From the CCS® Sales Blog

Top 20 Sales Training Companies

CustomerCentric Selling® Is Selected to the Top 20 Sales Training Companies List for the Tenth Consecutive Year

Training Industry Names CustomerCentric Selling® to the 2018 Top Sales Training Companies List

Boston, MA, March 26, 2018

CustomerCentric Selling® (CCS®), a proven methodology for improving revenue growth and sales performance, today announced that Training Industry, Inc. has named CustomerCentric Selling® to the select list of Top 20 Sales Training Companies for the tenth straight year in a row, since Training Industry first started publishing the prestigious list in 2009.

“The organizations on this year’s Top 20 Sales Training Companies List have shown a tremendous amount of growth and innovation in the sales training industry,” said Ken Taylor, president of Training Industry, Inc. “These companies have demonstrated their commitment to the modern learner, with innovative partnerships and the use of learning technologies to support a wide range of initiatives, including virtual instruction, training reinforcement and coaching.”

CustomerCentric Selling® President and Chief Operating Officer, Frank Visgatis, states, “We’re thrilled to be included in this honorable list for the tenth consecutive year. Training Industry, Inc. is a highly respected resource for organizations seeking the best in our industry.” Visgatis adds, “This tremendous recognition speaks volumes to the high standards we have set for ourselves over the years and to how our methodology has stood the test of time in its relentless focus on the buyer. Our clients worldwide are evidence of the growth, success and results we continually strive to deliver, making us a trusted partner for ongoing sales improvement.”

The 2018 Top 20 Sales Training Companies list recognizes the top sales training companies in the industry. These leading companies provide outstanding service, and a proven track record for delivering superior sales training and improving the impact of the sales organization.

Sales training companies are evaluated based on the following criteria:

• Thought leadership and influence on the sales training sector
• Breadth and quality of sales training topics and competencies
• Company size and growth potential
• Industry recognition and innovation
• Strength of clients and geographic reach

“The companies selected for the 2018 Sales Training Companies Watch List are emerging and consistent players in the sales training market,” said Tom Whelan, director of corporate research at Training Industry, Inc. “These organizations have proven that they have specific strengths and are able to offer a wide portfolio of sales training topics that incorporate trending learning and development technologies.”

About CustomerCentric Selling® – The Sales Training Company

CustomerCentric Selling® (CCS®) specializes in world-class sales training.
CustomerCentric Selling® (CCS®) is a proven methodology for predictably improving revenue growth and sales performance. Founded in 2002, CCS® helps clients worldwide to implement repeatable, auditable and scalable sales processes that, when combined with CustomerCentric Messaging® (Sales Ready Messaging®), guides marketing and sales to have meaningful conversations with customers and prospects. This results in winning high-value deals, retaining and growing client relationships and improving the predictability and accuracy of sales forecasts.

CustomerCentric Selling® is annually named to Training Industry’s list of Top Sales Training Companies. For more information, visit www.customercentric.com

Give Skilled Craftsmen Better Tools

Sales Tips: Give Skilled Craftsmen Better Tools

By John Holland, Chief Content Officer, CustomerCentric Selling®

Many sales executives that are considering training their salespeople question whether their top performers should attend. My suggestion is:

If a sales process is chosen it’s important that all sellers use the same approach and have a common skill set to be able to execute the process.

That foundation gives first level sales managers a much better chance of successfully assessing and developing sellers that report to them.

sales training company

With all due respect to “A Players” I hope you agree they sell intuitively. They are so talented they ad lib (wing) sales calls and are successful. That said, few A Players sell “on purpose.” By that I mean they have a plan, execute it and can articulate exactly where they are in a given sales cycle. If you doubt it, think about how frequently estimated close dates slip on opportunities in an A Player’s pipeline. The good news is their close rates are much higher than B/C Players but forecasting is a challenge.

My thought is many projected dates reflect the seller’s or vendor’s need to close by month, quarter or year-end without much thought to when the buyer may be ready to buy.

I’d like to cite two (2) examples of A Players that quantified significant improvement in top-line revenue after attending CCS® Workshops:

I happened to run into a senior salesperson for a distributor of Canon printers, copiers and faxes when I was onsite to teach another workshop. Jeff had been and continued to be a top performer year after year. I intimated that he probably didn’t need to attend the workshop and his response surprised me.

