Brian Lange

While observing a client company run a “Closing Skills” workshop of theirs, the following Close attempts were overheard:

“Can we agree…”

“Would you agree…”

“Is there anything holding you back from using my product…”

“Can you see how…”

“Since they’ve had such success, would you commit to…”

“Based on our conversation, I’d recommend that you…”

“Now that you’ve had success, I’d recommend that you…Does that sound right to you?”

“Do you feel the product meets everything we discussed? Is there anything missing?”

“I have one recommendation…”

“Does that sound like you’d want to use (my product)? Does that make sense?”

“Would you admit there’s an opportunity to…”

“With that said–over the next week–how many can you try?”

“Can you see that by following our information, we deliver a…”

If I put myself in the shoes of the customers who would be hearing these Closes…I have to admit—I wouldn’t like it. I think the overall idea that someone would be getting me to “agree”—or acquiesce—to what they want me to do…would be problematic. Maybe I’m too independent…place too much value in the conviction and wisdom of my own thoughts/ideas/solutions…or, perhaps I simply don’t like the idea of feeling that I surrendered to the other person’s solution (or had to “admit” they were right). Maybe I need to talk to a professional about this…

But—maybe there’s something here to really think about: Maybe the time has come to re-examine—if not kill—the traditional Close. The Close in which the seller identifies a path forward, and seeks to gain a “tangible commitment” from the buyer. Conventional Wisdom has held—and traditional sales training has supported—that the seller is somehow best suited for ensuring that some form of a commitment to an action on the part of the buyer is achieved. Thus, it is usually the seller who proposes a given solution, and seeks to get the buyer to agree/commit to it.

Perhaps the seller should not do all the heavy-lifting during the Close. There seem to be a few compelling downsides to the seller coming up with the Close’s solution:

• Buyer has no “ownership” in the solution, and may not feel as compelled to implement it (there is research indicating that when a person is involved in making a decision, they are 5X more likely to carry it out!)
• Seller gets what s/he wanted, but how about the buyer?
• Buyer can feel tempted to agree—just to hurry the call along
• The quality of the solution is potentially less because only one person has generated the idea (no collaboration)
• Changing behavior is not simply a rational undertaking: when buyer “agrees” to seller’s (likely) rational Close suggestion—this process may miss any uncovering of the buyer’s emotional connection—or beliefs—related to the idea of this proposed change. An emotional commitment to change must usually be present in order for actual behavior to change.
• Using this approach delivers a sales experience that is just like all the other sales calls the buyer has likely participated in: no differentiation!

Ultimately, there is greater opportunity for sales professionals to collaborate with customers on what “next steps” might be possible at the end of a sales call. By having ownership in the development of the action item, the buyer will be more likely to carry through with the action. In this approach, the role of the seller is more focused on facilitating dialogue and process—and less on “convincing” the buyer to agree. All mourn the death of the old-school, one-way Close…It’s time to give Sales Professionals some new tools to produce more effective and more collaborative Closes!

A Banker resigned today–very publicly–from his employer and published an Opinion piece in the New York Times (http://tinyurl.com/6ozlqmt). Some are claiming sour grapes as a result of a lower-than-expected bonus–but, regardless, the editorial is worth noting some key reminders for those that help steer the ships or tend the sails of organizations.

Organizational Culture MATTERS. I always tell clients, “you can get your culture by accident–or, you can deliberately plan for the culture you desire…and then build it” (your front-line managers are absolutely essential!). In this instance, the Banker initially identified with the culture at the firm he joined:

“It revolved around teamwork, integrity, a spirit of humility, and always doing right by clients.”

Ultimately, though, 12-years into his employment, he realized that the firm had “veered so far from the place” he joined, that he could no longer say he identified “with what it stands for.” He no longer had “the pride, or the belief.”

How does this happen? Very easily, I’m afraid. When management loses sight of the difference they make in their customers’ lives (their purpose!), or fails to uphold the values their company espouses–day-in, and day-out–the very identity of an organization begins to dilute. And the people within that organization can not possibly perform at peak levels of performance and engagement.

