal point of building a successful business relationship. Trust is rarely tied to a product or service but it is facilitated by the person interacting with the customer. Why is this important? Because everything depends on trust and in this day and age, trust is difficult to come by.

The “trust” question arises more often with the sale of a service, simply because you cannot see or touch the product. This means, there is no visible brand, other than you, so you become the representative for quality. Because of the downward spiral of ethics in business today, it is no longer simply a matter of a product being trustworthy, you must convince your clients that you are trustworthy. What you do and how you are perceived by a potential client sets the tone for how they view your entire organization.

A recent study found that selling competencies for professional service firms are explicitly focused on defining the element of trust from their client’s perspective. The study also revealed after interviewing nearly one thousand people they found that trust has three essential elements in the eyes of a future client.

Candor: Clients value honesty when dealing with a service provider. They want the person to be straight forward about what will and what won’t work about their solution as it relates to their problem. They respect and appreciate your candor so if you don’t know the answer and let your client know that in fact “you don’t know” creates a foundation for a solid business relationship.

Competence: Clients want and need to believe that you know exactly what you are doing. They need to feel there is a low level of risk involved in working with you. Remember, because they cannot see and touch your service, your ability to solve their problem becomes the focal point for your client relationship. Your competence truly represents the product in the client’s mind.

Concern: From a client’s perspective, the most important element of trust is concern. Clients want to know you not only understand their problems but you have the ability to empathize with them and feel their pain. They want to know you are concerned about them and the business issues that go beyond the typical sales rhetoric it takes to land a new client.

The importance of candor, competence and concern are essential for developing trust. The absence of any one element can lose a deal. The challenge is that most people when engaged in a selling scenario is that they are not very good at demonstrating each of the three C’s. In both the professional services study and in parallel studies conducted with product sales forces, the element of concern was most frequently deemed missing. Clients felt that while most professionals were competent and/or candid, when it came to concern they fell short. They were interested in making a sale as it related to their service. As a result, they failed to really listen for the prospect concerns; and when a trust breakdown occurred? Ultimately the sale broke down as well.

A quick comparison from the study, using a score of 100 as the highest level of trust shows us that service sales people consistently score a 35 on concern versus a product sales person scoring a 53 on concern. As you can see, when compared with product sales, service providers receive an unexpected surprise. They immediately fall 20 points behind a tangible or product sale in the area of concern. Yet, as professionals, they are used to thinking of themselves as deeply concerned about their clients. They are often surprised and offended if anyone suggests they don’t put their clients’ interests first. As the research shows, this is not how they come across to a potential client. Thus, not only do clients give service providers the lowest ratings on concern, they judge professional service sales people to be significantly less concerned about them than product sales people.

Why do clients see you as unconcerned? There are several reasons:

First, service providers listen for what they can solve rather than what is important to their clients. Prospective clients view service sales people including attorneys and accountants as sharks circling for a kill (we’ve all heard the jokes).

Second, service sales people are often too anxious to get to their solutions and fail to listen for the client’s real problem. Service sales people are seen as very seldom viewing the problem from the client’s side of the table. What’s needed is an ability to demonstrate their capability, to see the core business issues, and to drive the results that exceed clients expectations.

To reinforce and ensure success of a service-based sale, the one element of trust where you need to score an A+ is concern. Not only because it is the most important element to clients, it is the only trust element that your client can make a personal valid judgment. Keep in mind, it’s hard for a client to judge whether you are competent; its assumed that you should be sitting in front of him/her because your expertise in solving other client’s problems. Candor isn’t easy to judge either. It is tough to tell who is being totally honest and isn’t exaggerating. No matter what the selling scenario, the client will always decide emotionally whether or not the sale will move forward and support that decision with logic.

Why? Psychologically, if you don’t believe someone is concerned about helping you, you don’t trust them. And, lack of concern translates into suspicions about their competence and candor, which influences all three levels of the trust equation. If you’ve ever wondered why you’ve lost a sale you need to consider how often clients have drawn the same conclusions about you. Trust is not a prepackaged emotion, it is something that has to be earned and it can only be developed through the interactions you have with your clients.

Joe is President of The Sales Samurai, a strategic and tactical field level sales coaching firm, a keynote presenter, and a speaker at corporate sales meetings, executive forums and to sales teams globally. His website is www.salessamurai.com

March 26, 2008

Guest Article: “Trust in Business: The Core Concepts,” by Charles H. Green

Filed under: Client Relationships, sales, selling, trust — Paul McCord @ 5:42 am
Tags: , , , ,

Trust in Business: The Core Concepts
By Charles H. Green

Trust relationships are vital to the conduct of business. Some base level of trust is required just to have employment contracts, or to engage in commercial transactions. Beyond such minimum thresholds, trust also plays a major role.

The level of trust in business relationships—whether external, e.g. in sales or advisory roles, or internal, e.g. in a services function—is a greater determinant of success than anything else, including content excellence.

How can we think about trust? What conceptual frameworks do we need in order to intelligently assess and improve on trust relationships, and in particular on our levels of trustworthiness?

This article lays out the core trust models I have developed and adopted over the years. They are taken from The Trusted Advisor (with Maister and Galford, Free Press, 2000), and Trust-based Selling (McGraw-Hill, 2006). There are three.

1. The Trust Equation: a deconstructive, analytical model of the components of trustworthiness;

2. The Trust Creation Process: a process model of trust creation through personal interaction—mainly conversations;

3. The Trust Principles: four principles, or values, which serve as guides to decision-making and conduct to increase trust.

