I recently accepted a cold call from an insurance guy because I was thinking of switching providers. Instead of facilitating my buying decision, the bias in his questions terminated our connection:
TODD: Hello Ms. Morgen. I’m Todd with XYZ. Are you interested in new car insurance?
SDM: I am.
TODD: Is your main concern lowering your costs?
SDM: No.
TODD: You don’t care about saving money?
SDM: Of course I do.
TODD: So your main concern IS lowering your costs?
SDM: No.
TODD: So what is it?
SDM: I’m interested in a personal connection, in knowing that if I have an accident I will be handled by someone who will take care of me.
TODD: I can promise you I’ll take care of you. My clients love me. Do you want to discuss how much you’ll save?
And, we were done.
Good sellers and coaches pose better questions than Todd’s, of course. But the conversation exemplifies how a Questioner’s biased questions can significantly influence outcomes.
THE BIAS INHERENT IN QUESTIONS
Questions restrict answers to the assumptions and biases of the Questioner; Responders respond within the limits set by the question. Asking someone “What did you have for breakfast?” won’t elicit the answer “I bought a lamp.” Even questions that attempt to open a dialogue, like “What can you tell me about the problem?” or gather data, like “Who’s in charge of decision making?” merely elicit top-of-mind responses that my not effectively represent – and indeed might cloud – the issue. Biased question; biased answer.
Sometimes questions are so biased and restricted that the real answer might get overlooked. ‘Do you prefer the red ball or the blue ball?’ excludes not only the green ball, but a preference for a bat, or a discussion about the Responder’s color blindness. But a question such as: ‘What sort of a game implement could be easily carried and engage all employees?” might elicit a response of a ball or marbles or Monopoly and include more team members.
Most questions pull or push the data sought by the Questioner, making it difficult to know if
- the communication partners make the same assumptions;
- the wording of the question is ideal;
- a better answer exists outside the limits of the question;
- the question encompasses the full set of possible responses.
What if the best answer is outside of the framework of the question? Or the question isn’t translated accurately by the Responder? Or there is an historic bias between the Questioner and Responder that makes communication difficult?
FACILITATIVE QUESTIONS
Questions can be used to facilitate choice, to lead Responders to new options within their own (often unconscious) value system, rather than as set ups to the Questioner’s self-serving objectives. Using a Facilitative Question, the above dialogue would sound like this:
TODD: Hi Ms. Morgen. I’m Todd, an insurance agent with XYZ Corp. I’m selling car insurance. Is this a good time to speak?
SDM: Sure.
TODD: I’m wondering: If you are considering changing your insurance provider, what would you need to know about another provider to be certain you’d end up getting the coverage and service you deserve?
The question – carefully worded to match a Responder’s criteria for change – shifts the bias from Todd’s self-serving objectives to enabling me in a true discovery process; from his selling patterns to my buying patterns. How different our interaction would have been if his goal was to facilitate my buying decision path rather than using his misguided persuasion tactics to sell.
I developed Facilitative Questions decades ago to enable any Questioner to facilitate someone’s route to congruent change. With no manipulation or bias, they require a different form of listening, wording, and objectives, thereby avoiding resistance and encouraging trust between sellers, coaches, consultants and their clients.
Take a look at your own questioning strategy to see if they might work for you:
*How are your questions perceived by your Responders? How do you know? What’s your risk?
*How do your questions address a unique Responder’s decision criteria?
*How do your questions bias, restrict, enhance, or ignore possibilities?
*What criteria to you use to choose the words to formulate questions?
*To ensure any new skills would work effectively with your successful skills, what would you need to know or consider before adopting additional question formulation skills?
Remember: your innate curiosity or intuition may not be sufficient to facilitate another’s unconscious route to change – or buy – congruently. You can always gather data once the route to change is established and you’re both on the same page. Change the goals of your questions from discovering situations you can provide answers for, to facilitating real core change. Before buyers or clients will work with you, they have to do this for themselves anyway. You might as well do it with them and create a trusting relationship.
____________
See my new Entrepreneur Programs: Getting Funded; Creating a Selling Machine; Marketing to Buying Decisions
____________
Sharon Drew Morgen is a Change Facilitator, specializing in buy-in and change management. She is well known for her original thinking in sales (Buying Facilitation®) and listening (www.didihearyou.com). She currently designs scripts, programs, and materials, and coaches teams, for several industries to enable true buy-in and collaboration. Sharon Drew is the author of 9 books, including the NYTimes Business Bestseller Selling with Integrity, and the Amazon bestsellers Dirty Little Secrets – why buyers can’t buy and sellers can’t sell, and What? Did you really say what I think I heard? Sharon Drew has worked with dozens of global corporations as a consultant, trainer, coach, and speaker. She can be reached at sharondrew@sharondrewmorgen.com 512 771 1117
Sharon Drew Morgen February 19th, 2018
Posted In: News
There are currently more than 165,000 healthcare apps used for a variety of purposes – helping patients routinize new dietary choices and exercise programs, patient engagement, collecting measurements and feedback for providers, managing clinical trials, and care coordination to name a few. The virtual healthcare system is revolutionizing health care. It’s exciting.
But to me, one element seems missing: other than a few attempts at behavior modification, I haven’t noticed any targeted capability to formalize lasting patient compliance. We’re providing patients the What and Why, but not doing such a great job on the How. It’s a conundrum: Why don’t patients do what they know they need to do? Why isn’t a rational argument, or a health scare, or trust in a provider, enough to inspire behavior change?
KNOWLEDGE DOESN’T ENABLE BEHAVIOR CHANGE
For those times we believe our patients need to change behaviors for improved health benefits, we’re not doing such a great job of helping them change. Indeed, we’re asking patients to change before they know how, causing resistance and non-compliance. But with a slight adjustment it’s possible to help them adopt and routinize new health-driven behaviors – in office or on apps – and avoid resistance completely. The first element to consider is behavior. What are behaviors, and why are they so hard to change?
Behaviors are merely the expression – the representation – of our Beliefs; the translations of our values into practice; our Beliefs in action. Without Beliefs as the foundation of our actions, new behaviors have no source.
Think of it this way: behaviors express our Beliefs much like the functionality of a software program – the upward movement of an arm on a robot, for example – is a result of the programming. To change the output, to make the robot’s arm do something different, you don’t start by changing the functionality; you first change the coding, the programming that causes the robot’s arm to move. A change in the programming will automatically change the functionality. It’s the same with people: our behaviors merely carry out what our internal programming (our human system, as I call it) dictates, regardless of the problems that result or the efficacy of a solution that might adjust them.
CHANGE IS A SYSTEMS PROBLEM
Each of us operates out of a unique, unconscious, human, adaptive system of rules and goals, beliefs and values, history and foundational norms that enable us to show up every day and operate in our own unique way. Our personal system is our status quo. It represents who we are and the organizing principles that we wake up with. It’s habituated, normalized, accepted, and replicated day after day, year after year, including what created and maintains our potentially flawed behaviors. It’s who we are, the identity and internal rules and Beliefs from which we derive our politics and religion and opinions; and we’ll do whatever it takes to maintain it and remain congruent – operate daily as who we know ourselves to be. The problems – the bugs, inadequacies, bad habits, quirks and personality traits – are baked in; we adopt clever, idiosyncratic workarounds to maintain them because, well, they’re part of our system and we adapt: gaining weight? Buy a bigger size. Coughing a lot? Suck on lozenges.
When we offer patients suggestions that haven’t been incorporated into their system, we’re actually threatening who they are and how they see themselves; regardless of their need to change or the efficacy of the offered solution, we’re actually asking people to
- act incongruently,
- change without giving them the means to,
- take on new actions that have not been programmed in to their system,
- get buy-in from the very rules that created the problem to begin with.
Of course we offer healthy options. But that’s not the point; their resistance is unconscious. Until or unless someone recognizes that a proposed change won’t cause permanent disruption to who they are, AND can discover how their beliefs, goals and routines can safely, congruently expand to include new behaviors, AND manage any fallout in a way that leaves the system butter-side-up, people will not change regardless of their need or your solution.
PATIENT EXAMPLE
Here’s a very simple example. Years ago, my neighbor Maria came over crying. It seems she was just diagnosed as pre-diabetic and had to change her eating habits including discontinuing her beloved tortillas. As a Hispanic woman with a very large family living nearby, she was known as Tortilla Abuela and supplied tortillas for all family functions. There were kids and grandkids around all the time seeking tortillas; Abuela was constantly at the stove making them. I’m not sure I ever saw her without her apron on. Of course she and her husband Joe ate them at every meal.
I brought her to Whole Foods and we found healthy non-grain flour and types of healthier shortening, but we knew it wouldn’t be the same. Maria gallantly tried for two weeks but she and the family were miserable; she finally gave up and went back to the lard and starch. “What can I do? It’s who I am.” she said.
I posed a Facilitative Question to help her figure out how to make change and still remain compliant with her Beliefs and status quo:
Facilitative Question: What would you need to know or believe differently to be able to provide your family the food they depend on you for, and still eat in a healthy way so you’ll be cooking for them for a long, long time?
Answer: I’d need to find a new way to get them tortillas that taste like mine, replace what I can’t eat with healthy options that my family will still love, and still be the one they depend on for favorite foods.
Now we had a direction to go. Food and tortillas were part of her core identity – baked in to her system, and necessary for her to maintain her role as family nourisher. We set about finding a route through to health AND food AND family. On reflection, Maria recognized her daughter Susanna made tortillas almost as good as hers, and, aside from her famous tortillas, her family loved her green enchiladas (sans tortillas, they were healthy and compliant with her doc’s suggestions) almost as much as her tortillas.
Her workaround was quite creative, one that I, as an outsider to her family, could never have conceived. She invited everyone over for dinner and served her famous enchiladas. Then, in grand presentation fashion complete with a bow, formally handed the tortilla implements to Susanna. She announced that because of her new health issues that kept her from eating tortillas, Susanna would now be Tortilla Tia but she’d still be making the green enchiladas for every family function. The family would get their tortillas and their enchiladas, and have a healthy Abuela.
WHAT TO ADD TO HEALTHCARE APPS
In our passion as healthcare providers we forget that regardless of our bona fides, the patient’s need, or the trust we’ve acquired, we’re outsiders: we cannot effect change for the patient; they must design their own path to congruent change.
When we design apps that offer patients our choices, ask patients for information we need, and don’t include an ability for them to design their own path to compliance in line with their own system of Beliefs, rules and experiences, we’re overlooking the need to facilitate patients through their change process.
Over the past decades, I’ve developed a Change Facilitation model I’ve taught to sales people, coaches, and leaders that facilitates their internal, personal decision path through to congruent change. In the sales industry, I’ve trained Buying Facilitation® for the past 35 years to many global corporations – around 100,000 people in companies such as IBM, Kaiser, Cancer Treatment Center of America, Morgan Stanley, KPMG, DuPont, California Closets, etc. – to results that far exceed those achieved by the sales model alone (In pilot studies, we’ve consistently achieved close rates of 40% using the same list that the control groups closed 5%.); we teach potential buyers – regardless of the price/complexity of a solution – how to organize themselves around the change of adding a new solution before we sell. In other words, this model has already been tested.
It involves several skills to facilitate unbiased guidance to help people make their unconscious more conscious, including 1. a new type of question that acts as a GPS to guide people along their own normalized, idiosyncratic route of change; 2. stops along each of the 13 change steps that all human systems traverse to make congruent change. Here’s a brief overview of two of the skills involved with the process:
Facilitative Questions: a new form of question that uses specific non-biased words in a specific sequence to lead people through their own internal, congruent, change process, to avoid resistance and advance discovery. They’re not information gathering, pull, manipulative, or biased by the needs of the Questioner; it’s a sort of GPS that efficiently moves people, without bias, through their own largely unconscious systems to design a path to congruent change while creating trust along the way [Note: especially on an app, it’s important to establish a ‘trusting relationship’ with users.]. Usually asked within a series, here’s a very simplistic example of a Facilitative Question.