He said he had been “maxed out” prior to attending CCS® and said that being able to disqualify low probability opportunities sooner allowed him to increase top-line by 50%. Qualifying using CCS® milestones (selling on purpose) had a significant impact.

sales training company

A seller (Rusty) from a client (InContact) that sells call center software did part of a video testimonial that is posted on our Customer Showcase on our website. After being promoted to a sales manager he looked back and realized after the CCS® workshop he was able to drive revenues higher by 40%.

Rusty says in the testimonial that such an increase would be likely for a relatively inexperienced salesperson, but it was “unexpected” of a top performer.
It stands to reason if you give a craftsman a better tool their final product will be better. As it turns out superior sellers have significant upside if they follow a proven process.

sales training company

publicworkshoppagesection

CustomerCentric Selling® – Bedford

Price: CustomerCentric Selling® Workshop – $2900 (USD) per attendee. If three (3) people from one company attend, AND that company also sends a role play coach (who has been through the training in the last 24 months), the per student fee is reduced to $2400 (USD) and the coach attends at no charge. The workshop includes daily continental breakfast, morning and afternoon breaks and lunch, and all classroom materials.,
Dates:Oct 24, 2017 – Oct 27, 2017
WorkshopDetails: You may register online at www.customercentric.com, by telephone (800) 993-1228 ext 701, or by e-mail at fvisgatis@customercentric.com. Please let us know if you will need an invoice. Payment in full is required before the commencement of the workshop. Cancellations received within three (3) weeks prior to the start of the workshop will be subject to a 50% cancellation fee: $1,350 (USD) per attendee. Cancellations received within two (2) weeks prior to the start of the workshop will be subject to a 100% cancellation fee: $2,700 (USD) per attendee. Space is limited to thirty (30) attendees, maximum, to ensure quality.

CustomerCentric Selling® – Denver

Price:CustomerCentric Selling® Workshop – $2900 (USD) per attendee. If three (3) people from one company attend, AND that company also sends a role play coach (who has been through the training in the last 24 months), the per student fee is reduced to $2400 (USD) and the coach attends at no charge. The workshop includes daily continental breakfast, morning and afternoon breaks and lunch, and all classroom materials.
Dates:Sep 12, 2017 – Sep 15, 2017
Dec 5, 2017 – Dec 8, 2017
Workshop Details:You may register online at www.customercentric.com, by telephone (800) 993-1228, Ext. 702, or by e-mail at gwalker@customercentric.com. Please let us know if you will need an invoice. Payment in full is required before the commencement of the workshop. Cancellations received within three (3) weeks prior to the start of the workshop will be subject to a 50% cancellation fee: $1,350 (USD) per attendee. Cancellations received within two (2) weeks prior to the start of the workshop will be subject to a 100% cancellation fee: $2,700 (USD) per attendee. Space is limited to thirty (30) attendees, maximum, to ensure quality.




CustomerCentric Selling® – London

Price:CustomerCentric Selling® Workshop – € 2400 (EUR) per attendee. If three (3) people from one company attend, the cost will be € 2200 (EUR) per attendee. The workshop includes daily continental breakfast, morning and afternoon breaks and lunch, and all class room materials. All fees are quoted in Euros and are net of any relevant tax.
Dates:Feb 20, 2018 – Feb 22, 2018
Workshop Details:You may register online at www.customercentric.com or by email to Alan Harton: aharton@customercentric.com or +44 (0) 7990 520940. An invoice will be sent to you and a full payment is required four (4) weeks before the commencement of the workshop. Cancellations received within two (2) weeks prior to the start of the workshop will be subject to a 50% cancellation fee: € 1200 (EUR) for the training and 100% cancellation fee for the hotel accommodation. Space is limited to twenty (20) attendees, maximum, to insure quality. You can substitute another participant without penalty.


Sales Training Workshop: San Francisco

Price:CustomerCentric Selling® Workshop – $2900 (USD) per attendee. As a special incentive, if three (3) or more people from the same company attend (no coach required), the tuition is reduced to $2600 per person. The workshop includes daily cook-to-order breakfast, morning and afternoon breaks and lunch, and all classroom materials. The hotel provides free airport shuttles and the special rate includes internet and complimentary parking.
Dates:Mar 6, 2018 – Mar 9, 2018,Sep 11, 2018 – Sep 14, 2018
Workshop Details:You may register online at www.customercentric.com, by telephone (800) 993-1228, Ext. 702, or by e-mail at gwalker@customercentric.com. Payment in full is required at time of registration. Cancellations received within three (3) weeks prior to the start of the workshop will be subject to a 50% cancellation fee: $1,450 (USD) per attendee. Cancellations received within two (2) weeks prior to the start of the workshop will be subject to a 100% cancellation fee: $2,900 (USD) per attendee. Space is limited to thirty (30) attendees, maximum, to ensure quality.