In the end, it is what leaders talk about, reinforce and DO that influences how others really understand the culture. In the last paragraph of the letter, the Banker compelled his former employer to “get the culture right again, so people want to work here for the right reasons.” It’s reasonably simple: Define the culture you want; identify the workplace behaviors that will help you get there; train to expectations (with skill development); and LIVE the plan.

And, if you’re lucky enough, you won’t have an employee resign on the pages of the New York Times. Ouch.

Boy, are we in trouble. Just when I thought I’d heard of every Politically Correct/nurturing/self-esteem building tactic around–I read a Twitter message from business author Marcus Buckingham (@mwbuckingham) last night:

“My daughter was ‘1st’ in her dance competition. Then she learned this meant 3rd, behind Top 1st, & Elite 1st. She could’ve handled the truth”

What?!!! “Top 1st?” “Elite 1st?” Are you KIDDING me?! I have some real concerns for when young people hit my domain: The American Workplace. If everyone comes in feeling special, and elite–and they’ve all been pumped-up with praise (often unwarranted)–what happens when things don’t go their way? When they meet with disappointment? When they don’t get acknowledged with winning “President’s Club” or “Employee of the Year/Quarter/Month?” What about when a boss isn’t satisfied with the quality of effort/result in a project? Will young people crash with despair? Lose hope?

It is precisely the journey of EXPERIENCING the joys and sorrows of life that ultimately teaches us how to COPE. In the absence of having experienced challenging times/heartbreak/disappointment…we end up completely UNPREPARED for when these inevitable realities occur. So, making everyone a “Winner”–where everyone gets a trophy (for participating!), and everyone is uniquely special and talented–is really doing a DISSERVICE to them…it’s just not realistic.

I am reminded of when my then-8-year old son was finishing up his 3rd round of golf–EVER!–and checked-in with me for verification of his talents: “Dad, I’m really good, aren’t I?!” I wouldn’t take the bait. “Son, I feel you’re right where you’re supposed to be after 3 rounds of golf. Keep at it.” But, this was not what he wanted to hear. He wanted confirmation of his uniqueness: “But, Dad…seriously: I’m really good, right?” Now, some of you may be pleading with me at this moment, hoping I nurtured his potential, and gave him hope and inspiration to work toward becoming a splendid Amateur Golfer. Sorry. “Son, you’re progressing as you should be for a golfer who has been on the course three times. Keep having fun and practicing. I’m sure enjoying being with you.”

Marcus’ Twitter comment called to mind an article I read last year by David Brooks of The New York Times entitled, “We Are Not That Special.” He shared research that showed that in the 1950s, 12 percent of high school seniors said they were a “very important person.” By the ’90s, 80 percent said they believed they were! Wow! What an uptick in self-esteem/perception! Jean Twenge of San Diego State University was also referenced in the article calling attention to the fact that young people are “bathed in messages telling them how special they are” and that these messages are often “untethered to evidence of actual merit” (love that line!).

Also cited were Roni Rabin of The Times who noted research that found that college students would rather receive a compliment than eat their favorite food or have sex.

OK. It’s official: we have gone too far with praise for our kids. Here’s hoping your own kid comes in 3rd–or worse!–and that they experience what that FEELS like. Seems it’s an essential component of developing into a fully-functioning adult. And, we NEED fully-functioning adults who can handle tough (realistic) feedback and can be challenged to strive for even greater levels of achievement at work…

Will someone please tell me this was an incredible post, and maybe send me an E-Certificate of Achievement?