How would you know if it were time to reconsider your hairstyle?
As a contrast, here’s a simple conventional information-pull question that matches the needs and biases of the Questioner (and note: all conventional questions are information-pull, driven by the [biased] needs of the questioner):
Why do you wear your hair like that?
It’s possible to design Facilitative Questions in a generic fashion that can
- traverse the sequence a patient’s brain uses to
- recognize the norms that must be addressed,
- adapt the status quo, add and routinize new behaviors congruently,
- facilitate buy-in, Belief change, and compliance with new programs
as an add-on to healthcare apps. Additionally, it’s possible to message our questions and requests – patient intake forms and surveys, search for patients who will remain compliant during the length of a study, the incorporation of family to support the change – so patients can respond without resistance.
Change Facilitation: although patients know there’s something wrong and probably should do something differently, they can’t permanently change until their system
- recognizes how, when, and where to change without anhialation or disruption,
- doesn’t feel threatened or resistant and achieves buy-in from the effected parts,
- designs a route between the old and the new in a way that maintains Systems Congruence.
Our apps can add a front-end feature that employs Facilitative Questions in the right sequence, to lead patients through their own idiosyncratic steps of change so they can plot a path that matches their own Beliefs, rules, and life experience. We can enable healthcare apps to first facilitate patient buy-in, highlight their potential points of resistance as the change progresses, and help them design a route through to congruent, enduring compliance, regardless of the change desired – routinized exercise and food regimens, patient retention, patient engagement, and data collection for example.
I’d like to help be part of the effort that affords patients the ability to choose health, positioning providers to be true Servant Leaders. I look forward to working with the healthcare industry to optimize patient engagement.
____________
Sharon Drew Morgen is an original thinker, inventor, and author of a NYTimes Business Bestseller (Selling with Integrity) and two Amazon Bestsellers (Dirty Little Secrets – why buyers can’t buy and sellers can’t sell, and What? Did you really say what I think I heard?) as well as 7 other books and 1700 published articles.She is the inventor of Buying Facilitation® and Change Facilitation models that help influencers help their clients to manage congruent change. Sharon Drew founded The Dystonia Society while living in the UK, during her stint as the founder of a tech start up in 1983. Sharon Drew lives on a floating home, on the Columbia River in Portland OR. Her blog award winning blog, www.sharondrewmorgen.com, features original essays on sales, leadership, communication, systems, change, and influencing. sharondrew@sharondrewmorgen.com
Sharon Drew Morgen January 22nd, 2018
Posted In: News
Given what’s going on in the world these days, I thought we all might need a bit of Sweet. Enjoy. SD
In 1981, I was a single parent of a young disabled son, working a full time job, living in Park Slope Brooklyn. Given my constant state of overwhelm, I decided to get a group of parents together to see if we could find ways to parent without nagging, or threatening, or cajoling, and maybe even free up time for us to enjoy our kids. I doubted I was the only parent in overwhelm mode. I put together a bit of a program design and convinced the local library to give me a room one night a week for 8 weeks for a Parenting with Integrity program. They gave me a room, coffee, and advertising. They were terrific.
About 10 parents showed up (although it grew) – mainly families from the police force and city workers, couples and single people. Agreeing how deeply we respected the individuality of our kids, and taking our jobs as parents seriously, we began with a core value to avoid the nasty ‘parent’ stuff of cajoling, punishing and threatening. We formulated our agenda: develop thinking that led to enabling our kids to safely, ethically make and recognize their own best choices, with life lessons imbedded.
One of the women had 5 kids aged 8-16. Susan complained that her mornings were hell trying to get them all dressed and fed and out the door. By the time she got to work, she said, it took her an hour to recover from the yelling and screaming and chasing and reminding and name calling and… We put our heads together and came up with a plan.
Over dinner the next night, Susan told the kids how their chaotic mornings left her unhappy and frazzled. So to make sure she got to work happy, and make sure their days would start off nicely, she was going to change a few things starting the next morning: She would announce when it was 7:00 a.m. and say it loudly to make sure everyone could hear; then, as she got herself dressed and prepared breakfast, she’d give them 5 minute updates until they all left the house at 7:45. She would no longer fight with them over getting up, eating breakfast, clothes or misplaced items. She assumed they would awake with either her voice or their alarm clocks, and eat breakfast if they were hungry. She assumed that whatever they were wearing at 7:45 when they left the house were the clothes they wanted to wear that day. And she wouldn’t wait for any of them: if they weren’t at the door at 7:45, they’d have to find their own way to school.
And she was hilariously, fiercely, deadly serious.
The next morning, Susan cheerfully chirped “It’s 7:00 a.m. Morning everyone!” Then again at 7:05. ”Hi kids. It’s 7:05. Hey, did you see that the trees are beginning to bud? Take a look later. Pretty.” 7:10: “I have pancakes for everyone on the table for whoever’s hungry.” And so on, until 7:45 when she got to the front door to leave. Indeed, there were 5 children waiting. And 3 of them actually had clothes on. The other 2 wore pajamas. Without saying a word, Susan cheerfully got them into the car, put on her favorite CD and sang all the way to their schools. During the drive not a word was spoken.
Two principals called her that day. Here was her conversation with one of them: “Did you know your daughter is wearing her pajamas today?” Yup. That’s what she wanted to wear. “Um. OK. Just checking. I think the kids are making fun of her. But I’ve seen worse. Good luck.”
At 7:45 the next morning, all 5 kids were ready and dressed. She never had another bad morning.
Wouldn’t it be nice if we always knew how to create the circumstances that enable each other be our best selves?
____________
Sharon Drew Morgen is the thought leader behind Change Facilitation. Used in sales (Buying Facilitation®, coaching, leadership, and any type of buy-in, her original models enable people to go beyond bias to creativity, integrity, and excellence – all with collaboration and involvement. Sharon Drew is the author of nine books, including the NYTimes Business Bestseller Selling with Integrity, and the Amazon bestseller’s Dirty Little Secrets: why buyers can’t buy and sellers can’t sell, and What? Did you really say what I think I heard? Her award winning blog carries thought pieces and practical essays on helping buyers buy, enabling ethical collaboration and communication, and why mainstream thinking doesn’t always cause success. Sharon Drew is a speaker, consultant, coach, and trainer.
Sharon Drew Morgen December 4th, 2017
Posted In: Change Management
I recently took a cold call from Comcast – the first cold call I’ve ever taken. With my two year contract just about up, I was interested in finding cheap deals moving forward. Here was the call:
Comcast: Hi Sharon. I’m Pete from Comcast, wanting to help you sort through your options with your TV programming since your current package expires in December.
SDM: Pete, my first name is Sharon Drew, never Sharon. Always both names, ok? Thanks. I was going to call you anyway. My free HBO and Showtime are expiring. Can you tell me how much will it cost me once they go up? Is there a different 2 year plan I can sign up for that would keep my rate about the same?
Comcast: Well, Sharon, I…
SDM: Excuse me, Pete. Sharon Drew. My first name is Sharon Drew.
Comcast: Um, ok. Well. I’m glad you asked. Given what you’ve got now, I think I can actually upgrade your programs and still save you money. We have a package that does X. It will give you XYZ, similar to what you have now with two added channels, but costs less.
SDM: What’s the downside? What do I gain? Lose?
Comcast: Everything is exactly the same, except you’ll get two more channels and pay less.
SDM: Exactly the same? Cheaper? More programs? Cool.
Comcast: Yup. Exactly the same and cheaper. I can send you the paperwork, and you can see for yourself.
He then texted me a link to a contract to pay; within the contract was another link to details. I clicked and noticed inconsistencies.
SDM: This is more expensive! You’ve unbundled each feature and charged separately, so I’d pay $45 more than if I just let my current deal expire in December.
Comcast: Everyone pays for those things. You couldn’t have Comcast if we didn’t offer those features.
SDM: That’s not what I said; and you’re making the argument murky. You said it would be the same and cheaper with two new channels. But it’s not cheaper; services are unbundled and charged out individually on top of the quoted rate, causing me to pay more than I would with my next contract. Sounds like you’re lying to me or at least trying to muddle the facts so it just appears that I’d be saving money. What am I missing?
Comcast: Silence. Silence. Click.
As my provider, as the company/behemoth to whom I give thousands of dollars annually, Comcast owes me honesty, no? And aren’t they big enough to not try to dupe customers who would have pressed ‘Pay’ without reading the ‘fine print?’ Surely lying can’t be the preferred avenue to successful upselling, although I’m sure sometimes sales folks ‘do whatever it takes’ to get the commission without the sanction of their supervisors. In this case I actually redialed Comcast and said I wanted to renew my plan. When the seller looked up my account, she did exactly what the first guy did – same promise, same spiel, same text/link. Sadly it seems Comcast is training their reps this way.
WHY BUYERS BUY UPSELLS
As vendors, our job is to serve our clients and customers; our products are the path to serving, so we’re a ‘customer service company that provides web design services,’ or a ‘customer service company that provides financial services.’ As such, answering questions and solving problems are part of the promise implicit in a purchase. [PERSONAL NOTE: Any time we betray our clients’ trust and don’t deliver on the promise inherent in their purchase, and any time we lie to our customers, they have the right to choose another provider who will be honest.]
One of our services is letting customers know when we develop an upgrade; our success at upselling depends on how we connect to inform them.
Who is a suitable buyer? There are two inbuilt problems:
- The only customers who will buy an upgrade are happy customers who already trust us and have taken us into their daily lives and habits. [Customers who don’t like our solution or don’t trust us will never buy again and aren’t prospects for upselling. Remember that, when designing customer support programs like help desks and call centers.]
- In the homes and offices of happy customers, our solution/service has become habituated; clients have developed a system of people, policies, behaviors, or habits that are in place when using the product and they’re doing very well, thanks.The problem is not in convincing them to buy a bigger/better add-on because it’s, well, bigger/better, but to help them figure out how to manage whatever change and disruption the upgrade would require.For example, if users are happily using the software they bought from you, they’d need to… to what? Take additional training and incur downtime? Face disruption that would carry a cost? Maybe buying newer services could cause more downside than upside. By merely focusing on features and functions, the real problem is overlooked: the focus of their objection is change.
The fact that they will be ‘better’ with an upgrade is most likely accurate, but beside the point. We each ‘know’ we’d be better if we stopped smoking/lost weight/jogged/meditated/were kinder, etc. But knowing isn’t the point. The problem is the change – the time, disruption, confusion, political or relationship risks, etc. – involved in altering an established pattern. (Note: I’ve coded the steps to congruent change to help you understand what buyers must do before they can buy.)
When we introduce and describe our new solutions, when we focus on introducing and pitching the value of our solution, we ignore the biggest factor that inhibits buying: as outsiders we can’t know how the purchase would affect the buyer’s environment and use routines – the relationships, politics, time factors, etc. – which may change, or might be perceived to change, with an upgrade. Before they buy, they must understand the extent of any disruption to determine if it’s worth it to them: a trouble-free working environment and nominal cost supersedes need. Remember: they find the current version ‘good-enough’ as it is; they have people and policies in place and have factored in the costs and resource. Habit and status quo may supersede benefits.
I’ve got a story. IBM was seeking local users of an old OS to place a new Beta test version, with a goal of visiting, testing, questioning, etc. There was a possible user right down the road and IBM was eager to enlist them. But three different sales reps tried to engage this user to no avail. Nope, we’re happy. Yes, our current OS is very slow and we understand this new, free, one would make our jobs easier and workflow faster. Nope. We don’t want the beta.