Sales Training Workshop: Adelaide

Price:CustomerCentric Selling® Workshop – $2900 per attendee. If three (3) people from one company enroll, a fourth person may be enrolled at ‘no charge’. The workshop includes daily continental breakfast, morning and afternoon breaks and lunch, and all class room materials.
Dates:Mar 26, 2018 – Mar 28, 2018,Nov 7, 2018 – Nov 9, 2018
Workshop Details:For those traveling by air, make your travel arrangements in and out of Adelaide’s International Airport.
You may register on-line at www.customercentric.com, by telephone 61 8 8361 8666 or by email at dmiller@acuere.com.au Please let us know if you will need an invoice. Payment in full is required before the commencement of the workshop. Should you need to cancel an enrolment, we will transfer your payment to another course if we are advised in writing 14 days prior to the start of the course. If you cancel within 14 days your payment will be forfeited. You can substitute another participant without penalty.


Sales Training Article: 4 Components of a Sales Process

Sales Training Article: 4 Components of a Sales Process

By John Holland, Chief Content Officer, CustomerCentric Selling® – The Sales Training Company

sales process

Selling is the business discipline most resistant to process and technology. Companies implement stringent procedures for order entry, billing, accounts receivable, accounts payable, general ledger, etc.

As relates to top-line revenue generation, few have established sales process.

As a result sales calls are like snowflakes. No two are the same. Sellers are given wide latitude in how to sell, how to position offerings, what opportunities they pursue and the progress they report. In these organizations a high percentage of sales calls are ad-libs.

CRM software was created to track seller activities and improve pipeline visibility. Without question there is value in centralizing and collecting contact information and sales activities.

The problem is that subjective seller opinions about progress on opportunities are the input to CRM systems.

The old IT adage of “garbage in-garbage out” applies because inaccurate opinions compromise the reports generated. How often have you seen sellers inflate otherwise “thin” pipelines?

Years ago I worked with an early CRM provider. Their VP of Sales told me by using their software he was +/- 5% in his revenue forecasts, accuracy most companies can only dream of achieving. They had defined 8 pipeline milestones. From the first day they joined the company new sellers entered data. Over time the system captured and applied each seller’s historical close rates on opportunities in each of the 8 milestones.

I asked him if his salespeople told customers their forecasts would be that accurate once the software was implemented. He said they did. I then discussed with him that his forecasts were based upon heuristic calculations. The software captured how accurate (inaccurate) sellers had been in the past and applied historical close rate to each milestone to create each month’s forecast.

New clients would need to gather sufficient data for sellers before their forecast accuracy would improve. If sellers left the company that data was gone forever. When new hires joined, there was a lag before their forecasts could be calculated. If new offerings were announced there was no historical data for a period of time.

A colleague told me years ago:

Technology without process speeds up the mess.

Forecasts can be generated with a few keystrokes but the reports are likely to be just as inaccurate as spreadsheets that were used years ago when sales managers did their “seat of the pants” forecasts which was mostly paring down over optimistic seller projections.

Applying Artificial Intelligence (AI) to sales has begun in earnest. There are benefits to be gained, but companies having an overall framework can enjoy the competitive advantage of reaping benefits of applying AI sooner.

The four (4) components needed for sales process are:

1. Sets of defined milestones for the various types of sales that must be executed.

2. Sales ready messaging® so that sellers position offerings to specific titles consistently.

3. A common skill set so sellers have the requisite skills to execute messaging.

4. Auditability to allow sales managers to grade opportunities based upon buyer actions rather than seller opinions.

Most AI applications require analyses of terabytes of historical data to identify actions that are likely to improve results. It’s the equivalent of finding needles in huge haystacks.

The structure defined above can allow best practices to be identified shortly after AI has been implemented.