“But then…something happens…and in that moment–awesome or lousy–you are living something you will never forget, something that jumps out of the toneless roar of day-to-day life.” Joe Posnanski, Sports Writer

http://joeposnanski.si.com/2011/09/29/baseball-night-in-america/>

The quote above was from a blog post about baseball, and how last night was one of the most memorable nights in recent memory–with 4 teams tied for 2 different Wild Cards for the Playoffs. Posnanski acknowledged that–yes–baseball is boring…but it is in the moments where the unexpected happens (pitcher blows lead in bottom of the 9th; runner gives his all to 1st base on sure-out grounder–despite not needing to win the game (already clinched playoffs); pitcher shakes-off 4+ signals from the catcher, etc.) that makes it stand out (jump out!) for us.

For me–Posnanski’s point also makes the case that Presenters need to give their audiences the unexpected…jar them from their “normal” expectations…That’s what helps make things memorable:

* If every presentation seems to start off with a bio about the presenter and a ton of slides with lots and lots of text–do something unexpected!

* If the audience expects the Presenter to do all of the work (talking)–do something unexpected! Get audiene INVOLVED!

* If audience expects Presenter to be at Podium (or in front of room)–do something unexpected!

* If audience expects Presenter to handle the summary of key “takeways”–do something unexpected!

So, let’s commit to breaking out of the “toneless roar of day-to-day” presentations! Consider the argument shared in a 2009 article by Shumpeter in The Economist: “There is no long-term comparative advantage in being forgettable.”

Ask someone who’s just delivered a presentation how things went, and you often hear something like, “Um…I think it went pretty well.” Ask further, “What might be different for the audience as a result of the presentation?”–and you may see shrugged shoulders and a quizzical expression on his/her face. Don’t know about you, but I tend to desire a stronger sense of how things have gone when I’ve presented…so, I want more data from the audience. I want to do some research. I want to know what—if any—delta (change) has occurred. So, I conduct “mini-debriefs” or “audience check-ins” throughout my deliveries.

To “debrief” means to “question to obtain knowledge or gather intelligence.” It’s helpful to begin debriefs with open-ended questions such as:

* What are you thinking about after that content?
* What–if anything–struck you about that?
* What’s on your mind?
* How do you react to this information?
The benefit of debriefs is that they provide an opportunity for the presenter to gauge–or check-in–with where an audience is in its thinking or understanding. It is NOT a time to seek AGREEMENT or ensure “buy-in” (this cheapens the experience, and serves to try and push people through pre-determined hoops). An ideal mindset for presenters is, “It’s all Good!” They should ACCEPT whatever content is shared from the audience—even when it is different than hoped for, or even contrary to goal of presentation– and NOT try to “fix” (at least initially) a viewpoint shared from a learner. Better to focus on helping the other feel heard. Worth repeating: better to help the other feel HEARD.

“OK…yes. For you, this new idea feels like it might make us feel good to be doing SOMETHING—but, it may not ultimately be an effective thing to do.” This format can greatly reduce the chance a speaker creates an adversarial situation, or a power struggle with an audience member.

After getting several audience member perspectives, it can also be helpful to give a summary:

“OK…we’ve got a variety of takes on this topic. Some are excited about the proposed direction; some concerned; others waiting to decide—and still others are a little fearful we’ve been down this road before.”
(Demonstrating this, “It’s all Good” mindset actually serves to enhance the credibility of presenter, and raises safety in the room).

If the speaker has additional ideas or information that may influence the audience’s perspective/concern, a strategy that can be helpful is to provide a teaser that establishes some credibility and generates interest—and offers the audience a chance to have ownership in whether it wants to hear the additional information:

“I recently read some research that explored a very similar issue [credibility]…would it be helpful if I shared a couple of their findings with you [ownership]?”

This approach heightens the chance that the audience may be more receptive to hearing the additional information because they had ownership in choosing to hear it. By the way, if they had said “no,” it would have likely indicated they still hadn’t felt heard by the speaker!

A presentation shouldn’t be done TO an audience, it should be conducted WITH them…checking-in throughout–or at the minimum, at the end—to gauge perspective is an important component of the experience. Know what’s “different” at the end of your presentations! Be curious. Enjoy and savor the interaction…