Since I was already there running a Buying Facilitation® training they asked me to try. The phone call follows:
SDM: My name is Sharon Drew Morgen and I’m calling from IBM. Is this a good time to speak?
CUSTOMER: Sure. How can I help you? [Note: I was fascinated that just about everyone took a cold call from IBM.]
SDM: I am following up from my colleague’s call re giving you a free beta OS, and I heard that you’re really happy using the OS you’ve got in place now. Seems it’s working really well for you and you don’t seem to mind its speed.
CUSTOMER: It is slow. But we like it.
SDM: What’s stopping you from considering adding more speed to the one you’re using now?
CUSTOMER: Dad.
SDM: Excuse me? Dad? What does that mean?
CUSTOMER: We’re a Mom and Pop shop. My dad is the Pop. He’s 75, and will be retiring next year. He’s in charge of the technology, and he’s not as sharp as he once was. We’re not going to add anything to his plate, and wait til he retires to upgrade whatever we need to.
SDM: Ah. That makes sense. I wonder how hard our new OS is to learn or use. I could find out. What would you and Dad need to know to be willing to experience whether or not the new OS would be simple enough, just in case there came a time when you wanted to accommodate all your new users?
CUSTOMER: I’d need to know that Dad would have no difficulty or confusion, and it would be easy and seamless to implement with no glitches.
SDM: We happen to have a functioning beta site for this product right down the street from you. Would you and Dad be willing to join me and visit them to try it out? Then, if Dad likes it and you find it more efficient, we could then discuss you being a possible beta site for us?
CUSTOMER: Sure.
It all went well, IBM got a new Beta test site and the customer got a free upgrade. It’s not about an upgrade; it’s about their readiness for change. And as outsiders, we can never know where a ‘Dad’ is and have no opportunity to lead them through a different decision.
Convincer and information strategies close the low hanging fruit. Each customer has unique ‘givens’ that have created and maintained their status quo; they’re not ‘stupid buyers’, they just must manage their own internal integrity. And the conventional sales approach assumes that the features, functions, and benefits will convince them to buy, ignoring the ‘how’ or ‘if’ or ‘why’ or ‘when’ to handle any disruption caused to their system by addiing a new element to their status quo with no route to address change for what’s already in place.
In summation:
- The target audience consists only of those who are happy using the solution they purchased (and that those who don’t would most likely never buy anything more);
- Conventional sales merely closes the low hanging fruit – those ready, willing, and able to manage any change inherent in an upgrade. Do blanket outreach with questionnaires, surveys, contests, prizes, to find these ready buyers, or find creative ways to target them specifically.
- It’s possible to facilitate buyers through their change process, as in the Dad story above, and broaden the buyer base.
What is the suitable vehicle? There are certainly several ways to facilitate upselling with integrity. When customers call in, ensure an integrous connection with someone or something in your company; provide a wonderful opportunity to exhibit respect and care. Each vehicle requires a different approach but includes the goal of facilitating change and managing the change-over to new routines.
OUTGOING UPSELL:
Cold Calling with Integrity: Happy customers have more of a willingness to take a call. Use this as an opportunity to serve them by facilitating change. I designed Buying Facilitation® to specifically facilitate the buyer’s steps of change and decision making; or design your own unique Change Facilitation model that quickly helps them think through routes to managing any disruption, and adds product pitch once the customer is ready. Remember: unless a prospect can positively address their change, use, and habituation issues, they will not buy regardless of need or the strength of your solution.
Email outreach: Current email blasts focus on introducing reasons to buy the upgrade. It’s possible to add ‘implementation features’ or ‘ways to get your cell phone recycled’, or ideas to mitigate whatever change your particular solution might incur. For this I recommend you research the routines and issues current customers face when using your solution. When researching this for my clients, I call several existing happy customers and ask the ‘how’ of their routines, and I include the Facilitative Question: What would keep you from adding an upgrade to what you’re currently doing successfully?
INCOMING UPSELL
Help desk: Currently, help desks suck. With a focus on time rather than service, we get customers enraged and frustrated. This is a wasted opportunity. When working with Quest years ago, we taught the reps to help customers figure out how and if an upgrade would serve them; we brought the help desk upgrade rate from $300 a month to $2100 a month per rep.
Tech support: See above: this is a great opportunity to serve. You’re wasting it by keeping people on hold and passing customers from pillar to post. Have ONE person own the incident to minimize the annoyance factor and use a Change Facilitation approach while on the phone. A great venue for upselling.
On-line chat: Reprogram responses to avoid the disrespect and annoyance that keeps customers from using this feature. Again, it can be a great opportunity for upselling if used correctly.
These are merely an introduction to ideas for more robust upselling. It’s possible to upsell a lot more than you’re now selling. Good luck.
____________
Sharon Drew Morgen is the developer of Change Facilitation models, including Buying Facilitation®, an addon to sales that leads buyers through their Pre-Sales steps to a purchase to enable Buyer Readiness. As an original thinker, she has written 9 books, including the NYTimes Business Bestseller Selling with Integrity and the Amazon bestsellers Dirty Little Secrets: why buyers can’t buy and sellers can’t sell, and What? Did you really say what I think I heard? Sharon Drew trains, speaks, consults, and coaches in the areas of sales, coaching, leadership, communication, change, buy-in, and influencing. She can be reached at sharondrew@sharondrewmorgen.com. Her award winning blog has original articles and essays. www.sharondrewmorgen.com
Sharon Drew Morgen November 6th, 2017
Posted In: Communication, Sales
Starting with my confusion: I will never understand what it is about women that men are willing to get stupid over, become abusive for, lose integrity over; to be willing to harm or violate or ignore; to deny rights or pay or work opportunities (or remain silent when these things happen). I just don’t get it. Men treat pets with dignity. Take care of their cars. Respectfully attend to their jobs. Why are women in a separate category that makes us a potential object of harm when we’re merely people who want the same things men do?
Don’t get me wrong. A vast majority of men are kind, responsible, ethical, and integrous in their treatment of women. Until they get to work and unconsciously don’t hear a creative idea that comes from a woman (but welcomes that same idea from a man minutes later). Or fail to object when a colleague or business practice discounts women. Or inadvertently overlooks an applicant because her skill set ‘doesn’t seem right.’ Or rejects a funding proposal because the company is woman-run. I was once on a plane that had a 100% female crew; when it was announced, a male passenger grabbed his carry-on and got off the plane, not trusting that he’d get where he was going because women would be flying him there.
MY STORIES
Like many women in business I’ve spoken with, I’ve had my share of misogyny – innovative ideas ignored, sexual favors required, positions lost, funding denied. (I was denied funding for a killer idea in 1996, at the height of the tech boom when 4% of funding went to women. Now it’s up to 20%.). My pioneering ideas have been discounted; I’ve even been left out of conferences at which my original, and published, ideas were featured. SiriusDecisions included my model Buying Facilitation® in their deck discussing the future of sales – sans ®, and sans attribution. “Come on, Sharon Drew. Let us use it like that. We’ll tell you if we get calls on it.”
Indeed, some terms I coined were attributed to men 30 years after I coined them. After one particularly innovative article I published I received an email from a man who said, “Well, you’re certainly full of yourself, aren’t you?” (I cheerfully responded, “Yup.”). I wonder if he would have sent that to a man. Or if the Chairman of the Board would have offered to stop a Board meeting when I teared up with rage: “Oh! Um, shall we take a break for Sharon Drew?” I’m not an object of pity, you nitwit. I’m just livid. That’s what women do. We have visible feelings. (How did ‘no visible feelings’ become the standard anyway?)
I’ve been overlooked for positions I was well-qualified for as some unqualified man got the job. I’ve had prospective clients who actually said they wouldn’t choose me because I was a woman, even after a successful pilot. Years ago, following a pilot training for Morgan Stanley, the MD sent one of the brokers around the country to trial several sales training methods to see if they were anything like my Buying Facilitation® model. Why seek someone else when the results were so terrific, the broker asked? ‘She just doesn’t fit.’ Boston Scientific wouldn’t do further training when the pilot study brought a 53% increase in sales in ONE MONTH because I was too ‘controversial’.
I’ve had company-saving ideas ignored, project schedules countermanded. In 1985 I took out a full page ad in the London Financial Times that was blank except for the words The Quality is Free across the middle (company details in a small font on the bottom); an FT editor actually came to my office unannounced with content he’d written ‘for me’ to fill the page, saying he ‘wouldn’t let me make the mistake’ of wasting my money on an ad that size to only print a few words (Let’s see: was brand marketing wrong? or was it just that I was a silly woman?). I told him I wouldn’t discuss it but we should have a cuppa and talk football. The ad ran my way.
And don’t get me started on the sexual thing in the workplace. Clients showing up at my hotel room the night prior to a training program for a ‘nightcap.’ Or being harassed and taunted and pranked on the floor when I was the only woman stockbroker. One well-known speaker told me he’d get me some big gigs if he could touch my breasts. Imagine telling a man who’d written a New York Times Business Bestseller that he could get a speaking gig if the recruiter could touch his genitals. Not only do these things happen, but somehow we live in a world where it’s even thinkable.
WHY DO GENITALS MATTER?
How is it even possible that a particular set of genitalia ensures a human being will enjoy cleaning house or changing dirty diapers? I once witnessed the CEO of a large company hand his infant daughter back to his wife to change: “I don’t do that” he said, smiling as if it were obvious. Nobody LIKES doing it, you knucklehead! As a grown up you do what needs to be done! How is it that some men live in a world in which they only ‘need’ to do what’s convenient or fun?
And why is it a viable option to walk out on children without offering support? How many children grow up with no responsible male figure loving them? I knew a man who left his newborn son and partner because he ‘told her I never wanted a child.’ And yet, there he was, a son he never once held or supported in any way – the assumption being that the woman would do it (or the child would die?), and that the child would never mind that he was abandoned at birth and never know his father. And why don’t men ever know their kids’ shoe size? Betty Freidan once told me that until men did half of the childcare and housework, women would never be equal. Current statistics I’ve seen say men, on average, do one third of household and childcare tasks, even in two earner families (and that men actually cause 7 hours of additional housework).
What’s the deal? Women are strong, intelligent, fierce, creative, kind, loving, sexy, empathic, collaborative and responsible. We give birth (Men should try that sometime just for a bit of reality testing.), are the glue that holds together families and traditions and companies and lives. In business we think outside the box, are organized and compassionate, and fix relationships on teams, yet are historically underpaid in every industry, as well as under-represented as mayors, or CEOs, or leaders. Male colleagues have told me countless times they prefer hiring women because they cost less and over-perform. Companies suffer when women’s ideas aren’t heard or integrated into the mix; it’s a well-known fact that women managers are better leaders bringing heart and a unique view of the world that men can’t fathom. Seems men would rather suffer financial and creative loss than allow women to participate.
I’ll never, ever understand why any of this is ok, why silence prevails and why there isn’t a higher level of public outrage when one class of people denigrates and harms another. Although it shows up differently in each culture, each industry, each country, and each household, the need for ‘power’ and ‘control’ are said to be the cause. Seriously? Men don’t know the difference between real power and force? Men can only be powerful by putting down, harming, restricting, ignoring, or humiliating another human because her genitals are different? We’re human beings for goodness sakes – the other gender that populates the world, remember? Your wives and mothers and daughters and friends; your partners in life and work; inventors and poets and CEOs and factory workers – people with brains and hearts and passions and hopes for the future, just like men.
But my underlying wonderment is How. How can it be right to denigrate another human being? How is it possible that more than one half of our population is ‘less-than’ because we were born with a one set of genitals instead of another? How is it possible that this isn’t a political cause, like opioid addiction, or football injuries? That being female is an automatic filter that allows treatment in a one-down position?