Sales Training Article: Key to Being “Customer-Centric”

Sales Training Article: Key to Being “Customer-Centric”

By John Holland, Chief Content Officer, CustomerCentric Selling® – The Sales Training Company

customer-centric

An August 23rd newswire summarized the findings of a survey done by Pegasystems with 250 global financial services companies. Some of the results:

  • 79% agree financial institutions will move from product-based selling to focus more on personal relationships in the next 5 years.
  • Only 31% deploy relationship-based sales models to any degree and only 1% fully leverage them.
  • 29% are mired in product-based selling.

As with changing the direction of a battleship going full steam ahead, getting your organization to migrate to relationship and buyer outcome selling is NOT something that can happen overnight.

A common misconception is that becoming “customer-centric” or buyer-centric is something to be done by Sales with support from Marketing.

Merely making someone responsible for “Sales Enablement” means paying lip service to an outcome that is difficult to achieve.

The major hurdle is overcoming the intense focus on products, a company-wide affliction that stifles attempts to put customers/buyers first.

Product sales are more about offerings, less about buyers and more likely to result in lower margins.

In coauthoring Rethinking The Sales Cycle (published by McGraw-Hill in 2010) we were unable to find a B2B vendor that could serve as a model for being customer-centric. Instead we had to use Apple as an example. It remains to be seen how the longer term will be, but the brilliance of Steve Jobs had a tremendous impact. Unlike virtually all competitors Apple has not sold computers. Other computer companies sell processing power, disk capacity, etc. that lead to commodity decisions.

CEO Steve Jobs had the remarkable ability to understand what the market wanted and then create offerings that people wanted to buy.

He was maniacal about dictating the design and functionality that would resonate. As an Apple customer since 1990 I’ve continually bought their desktops and laptops without considering alternatives that likely cost 50% less. Apple offers reliability, support and has become an integral part of my life via iPhones, iPads, iPods, etc.

Absent a genius like Jobs, it’s incumbent upon companies to learn their customers’ requirements.

Product-focused companies create offerings they think buyers will want and then ask Sales and Marketing to use “push” strategies to sell to their markets.

I hope you see how flawed this approach is.

Shifting to a “Pull” Strategy
As an alternative, vendors that create organizations that can listen to their customers and articulate needs to Product Development enjoy the advantage of creating offerings that people are more likely to want to buy. They can enjoy higher revenue due to “pull” of market demand.

The primary takeaway from the changes in buying behavior over the last 15 years that vendors should realize is that buyers want to exert more control in making buying decisions. They don’t want to be “sold” (manipulated by salespeople). Instead they want to be empowered to buy offerings that enable them to achieve desired business outcomes.

Organizations that want to be customer-centric can’t get away with a new coat of paint.

Teardowns are required to shift from inside-out views of markets to outside-in views where customer needs are the fuel that propels Product Development.

This requires significant organizational change, but vendors that are successful in this migration can enjoy a sustainable competitive advantage over their competitors that continue to use selling approaches that buyers have rendered obsolete.

Since the turn of the century we’ve never seen the runaway revenue growth of the 90’s that vendors enjoyed. I find it odd in light of all the DIY purported “buying activity” via the Internet and social networking. It is time to realize the difference between product evaluations done by mid to low level staff versus corporate initiatives to improve business results that will provide the necessary value to provide payback.

Vendors need to position themselves to proactively use top-down strategies to qualify opportunities. In order to do so vendors must provide sellers with business results that have been or can be achieved through the use of their offerings. When calling high, executives don’t want to learn all about a vendor’s offerings.

To better align, sellers should discuss business outcomes and how offerings can be used to achieve them.

Executive would be more open to vendors that realized product pitches are relics of the past when sellers pushed products.

Sales Training Article: When to Provide Pricing and How

Sales Training Article: When to Provide Pricing and How

By John Holland, Chief Content Officer, CustomerCentric Selling® – The Sales Training Company

sales training workshop

A common misconception (maybe perpetuated by Procurement) is that price is the primary reason for making buying decisions of non-commodity items. Many salespeople are tentative or defensive when providing prices.

Either verbally or via body language sellers send messages to buyers that quotations aren’t set in concrete.

Price is an important component in making decisions and I wanted to share a few thoughts on when and how to provide pricing.

  • Sellers open themselves up to pricing questions when they mention product prematurely. Once product is on the table it’s reasonable for buyers to ask: “How much?” This question often elicits slippery (“your mileage may vary”) stereotypical responses from salespeople. At some level they know providing price isn’t the right thing to do at this point.