The Trust Equation

Trust is a bi-lateral relationship—one trusts, and the other is the trusted. While the two are related, they’re not the same thing. The trust equation is a model for the second—the one who would be trusted. It is about trustworthiness.

Often we intend more than one thing when we use the word trust. We use it to describe what we think of what people say. We also use it to describe behaviors. We use it to describe whether or not we feel comfortable sharing certain information with someone else. And we use the same word to indicate whether or not we feel other people have our interests at heart, vs. their own interests.

Those four variables can be described as Credibility, Reliability, Intimacy, and Self-Orientation. They can be combined in an equation.

The Trust Equation
Trust Equasion
Credibility has to do with the words we speak. In a sentence, we might say, “I can trust what she says about intellectual property; she is very credible on the subject. By contrast, reliability has to do with actions. We might say, for example, “If he says he’ll deliver the product tomorrow, I trust him, because he’s dependable.”

Intimacy refers to the safety or security that we feel when entrusting someone with something. We might say, “I can trust her with that information; she’s never violated my confidentiality before, and she would never embarrass me.”

Self-orientation refers to the focus of the person in question. In particular, whether the person’s focus is primarily on himself or herself or on the other person. We might say, “I can’t trust him on this deal—I don’t think he cares enough about me, he’s focused on what he gets out of the deal.” Or—more commonly—“I don’t trust him—I think he was too concerned about how he was appearing, so he wasn’t really paying attention.”

Increasing the value of the factors in the numerator increases the value of trust. Increasing the value of the denominator—that is, self-orientation—decreases the value of trust.

Since there is only one variable in the denominator and three in the numerator, the most important factor is self-orientation. This is intentional. A seller with low self-orientation is free to really, truly, honestly focus on the customer. Not for his own sake, but for the sake of the customer. Such a focus is rare among salespeople (or people in general, for that matter).

Looking at trust this way covers most of the common meanings of trust that we encounter in everyday business interactions. Note that the meanings are almost entirely personal, not institutional.

People don’t primarily trust institutional entities, they trust other people. The components of credibility and reliability are sometimes used to describe companies or Websites, but at least as often to describe people. The other components—intimacy and self-orientation—are almost entirely about people.

Trust in selling requires good “scores” on all four variables in the equation. But the most important, by far, is low levels of self-orientation.

Living the four trust values is the best way to increase your trustworthiness.


The Trust Creation Process

Trust typically gets created at the individual level, between people, and usually in conversations. The Trust Creation Process is a five-step model for that process:
Trust Process

1. Engage the client in an open discussion about issues that are key to the client;

2. Listen to what is important and real to the client; earn the right to offer solutions;

3. Frame the true root issue, without the language of blame, via caveats, problem statements and hypotheses; take personal risks to explore sensitive issues—articulate a point of view; create by giving away;

4. Envision an alternate reality, including win-win specific descriptions of outcomes and results, including emotional and political states; clarify benefits—make clear what’s at stake; be tangible about future states;

5. Commit to actionable next steps that imply significant commitment and movement on the part of each party.

The order in which these sentences occur in a conversation has as much impact as the sentences themselves. That is, you could do a wonderful job on framing the issue or on the commitment to action—but if you do them before you do listening, then the trust process breaks down, or freezes. This becomes clearer when we translate the trust creation process into a sales context, as follows:

Engage: I hear X may be an issue for you—is that right?

Listen: Gee, that’s interesting; tell me more; what’s behind that?

Frame: It sounds like what you may have here is a case of Q.

Envision: How will things look three years from now if we fix this?

Commit: What if we were to do Z?

The most powerful step in the Trust Creation Process by far is the Listening step. The two most common errors in practice are:

a. Inadequate listening, and
b. Jumping too quickly to the final, action, step.

The Trust Principles

Being or becoming trustworthy cannot be reduced to pure behaviors. You can’t bottle it in a competency model. Our actions are driven by our beliefs, and our beliefs are driven by our values or principles. Trustworthy behavior is way too complex to fake without the beliefs and values behind them. If your values don’t drive you to behave in a trustworthy manner all the time, you’ll be found out quickly.

Hence, the Trust Equation and the way we use the Trust Creation Process model are really just outcomes of the principles we hold. The way to become trusted is to act consistently from those principles—and not just any set of principles will do. There are four specific principles governing trustworthy behavior:

1. A focus on the Other (client, customer, internal co-worker, boss, partner, subordinate) for the Other’s sake, not just as a means to one’s own ends.

We often hear “client-focus,” or “customer-centric.” But these are terms all-too-often framed in terms of economic benefit to the person trying to be trusted.

2. A collaborative approach to relationships.

Collaboration here means a willingness to work together, creating both joint goals and joint approaches to getting there.

3. A medium to long term relationship perspective, not a short-term transactional focus.

Focus on relationships nurtures transactions; but focus on transactions chokes off relationships. The most profitable relationships for both parties are those where multiple transactions over time are assumed in the approach to each transaction.

4. A habit of being transparent in all one’s dealings.

Transparency has the great virtue of helping recall who said what to whom. It also increases credibility, and lowers self-orientation, by its willingness to keep no secrets.

Applying these principles to all of our actions will develop the fullest possible sort of trusting relationship.
Copyright 2008, Charles H. Green.

Charles H. Green is one of the world’s foremost authorities on building and maintaining trust in business relationships. Visit his website at http://www.trustedadvisor.com

Paul McCord of the Sales and Sales Management Blog may be reached at pmccord@mccordandassociates.com

Next Page »

Blog at WordPress.com.