Stop it, guys. Put on your big-boy pants and grow up. Seek, accept, respect, communicate, hear, and partner with the women in your life. You’ll be better for it. So will the world.
____________
Sharon Drew Morgen is an original thinker and thought leader, the author of 1700 articles and 9 books including NYTimes Business Bestseller Selling with Integrity and two Amazon bestsellers: Dirty Little Secrets – why buyers can’t buy and sellers can’t sell, and the game changing What? did you really say what I think I heard? the explains, and fixes, the gap between what’s said and what’s heard. Sharon Drew is the inventor of a Change Facilitation model that gives influencers a unique set of tools to facilitate congruent change for buyers in sales (Buying Facilitation®), leadership, coaching, and management. She is an inventor, speaker, trainer, consultant, and coach. Sharon Drew currently lives on a floating home in Portland, OR. Her award-winning blog www.sharondrewmorgen.com carries articles on communication, leadership, decision making, change, sales, and buying. She can be reached at sharondrew@sharondrewmorgen.com.
Sharon Drew Morgen October 16th, 2017
Posted In: Listening
At a neighborhood picnic recently, I introduced myself to five people standing together:
SDM: Hi. I’m Sharon Drew Morgen, and I use both names “Sharon Drew” as my first name. What’s your name?
JIM: Hi Sharon, I’m Jim. Nice meeting you.
SDM: Hi Jim. But, um, no. Actually my first name is Sharon Drew. I use both names.
JIM: Oh, that’s right, you just said that. Sorry. Nice meeting you, Sharon Drew.
SUSAN: Hi Sharon. I’m Susan.
SDM: Hi Susan. Actually, my first name is Sharon Drew and I always use both names.
SUSAN: Oh. Right. You just said that to Jim. Sorry. Hi Sharon Drew.
FELIX: Hi Sharon. I’m Felix.
SDM: Um, actually, my first name is Sharon Drew……
And so it continued around the circle. FIVE people – standing next to each other, and looking directly at me – didn’t ‘hear’ me explain repeatedly that I used two first names. Well, actually, they heard it. But because the name isn’t within their brain’s recognition of ‘typical’, it was filtered out of their conscious understanding. And we all do this on a regular basis.
WHY WE RESTRICT WHAT WE HEAR
We love, live, work, and play amongst those with similar values and beliefs, cultural norms and politics. We choose partners, jobs, neighborhoods, and friends that maintain our world views and allow us to lead relatively uncomplicated lives, seeking, avoiding or battling against ideas and people who challenge us. To accomplish this our brains filter what other say to us (regardless of the situation) biasing the message, making inaccurate assumptions, or following our brains through inappropriate memory channels and neural pathways to places that were unsaid and not meant. We hear what we want to hear and filter out the rest: it’s not our fault; our brains do it to us through filters and language itself:
- Pattern habituation:
a. We speak in one unbroken stream of words (Spaces appear only between written words.), that are differentiated only by those familiar with the language and vocabulary (Have you ever asked a question from a language book in a foreign country and get a response in a continuous stream of words that can’t be isolated to allow you to look them up to translate? Everyone speaks in word streams.);
b. Our brains only remember spoken words for approximately 3 seconds. By the time our brains separate the individual words to glean meaning, we’re ‘behind’ the speaker, so we rely on our unconscious habits and thinking patterns to bridge, or fill in, gaps in understanding (as in my name issues in opening story). Obviously, it’s easiest to accurately understand people we’re similar to.
- Subjective filters: Bias, assumptions, triggers, habituated neural pathways, and memory channels sift out what’s being said that’s uncomfortable or different from our beliefs, our lifestyles, our status quo, or are not in line within the realm/goal of what we enter the conversation actively sorting for.
We hear others uniquely and subjectively, making lots of guesses and habitual (and potentially incorrect) connections and assumptions; we end up mishearing directions, rules, warnings etc., take away mistaken comprehension, make agreements we’re not aligned with, ignore important or relevant ideas or requets, and on and on. As sellers we hear people in a way we construe they’re buyers; as coaches we hear people complain of stuff we know how to fix; as leaders we hear our teams convey they’re on-board (or not) with our ideas; as change agents we hear rejection.
We set up our worlds to hear what we want to hear regardless of what Others actually mean. When researching my book What? Did you really say what I think I heard? about the understanding gap between what’s said and what’s heard, I discovered the complicated set of physiological elements involved.
FILTERS
We unwittingly listen through our unconscious, subjective, and predisposed filters. Unfortunately our brain omits to tell us what it has altered, keeping us unconsciously rooted in what’s comfortable and familiar. Biases (of which there are hundreds), assumptions, and triggers are major impediments to what we think we hear: our neural pathways, habits, and memory channels automatically get triggered by a word or phrase regardless of the efficacy of the choice and when there might be more relevant memory channels available. To fill in the language gaps, to garner understanding or to recognize a fight or flight situation, our brains unconsciously go through stages of filtering. Simplistically, here’s our unconscious process:
- We first listen with filters for familiarity and sameness, seeking a match with our unconscious biases, beliefs, and values – and delete or alter what seems incompatible.
- With what’s left from the initial round of filtering, our brains seek a match with something familiar by sorting for a similar memory, which could focus on just a term or one of the ideas mentioned, or or or, and throws away what doesn’t match (like what happened with my name above) without telling us what’s been omitted or misconstrued! We might accurately hear the words spoken, but unconsciously assign vastly different implications from the intended meaning.
And because we’re only ‘told’ what our brains ‘tell’ us has been said, we end up ‘certain’ that what we think we hear is actually what’s meant. Listeners always assume what they think they hear is what has been said. And where this diverges from the speaker’s intended meaning, we end up responding to an inaccurate understanding and never consider that just maybe we got it wrong. [Note: I’m always amused when men tell me they hear what their wives mean ‘better than they do.’]
It all happens automatically and unconsciously, and we have no conscious ability to tell our brains what to search for during the filtering process. In other words, we hear a fraction of a fraction of what’s meant (I’ve got an entire section in What? that thoroughly describes this nasty process.) and we then respond according to what we THINK has been said. So we might get self-righteously angry, or perceive we’re forgiven; we hear people as racists or healers or sarcastic or buyers; we feel slighted or complimented or ignored; we think ideas are stupid and opinions absurd. I lost a potential business partner who was adamant that I said something he found offensive, although both his wife and I assured him I’d never said that. ‘You’re both lying to me! I heard it with my own ears!’ And that was his truth. His brain did tell him I said that, even though I didn’t.
COMMUNICATION
Communication itself is a piece of the problem. We assume our Communication Partners (CPs) assign words the same meanings and assumptions we do, further restricting success, understanding, and relationships. It’s obviously problematic when our CPs operate from different norms (another reason we contain our lives to what’s familiar), especially when they’re unspoken or haven’t been agreed upon. When I travelled in Japan, for example, I found it disconcerting that my CPs would quickly gauge my reactions while they spoke, then added a “NOT” at the end of the sentence if my response wasn’t what they were after, negating everything that they’d said to make it more ‘palatable’ to me. Different industries, different cultures, different educational backgrounds, and even different neighborhoods, have different assumptions built in to their listening filters and communication habits. This, too, limits our worlds, leading to disastrous, or funny, results. Listen to this dialogue:
After an Identity Theft problem, my bank account had to be closed and a new one reopened. This is the conversation I had with the bank rep when he called to get me a new set of checks.
BANK: What number would you like your checks to start with?
SDM: Cool. Let’s see. One half? Hahahaha. Maybe 4,962?
BANK: Let’s start with Check #1.
SDM: Oh no. I’ve already used up about 100 or more checks.
BANK: Why didn’t you say that?
SDM: You never asked.
BANK: Yes I did. That’s exactly what I asked you.
SDM: No, you asked what number I’d like to start with.
BANK: Same thing.
Obviously, it wasn’t the same thing to me. In order to have understood what he ‘meant’ I would have to have recognized that this was ‘bank language’ and have implicitly ‘agreed’ to cooperate with his assumption. But I didn’t. I really never heard him ask for the check numbers I used. Indeed, I actually found his question fun until he pointed out that he meant something different than what I heard.
My bank story is a fun example of how uniquely and subjectively we hear each other. And due to our universal assumption that our CPs are intent on cooperating in a dialogue, we feel rule-bound to continue cooperating, nodding our heads, or say ‘uh huh’ to imply agreement and understanding. Whole industries train folks on what to listen for. Sellers listen for any modicum of need and ignore the underlying impediments to buying ability; coaches and therapists listen for the roots of a problem that they’re familiar with, asking biased questions that potentially miss the real problem; leaders listen for glitches in compliance and miss the underlying mismatch in beliefs that will cause implementation issues. Net net it’s difficult to fully understand what others intend to tell us unless we know our CP very well and understand their world view and reference points. And even then it’s iffy.
I’ve devised an approach I call Listening Systems to circumvent all listening filters and biases (see chapter 6 in What?) to hear what our CPs actually mean. For those who don’t want to learn how to do this but want a simple take-away, use this question at the end of an important dialogue or meeting: Do you mind if I check that what I heard you say is accurate? And remember: it’s just not possible to fully understand your CP in many conversations. Pick the conversations most important to you and continually check in. It will make the conversation a bit unwieldy, but at least it will be accurate. Or contact me – I’ve got a one day program that teaches teams to hear each other and their clients, accurately, without bias or filters.
____________
For those interested in learning how to recognize or avoid your listening biases, and ensure you’re hearing what your Communication Partner intends to convey, here are some options (Note: programs are for individual or team learners. The on-line How to Listen program is for teams reading What? together and follow the chapters in the book to install learning.).
On Line: Bias Assessment, How to Listen without Filters; Face-to-face ‘one day program’: How to hear what’s meant
____________
Sharon Drew Morgen is a thought leader in Change Facilitation, in sales (Buying Facilitation®), coaching, communication (www.didihearyou.com), and leadership. She is the author of 9 books, including the NYTimes Business Bestseller Selling with Integrity and the Amazon bestsellers What? and Dirty Little Secrets and the inventor of Buying Facilitation®. Sharon Drew’s award winning blog www.sharondrewmorgen.com carries interesting articles on change, decision making, leadership, coaching, and how buyers buy. She has trained over 100,000 people in global corporations over the past 35 years. She can be reached at sharondrew@sharondrewmorgen.com
Sharon Drew Morgen September 25th, 2017
Posted In: Listening
When you’re conversing with a prospect, a teenager, or a team member, how do you choose the most effective words – and how do you know if there is a problem with what you’ve communicated before it’s too late? How do you determine what to say, exactly, to effect real choice and change with folks who may have different mindsets and goals than you?
We’ve been through decades of Why, then What. But without the How, the Why and What can’t initiate choice or change: Recent brain research has proven that humans actually have no conscious access to the associations that drive our beliefs, biases, or behaviors. How do we get to our own, and Other’s, unconscious to enable change? How do we go beyond our own beliefs, biases, and behaviors to enable all that’s possible in any communication? How?
CONVENTIONAL QUESTIONS AND LISTENING FAIL
To get to the unconscious and real change, our habitual skills are inadequate:
Questions: our natural curiosity and inquiry-based questioning processes are biased – posed by Questioners from their restricted subjective experience (and prejudiced curiosity and assumptions) and predisposed goals; our conscious curiosity restricts possible outcomes and butt up against the limits of our Communication Partner’s (CPs) biases, assumptions, history, expectations and knowledge base. In other words, we’ve got bias bumping up against bias.
Listening: we only hear according to habitual filters (bias, assumptions, triggers, memory). I spent 3 years writing and researching a book (What? Did you really say what I think I heard?) on how our brains reject anything we hear that makes us uncomfortable.