TIP: My suggestion in situations where value hasn’t been established is to tell buyers that you can’t give an accurate estimate until you better understand their requirements and ask if pricing discussions can be deferred. Most buyers will give sellers this latitude.

  • Others will persist and want pricing now. They’ll become frustrated with sellers that don’t respond. Years ago I would give these buyers a range. The problem in doing that was they would always remember the lower number and try to hold me to it.

TIP: I found a way to prevent that from happening by offering them a “not to exceed” number. If after sharing that number I needed smelling salts to revive a buyer it was likely:

  • This company wasn’t a prospect
  • I needed to call higher

In my experience the higher a seller calls, the lower the likelihood there will be early questions about pricing.

This may be due to the fact that higher levels aren’t limited by budget. If a new initiative offers more value than planned acquisitions executives have the ability to re-allocate budgets.

Bonus Tips:

  • I also suggest buyers should know the pricing soon after they understand value. Ultimately price is a qualifier and should be provided fairly early in the buying process.
  • I also believe an important factor in reducing negotiations is the level of the person sellers ultimately close. If you’re selling technology and ask IT or Procurement for the business, brace yourself for several hard pricing squeezes. In stark contrast if you’re closing a line VP who understands the potential value, protracted negotiating sequences are less likely.

Sellers are usually viewed as people that must push sales cycles forward. Once Key Players understand value they recognize there is a cost of delay and don’t want to move through buying cycles to start reaping benefits. 

Sales Training Article: Old Selling Approaches Yield Poor Buying Experiences

Sales Training Article: Old Selling Approaches Yield Poor Buying Experiences

By John Holland, Chief Content Officer, CustomerCentric Selling® – The Sales Training Company

sales training workshop

Over the last decade vendors began to evaluate buying experiences they were providing. The truth be told, many were motivated by a shift in power as buyers leveled playing fields with sellers by using the Internet and social networking.

Selling approaches have changed at a glacial pace.

Most vendors deserve low grades or “incompletes” for their efforts to improve the way they treat buyers. Creating Sales Enablement functions without the needed organizational changes has been the equivalent of applying Band-Aids when surgery was needed.

It seems to me there’s a fundamental flaw in the way vendors look at buyers.

For decades sales organizations have viewed a seller’s job as getting buyers to do what they wanted them to do (buy).

If buyers raised objections sellers were taught how to overcome them. Some sellers welcome objections because each one that is overcome means they are a step closer to getting the business. They subscribe to the theory that selling begins when buyers say no. What a horrible way to treat people trying to make buying decisions.

The Internet and social networking allowed buyers to see an alternative to “being sold.” The problem in my mind has been that executives lack the time and most websites lack the content to engage them.

This has some important implications:

1) Many “buyers” doing product evaluations have neither budget nor support from executives in their companies.

2) There is little if any need development to estimate the potential cost vs. benefit and assess if there is potential value.

As with many things in business the pendulum of control seems to have shifted in buyers’ favor.

That said, evaluating offerings before understanding whether purchases can be justified can result in wasted time, effort and resources.

Buyers doing product evaluations are fortunate if they encounter a competent seller to pull them back to identify potential desired business outcomes and re-evaluate the capabilities needed to achieve them.

The challenge to vendors is developing salespeople with the skills needed to help buyers migrate from product evaluations to building business cases.

If done properly sellers can get away from attempting to make people buy. Buying committees that define their desired business outcomes, understand why they can’t be achieved and are aware of the capabilities needed become empowered to buy. Vendors that can teach their sales staff how to execute business outcome rather than product sales will provide superior buying experiences.

Realizing people prefer to buy rather than be sold is a significant step in improving buyer experiences.

As soon as our children could talk, they resisted attempts to convince or persuade them to do things my wife and I wanted them to do.

Why do vendors cling to an obsolete definition of selling that buyers will resist? They want to be empowered to buy.  

You Have 3 Goals the First Time You Meet a Potential Client. Popularity Is Not One of Them.

You Have 3 Goals the First Time You Meet a Potential Client. Popularity Is Not One of Them.

sales training workshops

Have you ever tried to make someone like you? Turns out, relationships evolve over time. Seller attempts to accelerate the process can be awkward because sales is a profession buyers generally don’t hold in high esteem. When calling at executive levels, sellers may feel a buyer’s time is worth more than theirs. Taking Al Franken’s approach can be deadly —

“I’m good enough, I’m smart enough, and doggone it, people like me.”

