These famous words were spoken by the cartoon character Dilbert by Scott Adams. The phrase suggests doubt. Doubt in the idea of change is often times rooted in our own self-imposed confinement of past experiences. These experiences (former collections of ideas and experiences) affects our ability to truly embrace change. Hence the natural corollary to our ability/inability to think outside the box.
Are humans incapable of original thought?
One of the main points of this idea is defining what an original thought is. All the time we come up with what we think is an original thought, yet this thought has come from somewhere. Humans cannot imagine something that excludes everything they have ever seen. Therefore, are we incapable of original thought? If we are incapable of original thought, is this one of the limiting factors on our advancement as a species?
Many would say that a song writer creating a new song is original. But is it? Is it not a collection of former lyrics/melodies/sounds/notes previously heard or played? Yes and No. The answer would really depend on whether we focus on the question around humans being incapable of original thought or whether we embrace the music and the smile it leaves in our heart.
And so it goes ... sometimes we let philosophy get in the way of change. We fail to take in as much "original thought" from every channel in order to improve and broaden our abilities and our senses. To "smell the flowers" as it were. To "hear the music". How much does this limit your potential?
So my message is: embrace change. Go first. Be a thought leader even when those thoughts are inevitably a compilation of everything you've done said and heard.
Who knows, it might just be perceived as original!
Tuesday, March 30, 2010
Wednesday, March 10, 2010
Why CIOs Hate Sales People
... well, most of them... and how to turn this around!
Every day hundreds if not thousands of sales people try to get the attention of a CIO. Some succeed and others fail miserably. Gartner reports that for all the sales calls made on a CIO only 20% of the "ideas" get taken forward for "consideration". That's 1:5. Of those only 20% get funded. That's 1:5. Of that , only 20% deliver to the intended scope/time and resource projections. That's .8% success. Let me state it again; .8% success. What is a CIO to do?
The first think a CIO does is look internally to correct the problem. Why? Because few "vendors" provide anything beyond product insights. Sales people inherently want to be more relevant but in most cases, all they focus on is finding qualified prospects and selling their wares into an existing project. This behavior is fed by their sales managers who have a number to make. And so the story goes. CIOs know this behavior all too well. Sales people have done it to themselves.
In a recent Information Week article, BP's CIO spoke about the wake-up call (actually presentation) delivered by the an industry expert. "If BP did not change its trends, they would be out of business in 4-5 years". This is a $300B annual revenues company. Out of business?
Of the 500 senior managers who received this message, the CIO highlighted his top priority. First he brought IBM in to assess his talent. Result: 80% of his direct reports were replaced with more process-specific experts. Staff was reduced by 1000. Outside contractors went from 45% of staff to just 27%.
Next, each junior CIO was reorganized to report directly to the CIO with specific objectives; "Accountability No. 1 for those CIOs is that they're there to help deliver enablement through IT to drive new revenue and also for helping ensure they're driving standardized shared services to keep cost down".
The third piece to the puzzle was to reduce the number of suppliers (how does that make you feel?), Offer tiered services (price and performance), and move from one-time transformation to an ongoing effort.
Let's stop there. Turns out, this CIO is just like us.
What are you doing to:
1) Assess your talent
2) Gain better control of what is going on in the field
3) Reduce the number of suppliers (rogue sales approaches)
4) Offer differentiation, and
5) Offer yourself and sales teams a plan for ongoing transformation?
With these 5 steps, every sales person would gain early-on and ongoing access to a CIO by showing a better command of Business Acumen, process, sensitivity to cost containment and improving the odds of success for every major IT initiative.
Take our free Business Acumen assessment (20 minutes) at www.iSalesman.com and see how you rank against your peers.
Every day hundreds if not thousands of sales people try to get the attention of a CIO. Some succeed and others fail miserably. Gartner reports that for all the sales calls made on a CIO only 20% of the "ideas" get taken forward for "consideration". That's 1:5. Of those only 20% get funded. That's 1:5. Of that , only 20% deliver to the intended scope/time and resource projections. That's .8% success. Let me state it again; .8% success. What is a CIO to do?
The first think a CIO does is look internally to correct the problem. Why? Because few "vendors" provide anything beyond product insights. Sales people inherently want to be more relevant but in most cases, all they focus on is finding qualified prospects and selling their wares into an existing project. This behavior is fed by their sales managers who have a number to make. And so the story goes. CIOs know this behavior all too well. Sales people have done it to themselves.
In a recent Information Week article, BP's CIO spoke about the wake-up call (actually presentation) delivered by the an industry expert. "If BP did not change its trends, they would be out of business in 4-5 years". This is a $300B annual revenues company. Out of business?
Of the 500 senior managers who received this message, the CIO highlighted his top priority. First he brought IBM in to assess his talent. Result: 80% of his direct reports were replaced with more process-specific experts. Staff was reduced by 1000. Outside contractors went from 45% of staff to just 27%.
Next, each junior CIO was reorganized to report directly to the CIO with specific objectives; "Accountability No. 1 for those CIOs is that they're there to help deliver enablement through IT to drive new revenue and also for helping ensure they're driving standardized shared services to keep cost down".
The third piece to the puzzle was to reduce the number of suppliers (how does that make you feel?), Offer tiered services (price and performance), and move from one-time transformation to an ongoing effort.