Goals: ‘Gather information’ and ‘Understand’ are biased by our own goals and biased questions and listening skills. Plus, we may be making false assumptions: our CPs have no conscious access to their full range of possible responses and may not be in a position to either gather accurate data or accurately represent stakeholders. We’re gathering incomplete and inaccurate data; we’re sharing data our CPs can’t make sense of or know how to listen to.
TOOLS FOR HOW
Doing what we’re doing now, it’s hard to facilitate change which demands that the underlying beliefs, values, agreements, and structural elements of a system (individual or group) must shift. In other words, our curiosity, our information sharing, our standard listening practices, are not change initiators and actually inhibit real change. Here’s the How of unconscious change:
Beliefs vs. Behaviors: our behaviors are representations and translations of our beliefs – our beliefs in action, if you will. And our beliefs are what makes each of us ecologically sound – they help us DO what we BELIEVE. Until or unless beliefs (mostly unconscious) are engaged, buy-in occurs, and any potential threats to the underlying system are managed, change will not happen. Too many of us – coaches, sellers, doctors, leaders, parents, to name a few – base our interactions and goals on offering and gathering information based on OUR biases and needs, causing us to succeed only with CPs whose unconscious beliefs are aligned. In other words, they’re not able to hear us or accede to our suggestions due to their unconscious filters: we’re merely pushing good data into a closed system and facing resistance. This is where we lose buyers, fail coaching clients, offer unheeded information to patients or teens, and have difficulties collaborating, implementing, or changing.
To enable change, we must have an array of unbiased communication tools to engage our own and our CPs unconscious beliefs, which can’t be done by gathering or offering information. [Note: information gathering and sharing is necessary only once the unconscious is ready for change.
Change: change occurs only when all of the elements (all) of our unconscious that have created and maintained our status quo buy-in to the new. If we try to push change without first getting buy-in, our unconscious thinks there’s a foreign element pushing in and rejects it. This is the problems with implementations: even when the change is ‘discussed’ beforehand, it faces resistance due to the nature of the ‘information-in’ approach without engaging the unconscious systems elements necessary, garnering resistance, sabotage, and misunderstanding.
Insider vs. Outsider: only people inside the system can understand, figure out, and make their own changes; they’re the ones living with their rules and values and history. Facilitators are outsiders and can never understand the system that re-creates the status quo every moment.
‘HOW’ DEMANDS REACHING THE UNCONSCIOUS
I have spent decades developing a ‘How’ model that’s used at the front end of questioning, data gathering, and data exchange. I know most folks prefer their habitual skills, intuition, and experience; but they rationalize any failure by calling buyers stupid, or patients un-educated or lazy, or say that clients don’t really want to change. Rather than considering the possibility that it’s our own skill sets that need enhancement, we continue what we’re doing and built our failures in (i.e. a 5% close rate in sales is deemed ‘normal’) as ‘acceptable’.
The real How requires helping CPs engage and manage their own unconscious. Facilitators must stop trying to meet their own expectations and facilitate Others in reaching their own – their way. Offering advice, pitches or information doesn’t make a dent, and as Outsiders, we’ll never understand anyway.
As a student of ‘How’ since I’ve been 11 years old, I’ve spent decades developing (and then training to global corporations) a ‘How’ process by unwrapping and scaling my systemizing Asperger’s brain, using NLP as a structural frame, and studying systems and brain science (a very cursory explanation of my lifetime of study and trial). My material uses a sequenced process of unbiased, systemic questioning and listening that gets precisely to the unconscious to make change, choice, and new decision. I’m eager to teach the material to anyone involved in facilitating excellence (sellers, marketers, coaches, negotiators, leaders, etc.) as I begin my retirement process.
Facilitative Questions: These questions enable the Other to sequentially engage their unconscious systems, pull information out of the relevant memory channels and are NOT inquiry-based. They follow the brain’s sequence of systemic change, and use specific words, in a specific order, to engage specific elements of our unconscious in the specific path our systems take to reorganize around change without disruption. Note: these questions have been tested and trialed over 30 years.
Listening for Systems: We’ve never been taught to listen for the underlying system or metamessage or unconscious patterns that form the status quo. By hearing what’s meant, rather than what’s said, we can formulate the right FQs. When listening for what we want to hear rather than what’s being meant, we listen with biased filters and circumvent success.
The Sequence of Change: There’s a generic, specific, systemic sequence that all change takes regardless of the circumstance (or industry, or situation. Change has identifiable, explicit, generic steps). Until or unless all elements (or stakeholders, or beliefs, etc.) are recognized, all the elements that maintain the status quo buy-in to change, and the system designs a route toward systems congruence, no change can occur.
Goals: We must become Change Facilitators first. Starting with ‘I need to know’ or ‘I seek a prospect with a need’ or ‘I need to offer this information’ impedes success. Without win/win, and Servant Leadership as goals, you’re a solution seeking a problem and merely find the low-hanging fruit.
WHAT TO DO?
So if you can’t ask questions, gather data, understand needs, or offer advice, what should you be doing instead? Here is the approach to How:
1. Enter as a Change Facilitator/Servant Leader. Help others examine their unique unconscious system of beliefs and biases to determine what’s missing within their system to reach Excellence in the area of your solution. Ultimately, they’ll need to recognize what’s standing in the way of them having the beliefs and steps to support the congruent change and determine a way forward that incorporates all (all) of their unique criteria – and maybe your solution. They do this anyway – just without you.
2. Begin the communication by listening for metamessages to trigger the
3. formulation of your Facilitative Questions that
4. lead your CPs through their unconscious status quo and enables them to discover
5. what’s missing (at the unconscious level) for Excellence to occur, and notice any incongruencies.
6. They must gather the appropriate people, policies, relationships, etc. and begin the change process. Once this is completed, THEN you can…
7. Ask information gathering questions or give advice ONLY to those who are able to change congruently.
Always remain in a Witness, or Observer stance to remain unbiased (I have a chapter in What? that explains the process). Obviously there comes a time when gathering/sharing data, or offering important advice, is vital. But save it for end when there is a readiness for change. It’s a systems thing. And I can teach you how to do this.
If I had my way, every scientist, teacher, doctor, seller, coach, lawyer, leader, and parent would know how to do this. For me, we all should be Servant Leaders to each other to enable good decision making for effective interactions. Sellers can find the right prospects on the first call and attend meetings with every stakeholder present; marketers can enter the Buy Path much earlier in the decision cycle by using Facilitative Questions; parents/doctors can inspire appropriate action; leaders can eschew their biases and facilitate change without resistance. I’m here to help those companies and individuals interested in learning the How of change.
___________
Sharon Drew Morgen is the author of 9 books on decision facilitation, Buying Facilitation®, and listening, including her newest book What? Did you really say what I think I heard? and her NYTimes Business Bestseller Selling with Integrity. Her award winning blog (www.sharondrewmorgen.com) has 1600 articles on sales, facilitation, change, bias, listening, questions, etc. She has trained over 100,000 people in dozens of corporations globally, and is recognized as a visionary and thought leader. Sharon Drew trains, keynotes, consults, and coaches sellers, coaches, and leaders. www.didihearyou.com; www.dirtylittlesecretsbook.com 512 771 1117. sharondrew@sharondrewmorgen.com
Sharon Drew Morgen September 18th, 2017
Posted In: Communication
In 1993, when my first book came out and before he died, David Sandler called to buy out my Buying Facilitation® model. We couldn’t agree on terms, but he was excited by my differentiation between the sales model and the buying process: “I recognized that the problem was on the buy side, and thought my Sandler method was thinking out of the box. Reading your stuff, I now recognize my focus is still on getting solutions sold,” he said. “I hadn’t realized that ‘outside the box’ meant to shift the focus first to facilitate buying. Well done.”
And yet, after all these years, the problem remains: we’re limiting success and wasting an untold amount of resource seeking those few who are ready, willing, and able to buy: we’re missing a much larger, untapped market of potential (but real) buyers we ignore because our sales outreach doesn’t affect them. By broadening the goal to include facilitating change with those in the process of becoming buyers, by recognizing that a buying decision is a systemic, change management issue before it’s a solution choice problem, it’s feasible to engage earlier (albeit in a different way) and find a much larger population of real buyers.
HOW SALES RESTRICTS SELLING
The sales industry has a singular goal of placing solutions. It’s an industry with solutions looking for a problem. And the paltry results of a 5% close rate have been baked into the system: you accept low closing ratios as the best you can do, hire more sales people than you need, suffer from a sales cycle that is months/years longer than necessary, and lose buyers that will need your solution but don’t yet need or notice the information you provide.
Have you never asked yourself why, with all the capability of finding prospective buyers at your fingertips, you still close only 5% – down from 7% a decade ago (and with much less technology)? And why you continue to waste untold bazillions on staff, technology, and time, chasing folks who will never buy. Have you not recognized that
-
the people you target aren’t necessarily buying or buyers,
-
you’re expending too much resource on those who will never buy,
-
you don’t know the difference between those who will and those who won’t buy?
With the best technology available, the most professional branding and marketing, great content, and a good solid product, you’re losing far more sales than you need to. This much should be obvious: No matter how much new technology, or how many sales methods available to you – regardless of all the ‘new new’ things at your fingertips – you’re still merely closing the low hanging fruit (those 5% who have determined they are ready, willing, able to buy).
A buying decision is a change management problem before it’s a solution choice issue. By adding a few bells and whistles to your sales efforts you can find people who will be buying but aren’t yet buyers and facilitate their strategic Pre-Sales, non-solution-based decision path that concludes with them buying. Then you’ll close far more than you’re closing now with half the staff and half the time. But it needs different thinking.
SELLING VS BUYING
People become buyers only when there are no other options and a purchase is their last hope for problem resolution. They can’t even accurately define a ‘need’ until the full complement of stakeholders are involved and the scope of any resultant change is recognized. Sales ignores this group because their touch points are different and they are definitely not yet buyers. Yet it’s here they’re more open for support and connection: their path to congruently resolving a problem is confounding; they may forget to bring in “Joe from accounting”, or can’t recognize the full scope of issues until they’ve falsely started down one path to resolution and must start all over.
You’re a subject matter expert in the area of their problem resolution and could really be a support here – so long as you avoid trying to sell and focus on facilitating change first. This is where they will be eager to connect. By only focusing on selling/placing your solution, you ignore 40% of real buyers who haven’t gotten there yet but will.
Ask yourself this: Do you want to sell – or have someone buy? They are two different activities with different rules, needs, and behaviors. Sales is tactical. Buying is strategic. Your tactical focus on placing solutions with Buyer Personas, Opportunity Management, content differentiation, and yes, even Sandler, SPIN etc. offer biased questions and content focused on those few who have defined, and understand, their need and change issues, overlooking those people in the midst of strategic decision efforts who will develop into buyers once they get their ducks in a row. Sellers actually sit and wait while prospects do this anyway. Why not help them! Here what sales ignores:
-
A buying decision includes a 13 step change management process, the first 9 steps of which are systemic change (not purchase or need) focused; they aren’t ‘buyers’ until step 10 when all of their systemic/change management stuff is worked out, and there is agreement that a purchase is their only option.
-
A problem doesn’t equal a need; a ‘need’ doesn’t equal a purchase. It might turn out that maintaining the status quo is a better option for them; as an outsider, you can never understand why.
-
People aren’t buyers until they’re out of options to fix their problems themselves AND they’ve gotten buy-in to bring in a ‘foreign’ element. The last thing they want to do (precisely, the last thing) is to buy anything. The buyers you seek/find are already at the end of their decision path.
-
Your terrific content isn’t being noticed by people who haven’t yet determined, defined, agreed upon a ‘need’ even though they may become buyers later, or even really need your solution.