Given the long-standing stereotype of buyer-seller relationships, many salespeople hope buyers will like them. This contributes to sellers failing to view themselves as equals because buyers aren’t making any efforts to get sellers to like them.

Related: The 3 Most Important Skills in Sales

When meeting buyers for the first time, I suggest a good initial objective would be to have buyers conclude you are trustworthy. Steven Covey believed that in order to be deemed trustworthy, the other party must believe you are sincere and competent.

I’d like to offer a few suggestions about how to best approach the first few minutes of a buyer-seller relationship:

1. Be sincere.

Being sincere requires sellers to rise above stereotypical selling behavior. Right after shaking hands, most salespeople thank buyers for their time. This means starting relationships as a subordinate. As an alternative after the handshake, say something like, “I’m glad we could meet today.” Thank buyers for their time after they’ve given it to you. Not before.

2. Establish rapport or get down to business?

Once the introduction has been made, if buyers don’t initiate small talk, sellers must decide whether to attempt to establish rapport or get down to business. My suggestion is for sellers to be quiet for a few seconds to give buyers the opportunity to initiate small talk. If they don’t, give a brief introduction explaining the objectives for the call rather than try to force rapport. There are many instances where rapport will happen after the business portion of calls.

Related: How to Close Deals Without Coming Off as Salesy

3. Establish competence.

Establishing competence is the next potential hurdle. Sellers should view executives as peers for the following reasons:

  • They are subject matter experts and have forgotten more than buyers will ever know about offerings.
  • They (or their companies) have experience helping other executives realize the potential value of their offerings.

Stop trying to be liked. Earning a buyer’s respect will increase the probability that there will be a subsequent meeting if your offering may offer some value to the buyer.

I can buy from sellers I like, but don’t respect, when making relatively unimportant buying decisions. That said, for important decisions, I’ll choose to buy from the seller I respect rather than one that I like.

Like and respect from buyers are not mutually exclusive and like any other relationship, develops over time. My contention is that trying to force personal relationships early can undermine selling efforts and position salespeople as subordinates rather than peers.

Related: Top 10 Tools for Maximizing Business-to-Business Sales

I hope these suggestions allow you to capitalize on opportunities. Remember, buying cycles begin when buyers share a business goal or problem. Executives typically will not share goals with sellers they haven’t identified as sincere and competent.

Sales Training Article: Help Your Buyers See Sufficient Value or Lose to No Decision

Sales Training Article: Help Your Buyers See Sufficient Value or Lose to No Decision

By John Holland, Chief Content Officer, CustomerCentric Selling® – The Sales Training Company

sales training company

My view is that too many “opportunities” ultimately end with buyers making no decision. This is an unfortunate outcome for all vendors that were involved but also represents a waste of time, effort and resources for companies doing evaluations.

One of the major reasons for no decisions is a lack of adequate payback/value. I believe many sellers would struggle to help create an enterprise view of potential value.

Buying cycles that will become committee decisions are far more complex for sellers to execute. It is important that there be some identified benefit for each major stakeholder if a purchase is going to be made.

CCS® helps clients identify the titles that are likely to be involved if a seller is going to sell, fund and implement offerings. These stakeholders have different objectives and business outcomes they hope to achieve in making purchase decisions.

Many sellers are unable to gain access to all the stakeholders by:

  • Starting with levels in the organization whose interest is primarily in offerings rather than business outcomes.
  • Asking lower levels for access to other titles. There are 3 ways of gaining access to stakeholders listed here in decreasing degree of probability of being successful:
    • Ask for access to higher levels (typical in bottom-up sales approaches)
    • Ask for access laterally (to peers of the initial contact)
    • Ask for access downward to people lower in the organization.

In my experience top-down access has the quickest and highest probability of conducting successful sales/buying cycles.

I say that because decision maker levels will self-qualify. By that I mean if they don’t see adequate potential value they won’t waste their nor their subordinates’ time.

When calling on each Key Player, sellers should have menus of potential business outcomes and uncover as many as possible.

By doing so sellers have the ability to summarize potential value for each person involved in the decision. Often it is necessary to help buyers understand their baseline metrics (where they are without the seller’s offering) and have them project the potential improvement. It is important that the Key Players quantify the results they feel they can achieve.

At some point in the buying cycle it can be a competitive differentiator to have the committee realize the total potential value of moving forward with a seller’s recommendation. This approach can neutralize what may be a seller’s most formidable competitor: No decision.