Let's stop there. Turns out, this CIO is just like us.
What are you doing to:
1) Assess your talent
2) Gain better control of what is going on in the field
3) Reduce the number of suppliers (rogue sales approaches)
4) Offer differentiation, and
5) Offer yourself and sales teams a plan for ongoing transformation?
With these 5 steps, every sales person would gain early-on and ongoing access to a CIO by showing a better command of Business Acumen, process, sensitivity to cost containment and improving the odds of success for every major IT initiative.
Take our free Business Acumen assessment (20 minutes) at www.iSalesman.com and see how you rank against your peers.
Thursday, March 4, 2010
Monetizing Sales and Marketing Investments
THE ENGAGEMENT PROCESS
Monetizing Investment in Sales and Marketing
More and more pressure is being placed on Demand Creation- both Sellers and Marketers- to generate qualified leads that hopefully lead to net new logos. Metrics are being gathered and analyzed to know how many leads were converted to a sale and everything in between on the sales "process" flowchart.
CSO Insights offers an annual research paper detailing industry averages for ratios such as leads-to-presentation, presentation-to-proposal, and proposal-to-close.
The industry is not at a loss for vendors peddling their sales and marketing automation wares. Suffice it to say that with CRM advancements, key activities can be tracked and measured. Except one. The Engagement Process.
In an article written by Tony Jaros, Sirius Decisions, he illuminates the "why not" around sales and marketing practices.
"Ask the engineers at General Electric how to manufacture jet engines, and you'll get a set of documents detailing a painstaking process followed by everyone with razor-like precision. Ask the software designers at Microsoft how they built Windows, and you'll get a hard-and-fast list of code provided in stepwise fashion. But ask these same companies the process they use to sell their jet engines, software or services, and you'll likely get as many different answers as people you ask."
While part of this may be true for some companies, over 93% lack a defined engagement process that can be taught, monitored, measured, and hold people accountable with full transparency.
Why not? Some say that a manager cannot be on every call with the rep and rationalize that the verbal debrief is effective.We call this subjective. Some say that selling has its own "style" and should not be disturbed by "scripted" or "canned" pitches. We couldn’t disagree more. Some say that every buyer is unique and requires slightly differing approaches and therefore intuition. We say intuition cannot be taught.
If your goal is to improve Demand Creation and Demand Monitoring in order to monetize investments and improve results, all the automation in the world will only report bad news from a flawed or non-existent Engagement Process.
Knowledge Advantage's Dimensions of Success Engagement Process will help your team "jet" to the top with the reliability and effectiveness of a GE Aircraft engine!
Monday, March 1, 2010
The Cost of Sales Training
Many have written that sales training dollars are often wasted. The pundits claim that most training is in a group setting (sub-optimal) and that 1) not all attendees need or want the same training, 2) all of the sales people are out of the field at the same time risking lost opportunities, and 3) after three days to a week of day-long exercises, most of what is learned is forgotten within 90 days and people are back to doing what they've always done. Of course there are more excuses.
Let's address each one.
Most training providers know that one size may or may not fit all. For example, we find that using a baseline Business Acumen test reveals an average score of around 40%. Not one person has scored 100%. That suggests that "everyone needs to up-level their business acumen" if business acumen is important for you as a sales manager or training manager to help gain entry to the executive C-Level suite. If not, perhaps there is another set of baseline "table steaks" skills that are warranted.
Once you have each person baselined, then and only then can custom training be developed. Keep in mind, custom training is expensive. That is why #2 above usually takes place. It is more cost effective. Further, one might also justify taking everyone out of the field if keeping them in the field performing poorly results in behavior that is much worse!
Looking at #3, we admit it is human nature to resist new ideas and the discomfort that goes with it. What is worse is making the training a one-time event. To affect behavior changes, reinforcement for between six months to twelve months is required. Yet companies resist the incremental investment.
How have you invested in training for sellers? Is it a cost or an investment?
Remember, we live in a selling world where 80% of the revenues come from 20% of the reps/customers. And you accept that as long as you make the number. The question is not the cost of of training but the losses from not training!
Let's address each one.
Most training providers know that one size may or may not fit all. For example, we find that using a baseline Business Acumen test reveals an average score of around 40%. Not one person has scored 100%. That suggests that "everyone needs to up-level their business acumen" if business acumen is important for you as a sales manager or training manager to help gain entry to the executive C-Level suite. If not, perhaps there is another set of baseline "table steaks" skills that are warranted.
Once you have each person baselined, then and only then can custom training be developed. Keep in mind, custom training is expensive. That is why #2 above usually takes place. It is more cost effective. Further, one might also justify taking everyone out of the field if keeping them in the field performing poorly results in behavior that is much worse!
Looking at #3, we admit it is human nature to resist new ideas and the discomfort that goes with it. What is worse is making the training a one-time event. To affect behavior changes, reinforcement for between six months to twelve months is required. Yet companies resist the incremental investment.
How have you invested in training for sellers? Is it a cost or an investment?
Remember, we live in a selling world where 80% of the revenues come from 20% of the reps/customers. And you accept that as long as you make the number. The question is not the cost of of training but the losses from not training!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)