-
Your content/selling push assumes that with the right content and message, offered to the right demographic, at the right time, focused on the right need -> purchase scenario, you’ll get in/close – but you’re only reaching those few who are ready OR those in the midst of their research (who may never buy but may call you with questions or take an appointment). They won’t even read or heed your outreach.
-
You’re using a ‘need’ and ‘solution-placement’ filter which restricts your results 95% of the time, causing you (beyond all logic) to push push push push harder or better, against a closed system of people and policies that’s not ready, willing, able to buy.
The problem is not your solution (It’s great. And people can find the content they need on line when they’re ready.); the problem is that the sales model places solutions with people who need them, but does nothing to help facilitate the change elements people traverse en route to becoming buyers and are not buyers yet. Here are the main stages people execute as they seek to resolve a problem (The full set of steps are laid out in my book Dirty Little Secrets: why buyers can’t buy and sellers can’t sell.):
-
Assemble the full set of stakeholders (including “Joe in accounting”) who spend time understanding the scope of the problem, how it got initiated, and how it maintains itself;
-
Once a problem is defined by all stakeholders, the group tries to resolve the issue with familiar resources to minimize fallout. (This is where they might contact you with questions. They’re doing research, not buying.)
-
Once it’s decided to seek an external solution, they must find a route to resolution that maintains Systems Congruence. So if your users refuse new technology, or your teams function well as they are, you might find a way around a purchase if the disruption is too great. An Outsider can never understand the unique nature of internal dynamics. Can I ever really understand why you don’t stop smoking, or stay in a dysfunctional relationship, or stay in a job/relationship that makes you miserable? Change is always personal.
Notice how these stages are change- and systems-focused, and not accessible to Outsiders with a ‘sales’ hat on. And until they are addressed, there’s no ‘need’ and no ‘buyer’. Btw, I developed these stages decades ago; they apply to anyone making a decision including coaching clients, patients, and employees, and all buying situations regardless of the size of the change/purchase. Whether you merely need to buy a new phone, or go through a merger, the steps of change must be traversed in a way that maintains the status quo (even when it’s unconscious) regardless of need. You wait while people do this anyway; why not find those who CAN become buyers (rather than ‘should’), facilitate their change quickly, and be there with them as they buy – and be with them as they figure out their own unique strategies for change – so long as you avoid trying to sell anything as they’re not buyers yet.
Is it sales? No. It’s a Change Facilitation process I call Buying Facilitation®. By first enabling people to facilitate their buying decision path, you’ll have less competition, close more, stop wasting time selling to those who can never buy, and be true Servant Leaders; you can use your technology, your content marketing, your sales efforts as you are now, but with an additional focus.
WHY AREN’T THEY BUYING? SDM ANSWERS YOUR QUESTIONS
Using the above thinking, here’s a ‘Q&A’ to help you better understand why you’re getting the results you’re getting.
What’s wrong with seeking buyers to place our solutions? Isn’t that what sales is?
Sales is perfect for finding and educating buyers with a need, but not for facilitating the buying decision path. There’s a 13 step decision path between recognition of a problem and a purchase. Sales only handles the limited portion (steps 10-13) that occurs once people reach the point where a purchase is their only option AND they have buy in from the full complement of stakeholders for non-disruptive change (step 9) (Think about it. You won’t buy a new car, or a new X, until you’ve tried to fix the one you’ve got, AND you have the funds now, AND your spouse/team agrees, AND you’ll still function as well with the new item.). No Outsider can make these determinations, they’re not based on buying anything, and your content is irrelevant until then.
Why do they keep talking to me if they’re not going to buy?
Until the entire scope of change is understood and integrated, people don’t understand the perimeters of their need (and when you ask biased questions, the flawed answers you receive often cause you to chase those who will never buy). Before becoming buyers, people must recognize that the cost of change (buying) is less than maintaining the status quo: their ‘system’ is sacrosanct. Would you buy a new car if your spouse would divorce you? Would you bring in a new CRM system if half of your user team would quit, or refuse to use it, or until the tech folks have the time to implement? You know you have to go to the gym more, and eat/drink less. You’ve got a need. Have you signed up for the gym? Stopped drinking beer?
Why are we still getting such a low close rate when we’ve got so many terrific tools at our disposal to introduce our features AND find the right demographic?
Because only a small percent of people you focus on are buyers. Until they’re out of other options AND determined they must bring in something from outside AND have all of their internal ducks in a row, AND have buy-in (Buyer Readiness), your tools aren’t recognized.
Why do they keep talking to me if they’re not going to buy?
During their change process, people research all possibilities. Your solution may be one of them; they’re actually using you for reference to report back to their team, or to figure out their own workarounds, or mention to their current vendor. It’s possible to know on the first call who will be a buyer and who is merely seeking data that will never lead to a purchase – but not with a solution-placement focus.
Why don’t buyers realize they need our solution when it seems so obvious?
It’s only ‘obvious’ to you. The best content, the most relevant solution, will be ignored until they reach step 10 when they become buyers.
Why is the sales cycle so long when there is a solid need/solution match?
The time people take to figure out how to manage change congruently is the length of the sales cycle. As Outsiders, we can never understand the depth of the change management issues: Who is fighting with who? What is the tech schedule? Who will need to be let go? How do internal politics show up? How does their history/future factor in?
The system that holds the problem in place is much more powerful than any solution you can offer. They need buy-in from EVERYONE and EVERYTHING that created the status quo and will touch the new solution. You’ll never recognize “Joe from accounting” who is an unsung influencer, or the fight going on between the sales and marketing folks who need to share budget. It’s not about their need – until it is. And they can’t tell you because they don’t know, or they won’t have found the nut of the problem yet, or you’re asking the wrong questions biased by your need to sell.
Why do buyers make promises they don’t keep? Are all buyers liars?
Buyers don’t lie. The one person you’re speaking with is responding to your biased questions, getting out of the thrust of your sales push, and is giving you the best data they’re willing to give you, or as much data as they have at that point in their 13 step change path. Whatever data they offer is limited by their access to the full Buying Decision Team, and the stage they’re at in their change management. You are, after all, strangers approaching them with a solution placement hat on, asking the wrong questions to the wrong people at the wrong time. As an Outsider you can never, ever have a clue as per the political, personal, strategic decision issues they face. But you can understand they system they decide in, a per your expertise in your field.
Why isn’t our great content being read or acted upon by the larger audience who really needs it?
Needs it according to who? Your research? Your biased questions? Your focus on placing solutions limits your audience and keeps you from getting into the decision path earlier. Are they at the point of seeking workarounds? Is there a team buy-in problem? Have they forgotten to assemble some of the appropriate stakeholders? Are they finding a glitch (political, personal, management-based, etc.)? Your sales, marketing, content, and technology restricts your target market to the low hanging fruit who have clearly defined their need, know they cannot fix their own problem, and have a route to congruent change.
When I gather info about a need, and it seems obvious there is one, what am I missing?
You’re merely asking biased questions to elicit the data YOU want to elicit from one person or a few research visits to your site, to find people who SEEM like they have a ‘need’ and spend a lot of resource chasing after them whether they are real buyers or not. Plus, because someone has a need doesn’t mean they are ready, willing, or able to buy; because the one person on the team you’re speaking with does NOT seem to have a need, doesn’t mean they don’t have one. You’re a solution looking for a problem. Enter first with a Facilitator hat on, help those that CAN/WILL become buyers traverse the route to change, and THEN sell.
It’s not as hard as you think. I developed a new form of unbiased question (Facilitative Question) to facilitate change (part of the Buying Facilitation® process) and pose these down the Pre-Sales steps to help the ‘right’ people become buyers. Here are two examples of responses to a Facilitative Question used on a first call. I bet you can tell which one CAN buy:
SDM: How are you currently adding more tools and capability to your sales team for those times you seek to reach an expanded market?
SALES DIRECTOR #1: I read a couple of sales books annually. If I like them, I’ll pass them on to my sales managers and tell them to get the sellers to read them, and run meetings to discuss their takeaways [Note: this was a real response.]
SALES DIRECTOR #2: I’ve had a helluva time trying to find new tools to use. I’ve tried several, and keep getting the same results. I’d be glad to use something new if I could be assured it was really new, and it would work.
My opening FQ, different for each situaltion, begins by shining a light on the system the person is operating in, and provides an invaluable insight into the state of possible change. It also begins making the person a Coach/Witness to her own status quo by asking for an overview of the system. This particular FQ helps #2 take an unbiased view of how she’s managed change until now. Buying Facilitation® then proceeds down her change steps so she can address each step efficiently, with me by her side. Director #1 had a need, but wasn’t a buyer.
When I form a wonderful relationship with a potential buyer with a need, where does he go? He seems to take calls and stay in touch, and then disappears. Where does he go?
He was never a buyer. He either couldn’t get the buy-in from the Buying Decision Team (BDT), or came up with an alternative solution, or decided not to move forward because the cost of disruption was too high. He stays in touch as long as there is a possibility he needs to buy something (he hasn’t yet gotten team agreement or become a buyer), or so long as the data you’re offering is useful to their ultimate decisions. 80% of our prospective buyers will buy a solution similar to ours within 2 years of our connection. That means they had a need but couldn’t figure out how to congruently manage the change.
When I’m months into a sale, and everything that was going well suddenly stops, where did it go?
See above. The person wasn’t really a buyer yet or the team wasn’t bought-in to change.
Are buyers spending a lot of time trialing and speaking to other providers before they choose us?
Possibly. People research the best alternatives to managing change with the least disruption.
Why aren’t we more successful when we check that they’ve brought in all stakeholders and help them achieve buy in? That’s managing Buyer Readiness, no?
You’re an Outsider. You’ll never understand what’s going on; the questions you pose and the direction you offer are solution placement based; you listen with a biased ear, etc. (Seriously: Read Dirty Little Secrets then call me and I’ll teach you how to do it.) Did they bring in “Joe from accounting”? How are they managing the fight between sales and marketing? Oh – one other big reason: you’re merely speaking with one, at most two, people; you have no reach through the sales model to facilitate change. I can’t say this enough: you’re an Outsider.
If you start as a Neutral Navigator, listen for systems and facilitate them through their OWN decisions with NO BIAS to selling, you can quickly find and serve those who WILL become buyers and help them efficiently manage change. Using Buying Facilitation® KPMG went from a 3 year sales cycle to a 4 month sales cycle with a $50,000,000 solution; Wachovia small business bankers went from a 2% close over 11 months to a 29% close over 3 months; Kaiser went from 110 visits and 18 closed sales to 27 visits and 25 closed sales. By adding BF to their dummy terminals, Barclay’s helped customers define, and buy, the exact solutions they needed. Help them traverse their change path and sell to those who will buy.
Why don’t more people show up at appointments? Why are so many buyers reluctant to take appointments?
-
All of the stakeholders aren’t involved yet so they don’t even have a clear, complete description of ‘need’. Those who take appointments are doing research (and do WHAT? with your content) and haven’t gotten team buy-in, or the full decision team isn’t on board yet;
-
They know from the first moment of a call that you’ll be pushing YOUR solution and not facilitating them in discovering THEIR own solution. It’s only if you can be an asset to them that they’ll be willing to see you.
What’s wrong with trying to place a solution by ‘understanding need’, or creating a need, or selling?
You can do that, for those who are already buyers understand their need.
I’ve paid a fortune for technology, research into demographics, opportunity management software, scripts, and experienced sales folks – but I’m still not closing all I deserve to close. Why?
Because your efforts are focused on ‘buyer’ ‘need’, and neither of those necessarily correlate with buying anything for those who aren’t yet buyers.
How does Buying Facilitation® find, and close, more real buyers?
