Meet the World's Worst Seller (is it You?)

Provocative titles aside, it is amazing that in this day and age there are still people who make the kind of calls I talked about at the Marketing Profs Daily Fix. During my career, I have gotten an education (why) on sales and sat in many training sessions (how). I own a signed copy of The Little Red Book of Selling by Jeffrey Gitomer and Solution Selling by Michael Bosworth, among other books on sales.

The smug fellow with the British accent in my story will not be able to sell me one thing because I did not like him -- that is sales 101 as Gitomer teaches here.

There is another question I would like to put to you here. In a related conversation I had off line with Roldano De Persio, he noted how a statement I made "get out there and talk to your customers" should really be the domain of sales, not the marketing team. What do you think?

It's a good observation -- yet in my experience often (not always) sales teams are compensated on the basis of selling to new customers not developing relationships with current clients, therefore this activity may fall to the marketing team. To some this may read like a totally improper and dysfunctional use of resources.

Sales professionals have unique human qualities like resiliency and patience; their role is to be out there and personalize the company product and service. Where the relationship is strong, the customer often buys because they like and trust the sales person. In that case, it may become a challenge to create a broader conversation with the organization  -- testimonials and case studies  are harder to come by then.

One friend I have in sales once told me that he would never share his top clients with the marketing team; he would ask for referrals from them only for his sales calls. What do you think? Is there a middle ground?

Comments

[Joe Raasch]

The mission statement of my current employer is, "Building Better Relationships."

Having been a salesperson (farmer) in a previous capacity, I wouldn't want any marketing folks messing with my accounts! As a business strategy professional, I know that SOMEONE has to keep that relationship with the clients.

If one's sales organization is compensated strictly on new deals (hunters), then I would want marketing to 'take over' as soon as the deal was signed. If I have a sales organization that is compensated on retention (farmers), then marketing is merely a resource for me to tap to assist in building client relationships.

[NW Guy]

Some of this conversation hinges on the type of product being sold but I'll assume a B2B environment where a relationship is beneficial. I agree with Joe; marketing should NOT have the relationship it should belong to Sales (farmers) or Acct Mgmt/Cust Support (if Sales are hunters).

The role of marketing should be assisting; occasionally being brought in to listen/participate in a conversation but not to solve issues in the meeting.

Marketing should be focused on the Market; having conversations with customers and non-customers. Listening to issues and developing ideas that address the larger needs. Provide insights to the Sales and Support folks but don't usurp their responsibilities to have focused conversations with their customers.

[Valeria Maltoni]

@Joe -- someone should cultivate relationships and someone should be planning and creating demand. There is definitely a role in there for customer service or conversations as I call them at Fast Company. I would not dream to mess with accounts ;-)

@Bruce -- what if account management doesn't follow up or call regularly? I guess you get new account managers in that case. The customer should receive service from the whole organization. I have been in a couple of sales-driven companies and the lack of planning for the future was kind of scary.

[Joe Raasch]

Hi Valeria,

I am a big fan of the hunter/farmer sales structure - which allows for marketing to play in both spaces: finding new business AND cultivating existing relationships.

Of course, this requires buy-in from sales and marketing - and the right understanding from clients so they know who their 'people' are at the company. Some businesses throw way too many people at an account - to the confusion of the clients.

[Greg Krauska]

Valeria, the most accomplished salespeople I know tend to be likeable people, but do not focus their energy on getting customers to like them. They focus on increasing their business and personal relevance to the customer and to the customer's organization.

Whether sales or marketing should have the next conversation with the customer really depends on what works best to build mutual trust, value and relevance.

In more complex relationships, both customers and suppliers increasingly prefer tighter alignment. If you are rolling out a multi-year initiative, close alignment across a variety of functions is simply good business.

Regarding your friend who won't share references, if the culture is ultra-competitive (even internally) and that's what will create performance, then terrific. In a newer firm where references are scarce, then a more collaborative approach may make more sense. Either way, leadership needs to tweak the comp plan and be clear about expectations and why.

Sales nearly always responds to comp plan adjustments within, oh, maybe 90 minutes of when they are published.

[Valeria Maltoni]

@Joe -- yet some companies do not have enough people paying attention to customers. I agree with you that marketing and sales should be in agreement and alignment to present a united team.

@Greg -- my favorite sales people are great listeners who give lots of space. Not sharing references may hurt your ability to do PR and marketing (case studies, testimonials, etc.) with your most satisfied customers. That might be good competitive juice for the sales person, I'm not sure it serves the business well in the end as the customer is not a "personal" customer, it's the company's customer. The comp plan is key. Thank you for jumping in here. I know you do a lot of work around this subject matter.

[Michael Wagner]

Great conversation generated by this post. Helpful to read the comments here.

The assumption that any one person manages or "owns" the customer relationship certainly hinges on what is being sold and what the business strategy requires.

During my 5 years as an Internet business strategist for a Web development firm I acquired the client relationship but it was actually a team effort between me and my assigned project manager in the nurturing of the relationship.

Our project managers shared in a portion of the commission since they advanced development projects and often brought new projects to the firm as they listened for opportunity.

More and more the "lone sales person" model has to give way to some sort of team sales model especially in complex B2B sales.

Thanks Valeria for giving birth to this conversation.

Keep creating...worthy dreams,
Mike

[Valeria Maltoni]

Mike:

Your comment made me think about how the lone ranger can also be dangerous -- over promise and under deliver can be a problem in many B2B environments, especially in complex situations. I would be interested in any further thoughts on this.

Anyone want to pitch in?

[Mike]

Valeria, you are so right.

By working as a team with my project manager I could call and get an informed answer to a questions of current capacity.

That way I could manage expectations with clients and have solid answers. For example - "if we start your project now it will take 12 weeks. But if we wait a month, given demand, you can expect something like 24 weeks."

My experience of B2B sales that are complex and consultative by nature is that most firms undervalue teamwork and collaboration between sales and production.

That is one reason I have dedicated my work with White Rabbit to "connecting to dots" between sales, marketing and production.

Love this conversation!

Keep creating...conversations that connect,
Mike

[Greg Krauska]

Mike, yes - many firms not only undervalue internal collaboration, they unwisely encourage siloing and internal competition. Meanwhile the customer watches and shakes her head wondering why.

There is a simpler way than figuring out the combination of over/under-promise and over/under deliver, what if suppliers and customers just make and keep promises?