Buying Facilitation® is a Change Facilitation model that works with sales (and coaching, etc.) and includes Facilitative Questions, Listening for Systems, Presumptive Summaries – wholly different skill sets than sales, and includes no bias. It traverses the first 9 steps of change management, in the ares your solution operates in, beginning with immediately ascertaining who is set up to be able to buy, or has a possibility of systemic change and then teaches them precisely how to discover their path to change. By adding BF you not only find the right buyers, but teach those who may not have been able to buy how to facilitate change.
With Director #1 above, it would take so long to convince him that his plan was flawed, and then get the other managers who have complied with his plan to acceded to change, that it’s not worth the effort. BF progresses down the change steps and teaches them how to bring in the right people, discover if workarounds are worthwhile, and why they haven’t worked until now. Then it helps them determine how change would need to be addressed – and with BF you can do this on the first call. It will ignore the ones who will never buy, and help the real buyers be ready to buy. So much easier than finding those relative few who have already done this. And it’s much easier than it sounds: you’re just not used to it yet.
IN CONCLUSION
Here is a rule: as long as the sales model tries to ‘find buyers’ and ‘place solutions’, you’ll never sell to anyone other than those who have determined they’re buyers, leaving you continuing to push your solution into their closed system. You can
-
discover who is, or will be, starting down the journey that will lead to a decision to purchase something,
-
figure out, with a change management hat on, what the journey in your industry, and among your buying market, looks like (or call me and I’ll help),
-
then enter with those few on their change journey as they quickly (with your help) figure out how to manage stakeholders, buy-in, workarounds, etc. and become buyers.
By adding outreach, vocabulary, content, that first focuses on facilitating the buying decision path earlier you’ll enlarge your range of buyers by 5x. After all, people must do this anyway before becoming buyers; we might as well join them where they are and facilitate the right ones.
Call me. Together, we can create content, software, scripts to find the right ones – those who WILL become buyers – and facilitate them down their decision path toward effective change and buying.
____________
For more reading on the subject, here are some ideas: Practical Decision Making, Questioning Questions, Buyer’s Journey, Do You Want to Sell? Or Have Someone Buy? , Influencers vs Facilitators. Or contact me to discuss. Am happy to share what I know. sharondrew@sharondrewmorgen.com
____________
Sharon Drew Morgen is a thought leader and original thinker, as well as the author of 9 books, including the NYTimes Business Bestseller Selling with Integrity, and the Amazon bestsellers Dirty Little Secrets and What? Did you really say what I think I heard? She has designed a Change Facilitation process for sales (Buying Facilitation®), coaching, health care, leadership, change management, and influencing, training it to such companies as DuPont (8,000 people), KPMG (6,000 people), Wachovia, Kaiser, Cancer Treatment Centers of America, IBM, P&G, Sandler Sales, ATT, Bethlehem Steel, Sandia Labs. Her blog www.sharondrewmorgen.com is recognized as one of the top business blogs, with articles on decision making, listening, questions, sales, coaching, etc. She is a trainer, speaker, consultant, and coach. Sharon Drew can be reached at sharondrew@sharondrewmorgen.com
Sharon Drew Morgen September 11th, 2017
Posted In: Change Management, Sales
The hot new sales tool is Opportunity Management automation. Just another in a long list of New New Things that seem like THE answer to THE way to efficiently close more sales. But is it? Over the past 10 or so years you’ve tried Buyer Personas, Understanding Need, marketing automation, Relationship Management, Trusted Advisor, Challenger, Sandler, SPIN, and lots of technology to push content. All hoping hoping hoping that THIS is ‘the one’ that will help you close more. But you’ve ended up with the same 5% close rate you’ve had for decades (It used to be 7%, remember?), regardless of the approach or the way an opportunity is managed.
Don’t get me wrong: opportunity management apps help sellers optimize their time and track results. But to what end? The tools can’t close more sales if the opportunity itself is flawed. What if you could find more viable opportunities by expanding your definition of ‘opportunity’?
WHAT’S AN OPPORTUNITY?
As I’m sure you’re aware, an ‘opportunity’ is often not an opportunity at all, or has only a small chance of being one. What if buyers aren’t your target audience? What if the larger opportunity is in a different place along the buying decision journey?
With the sales model based on entry points of ‘buyer’, ‘need’, Buyer Personas, and ‘need/solution’ match it’s impossible to close anyone but the low hanging fruit – buyers seeking a solution. This definition
- restricts your close rate to those people or groups who have gotten themselves ready to bring in an outside solution (5% with sales outreach; 0.00059% of online marketing outreach) and are ready, willing, and able to buy;
- assumes that those with a seeming ‘need’ is a prospect (They’re not. ‘Need’ does not equal ‘Buyer’ – but you know that by now);
- focuses questions, content, and relationship-creating skills with a bias toward placing a solution (ignoring the vital non-solution, systemic, change management, Pre-Sales steps that have no relevance to, but precede, buying anything);
- doesn’t sort for differences between someone who is strategically en route to becoming a buyer vs someone you’ve determined SHOULD buy and has a 95% chance of NOT buying;
- uses tools to pushpushpush what YOU want to sell (into a prospect’s private, personal, closed system of cultural norms and givens that outsiders aren’t part of), and closing merely 5%;
and restricts you from finding those who WILL close, aren’t quite ready, and could use your help efficiently getting there. The confusing part for sellers is that these folks – these real, potential buyers – are off your screen: they aren’t buyers, aren’t seeking a solution, haven’t determined they want to buy anything yet, haven’t yet fully determined the scope of their need, aren’t attracted by your content.
And therein lies the rub: before people become buyers they merely want to resolve a problem in the most efficacious way and their route to competence is initially not directly related to what you’re selling. Before people become buyers, before there is a sales opportunity, they must first conclude there is absolutely no route to resolving their problems with known resources AND have a route through to congruent change – internal adoption, buy-in, Systems Congruence, and change management. The last thing they want to do is go outside their system to buy anything – they never start out as buyers until they run out of options to fix a problem themselves. By putting on a wholly different hat, we can find and facilitate the ones who will BECOME buyers and vastly increase our pool of opportunities. But we can’t use a ‘sales’ hat to find them.
CHANGE MANAGEMENT PRECEDES BUYING
A buying decision is a change management problem first before it’s needs- solution-based. Buyers are merely people who have gotten to the point in their change management procedures when an external solution (i.e. making a purchase) is their only viable alternative to Excellence. The fact that people have a ‘need’ that your solution can resolve does NOT mean they are, or will ever be, ready, willing, or able to buy. There is a 95% chance that those who seem like buyers aren’t buyers at the point where your content finds them. And sadly, your content won’t get them there: they won’t even notice it because they’re not yet looking for it even though they may eventually seek it.
It’s possible to shift the ‘opportunity’ criteria to people who WILL be buyers but aren’t ones yet – and know how to recognize real buyers from ‘tire kickers’ on the first contact; there are far easier entry points into a buyer/seller dialogue than what might seem to the outsider like a ‘need’.
Before becoming a buyer, or having a fully defined need, people traverse a specific path (I’ve spent decades coding and defining, training and testing, the 13 steps in a buying decision path, as explained in www.dirtylittlesecretsbook.com) between recognizing a problem, assembling the proper stakeholders to buy-in, managing any negative consequences of change, and deciding to make a purchase; they become buyers only at step 10 once they agree that making a purchase is their best option.
In other words, there are 9 non-buying change management (Pre-Sales) steps people take as they figure out how to congruently solve their problem and manage the change an external factor will cause. Using a Change Facilitation lens, with a bias toward the steps of congruent change, we can enter earlier to efficiently facilitate real prospective buyers and be part of their system as they begin the buying process. It’s possible to expand your criteria and tool kit to connect along different stages of the decision journey and recognize/facilitate exactly who WILL become buyers but aren’t there yet. But your initial focus must be systemic change, not selling. Different questions, different listening.
Using ‘need’ and ‘solution placement’ criteria, the only way to attract an opportunity is to find those relative few who have gotten to the point of recognizing they cannot resolve their own problem. Until then, they cannot buy: they haven’t fully defined a ‘need’, don’t have their full Buying Decision Team (BDT) in place, haven’t gotten buy-in, and aren’t actively seeking to buy anything. Selling is tactical: buying is strategic.
WHO IS A BUYER?
Think along with me for a moment. A person or group doesn’t become a buyer unless they’ve determined they cannot fix their problem themselves with familiar resources AND they are set up (environment, culture, technology, implementation, buy-in) to manage any fallout from having a foreign element (a purchase) enter their system. Maintaining Systems Congruence is vital; the last thing, literally, that a person wants is to buy anything due to the possibility of disrupting their status quo that is functioning ‘well-enough’. Indeed until they
- have a plan to manage their strategic, idiosyncratic, private activities and are convinced they will end up with Systems Congruence;
- have assembled their full complement of stakeholders and understand their full complement of buy-in and change issues (including ‘need’);
- are congruently ready to seek purchasing options;
they’re only ‘people’ meandering through a confounding route to Excellence, facing political issues, personnel/personal issues, buy-in issues, tech integration issues, etc. They’re not buyers regardless of what you consider to be an ‘opportunity’, how many appointments you make, or how well the folks like you. And the way sales is implemented and biased toward solution placement, the questions posed, the answers sought, you’re only seeking and attracting those who have already reached step 10 and consider themselves buyers.
What’s the difference between an ‘opportunity’ and one that’s NOT an opportunity?
- There’s no opportunity to place a solution with a prospect until they’vea. fully assembled their entire BDT including ‘Joe’ in the back office who you never get to speak with but who’s a huge influencer,
b. tried workarounds to fix the problem themselves with familiar resources,
c. fully recognized the change management issues that would potentially cause a breakdown should they bring anything in (buy something) without appropriate change management and
d. determined that the cost of a purchase is less than continuing their status quo.
- With a bias toward placing a solution, you try to ‘get in’, ‘find a need’ and ‘have a relationship’ based on your desire to sell, gathering biased, wrong or incomplete data, leading to false assumptions of Buyer Readiness. Until they’re buyers, they haven’t fully defined their need or what it would take to fix (although BDT members might research your solution or reach out to you to gain knowledge).
- When you make an appointment to ‘begin a relationship’ and the full BDT is not present, you are neither connecting nor starting a relationship. What portion of the BDT does the person you’re meeting with represent? Where are they along their decision path? How do you know the rest of the full BDT agrees with that assessment? How will they use, or convey, the data you present? Are you pitching what THEY need to hear to address their internal change problems?
- Until the prospects recognize they cannot fix their problem with known resources AND have a strategic plan to implement any necessary change that a new solution might cause (even for a cheap, or personal, or small, item), they’re not buyers. Just because you think there’s a need doesn’t mean they will end up buying anything.
- On route to fixing a problem with known resources, people often have a plethora of choices that you’re not familiar with that may provide them with a congruent outcome that does NOT include a purchase. I can’t say this enough; the last thing people need is to bring in an unfamiliar vendor/product: the cost of disruption may not be worth the price of a fix.
Your identification of an ‘opportunity’ is currently based on your biases, assumptions, conversations with a fraction of the full BDT, assessments, research, etc. based on the fit that YOU perceive between what YOU’VE determined (or that one outlier from the BDT) they need – and your solution. What you think is an opportunity most likely isn’t. Otherwise you’d be closing more than 5%. Data collected from my control groups when I train show it’s possible to close about 5X more than you’re closing now by entering earlier along their change path and using a Change Facilitation skill first. More on this in a moment.
WHAT AN OPPORTUNITY SOUNDS LIKE
Here’s what you’ll hear when there is a real opportunity (and yes, even on the first call, using a Change Facilitation skill set focus):
- All stakeholders are on board already. When you speak with someone who still needs approval, or hasn’t assembled the full complement of stakeholders yet (and even your prospects often don’t know the full complement of stakeholders). Note to sellers: you cannot ask someone specifically if their BDT is fully on board – they won’t know , and can’t offer, an accurate answer until near the end of their journey. But you can help them assemble the right people quickly – just not with the sales model. They always forget ‘Joe’ and HR, for example, and then must go back to the beginning;
- All change management elements are recognized with a plan to move forward. I.e.: the users are developing their criteria for a new piece of software, and the techies have a specific integration and implementation plan; participants for a training program are ready to interview you to see if you meet their criteria, etc. In other words, they’re aware of their stumbling points and are already in the process of handling them;
- The prospect wants to set up a meeting with you and the rest of the Buying Decision Team to discuss their expectations and criteria for choosing you.
When you make an appointment with only one or two people you don’t have a real opportunity. If the person you’re speaking with thinks s/he has a need but hasn’t gotten team buy-in yet, or doesn’t know the complete set of potential disruptors that need managing, there’s no opportunity. If your prospect is going to take your information back to the boss/manager, there’s no opportunity. If a prospect calls you for information, there’s most likely no opportunity (although you can use this time to begin the Change Facilitation process).
I don’t consider a 95% failure rate success; you’ve just convinced yourself that this is the way it is for your industry. Let’s change it to be more successful. Instead of running after people once they become buyers, why not find those who are already en route to buying, use a different focus and new skill set such as Buying Facilitation® (the model I’ve developed to handle Pre-Sales Change Facilitation) or some change management tool to enter earlier in their change/decision journey, quickly facilitate them through their change, and THEN sell.
It’s not rocket science. You’re current selling/solution-placement modality restricts you to fighting for those who have defined themselves as buyers. People really need help determining how to change congruently. But the time it takes them to do so is the length of the sales cycle. You’re wasting your time chasing the 5% and ignoring the 80% of prospective buyers who WILL buy within two years of connecting with you but can’t until they’ve got their ducks in a row. But you can hasten their journey by first becoming Neutral Navigators doing a Change Facilitation process and THEN wear a ‘seller’ hat. Then you’ll stop wasting time and resource with those who aren’t buyers and truly serve those who WILL buy become buyers much quicker. But no amount of content, relationship, or Opportunity Management will force those who aren’t, or who will never be, ready. You’re waiting while people do this anyway. Help them. Close more. And have more opportunities to manage.
____________
Sharon Drew Morgen is the developer of a Change Facilitation model used in sales (Buying Facilitation®), coaching, leadership, healthcare, and management. She’s been running Buying Facilitation® and How Buyers Buy training programs in global corporations since 1985. She is the author of the NYTimes Business Bestseller Selling with Integrity, and the Amazon bestsellers Dirty Little Secrets: why buyers can’t buy and sellers can’t sell,and What? Did you really say what I think I heard? Sharon Drew has trained over 100,000 sales people globally, and is currently running Listening programs to facilitate unbiased listening. Her blog is consistently ranked in the top 10 of all sales/marketing blogs. Sharon Drew is considered an original thinker and thought leader, doing keynotes, coaching, and consulting to enable servant leader skills. She can be reached at sharondrew@sharondrewmorgen.com.
Sharon Drew Morgen August 28th, 2017
Posted In: Change Management, News, Sales
I recently heard yet another excuse as to why a buyer didn’t buy. This one was a hoot – seller/buyer misalignment. Seriously? Because the seller didn’t close a sale (That was expected by the seller? In the mythical pipeline?) there was a relationship problem? Because the buyer didn’t buy (according to the expectation of the seller) there was a bonding problem? No. The problem stems from sellers not understanding what a buyer is. In this case, there was no buyer to be ‘misaligned’ with.
FROM PERSON TO BUYER
A decision not to purchase has very little to do with the seller, the solution, the relationship, or the need. In fact, a purchase is the very last thing a buyer wants. Just because a situation seems like a perfect fit with your solution does not make it a buying/selling opportunity; just because someone really needs your solution does not mean they are ready, willing, or able to buy.
Let me begin by defining ‘Buyer’: a person (or group) who has
- assembled all people, causes, and elements that created their problem AND
- recognized they cannot fix the problem with familiar resources, AND
- gotten buy-in from everyone/everything involved with the changes a fix would affect, AND
- met a collection of personal/group criteria that assures eventual stability, AND
- decided that the cost of a fix is lower than maintaining the status quo,
and decides to purchase an external solution as their only option.
As the thought-leader behind how buyers buy (programs developed, books written, modelsinvented, steps defined, terms coined, since 1985) I’d like to offer some thoughts:
1. A buyer isn’t a buyer unless they’ve bought something. Until then they are people with a problem that may, if all else fails, require an external solution.
2. People first recognize a problem that keeps them from the type of Excellence they require. They may or may not decide to fix it. It never begins as a decision to make a purchase (unless a small personal item).
3. There are usually a range of ‘fixes’ available for problems. Workarounds are always the first option, a purchase the last.
4. All people (buyers, groups, individuals) live in a unique unconscious, human system (rules, relationships, beliefs, experience, goals, etc.) that created the problem and maintains it as part of their status quo. The system exists AS IS, with problems factored in. If an element is recognized as problematic, the system would need to agree on possible forward routes. Any change would need to end up as an integrated part of the core system.
5. A purchase means something new will enter the system and replace or reconsider what’s already there without leaving a mess. It’s only when there’s agreement from all elements that created the problem that
* it can’t be fixed with known resources or workarounds,
* the cost in resources/change is lower than the cost of fallout,
* a path forward is defined by everyone who will touch the final solution,
that the full scope of a solution is understood. Until then ‘need’ isn’t fully defined. Here is where sellers often get caught thinking there’s a ‘need’ before there is one.
6. There is a defined series of 13 (generic) steps that all systems traverse (often unconsciously) to decide if, when, why, how, what to change. Until they’ve agreed they can’t fix the problem with familiar resources AND developed a plan for congruent change, (step 10), there is no willingness to seek an external solution. In other words, people become buyers at step 10; before that they’re merely people trying to fix a problem themselves.
7. During the steps of change, people within the system do research to find a variety of ideas that could possibly help them fix their problem themselves. If they have contacted a solution provider during their research phase (and have not yet gotten group buy-in) they’re not buyers regardless of their apparent need and the efficacy of a seller’s solution.
8. Making a purchase is first a change management issue, last a solution choice problem; the first question people ask is how they can achieve Excellence without leaving an internal mess; the last question they ask is what solution they’d need from ‘outside’. Using the sales model, only solution placement criteria and activities are considered and any questions posed are biased to inspire agreement, admission of need, ‘relationship’ – all with an intent to sell something (i.e. steps 10-13); there is no element of the sales model that facilitates systemic change to enable sellers to enter earlier.
9. Until any disruption caused by a purchase (i.e. all purchases are ‘foreign’ elements) is understood, planned for, and agreed to, no purchase will take place. The existing system is sacrosanct; keeping it running smoothly is more important to them than fixing a problem that’s already been baked into the system.
10. Everyone and everything who created the current problem and would potentially touch a new solution must agree to any modification (possible purchase). Until then, they won’t, they can’t buy and they are not buyers.
11. The time it takes people/buyers to discover their own answers and know how to manage change in the least disruptive way, is the length of the sales cycle. It has nothing to do with selling, buying, need, relationship, content, or solutions until the route to congruent change is defined and agreed to. It’s change management issue before it’s a solution choice issue.
12. The last thing people want is to buy something. With their only criteria of ‘solution placement’, sellers often enter at the wrong time in the buying journey, ask the wrong questions, and offer the wrong data – and sell only to the low-hanging fruit (the 5% who have planned their route to change already).
13. Buyers buy using their own buying patterns, not a seller’s selling patterns. Using a specific type of sales effort further restricts the population of those who will buy.
14. There is a difference in goals, outcome, capability of changing, and level of buy-in between those who CAN/WILL buy (based on congruent change) vs those who sellers think SHOULD buy (based solely on need/solution match) and hence waste a helluva lot of time.
15. The time it takes people to come up with their complete set of buy-in and change-based answers is the time it takes them to make a decision to seek an external solution – i.e. become a buyer. It has nothing whatsoever to do with their need, your solution, or your relationship until they are certain they will end up with Systems Congruence. And THEN they are ready to discuss the full complement of needs, criteria for buying a solution, and seek a compatible relationship with a seller.
By only listening for clues that lead you to assume a ‘need’ for your solution, by entering into ‘relationships’ based on what you’re selling, by only asking
questions to ‘prove’ a need/solution match (too often with only one or two members of the full Buying Decision Team [BDT]), you’re not only biasing the interaction, but limiting your sales to closing those who have gotten to the point when they’re ready, willing, able to change – the low hanging fruit; you’re missing the opportunity to enter earlier, develop a real relationship, and facilitate the path that people who CAN buy must take before they are buyers. The sales model does not facilitate systemic change issues; buyers can’t buy unless this occurs and sellers aren’t helping them, merely waiting for them to show up rather than doing the real job of relationship managers and facilitating through their necessary change issues.
HOW SALES RESTRICTS POSSIBILITY
Because we’ve restricted selling to placing solutions, people with problems we could resolve slowly figure out their own path to change while we sit and wait for those who have completed their process to show up. Prospective buyers, facing confusing choices, would be happy to have help navigating through their Pre-Sales systemic decision/change process and adding a true facilitator onto their BDT.
Right now, you’re seeking out those people you’ve determined SHOULD buy (and getting ignored, misaligned, dropped, etc.) and ignoring ways to facilitate those who CAN buy but haven’t yet become buyers. If you enter with a Change Facilitation focus, it’s possible to find those who CAN buy on the first call, and use your relationship and knowledge to facilitate them through the steps of the change management process first, and THEN be there as they determine the need for your solution.
By adding a Change Facilitation processes to your upfront tools (seller-, marketing-, or software-led) you can enter at any step along the Buying Decision Path and be part of the BDT to help them get their ducks in a row. Then you’ve gotten ahead of the competition, reduce your sales cycle by half, only connect with those who WILL buy, close a helluva lot more sales (my clients close 5x more than the control groups using the same lists), and truly serve the people who need you.
I’ve developed a model (Buying Facilitation®) that uses wholly unique skills (Listening for Systems, Facilitative Questions, etc.) to facilitate the discovery of a congruent route to Excellence. A generic model used for coaching, management, leadership, healthcare, I’ve been quite successful teaching it to global corporations ( i.e. IBM, Kaiser, Wachovia, KPMG, etc.) to increase their sales. Currently you’re now wasting 95% of your time running after those few who have finally arrived at step 10 – the low hanging fruit – ignoring the much larger pool of those who are on route, and fighting for a competitive advantage.
By adding new functionality to your sales model, you can enter earlier, be a Servant Leader, and facilitate congruent change and THEN be on board and accepted as a provider as they go through their buying decision process. It’s NOT sales; it’s NOT selling/purchase-based; it IS change-based. Right now you’re waiting while buyers do it anyway (or merely running after those you THINK have a need but end up fixing the problem in other ways). Why not add a skill set, stop wasting time/effort, and close more. Then you’ll never be ‘misaligned.’
____________
Sharon Drew Morgen is an original thinker and thought leader. As the originator of Change Facilitation, she invented Buying Facilitation® for the sales industry; she’s trained over 100,000 sellers globally to diverse industries and cultures. Sharon Drew is the author of 9 books, including the NYTimes Business Bestseller Selling with Integrity, and the Amazon bestsellers Dirty Little Secrets: why buyers can’t buy and sellers can’t sell, and What? Did you really say what I think I heard? Sharon Drew works with individuals and teams as a coach, speaker, trainer, and consultant, in sales, change implementations, healthcare, technology. Her work on listening without bias has been called ‘game-changing’ and is used by corporations globally. Contact her at sharondrew@sharondrewmorgen.com
Sharon Drew Morgen August 14th, 2017
Posted In: Communication, Sales
« Previous Page —
Next Page »
