eNOISE

Once upon a time I came across an article regarding the importance of context in sales scenarios, and positioning of salespeople as Trusted Advisors and its impact on the outcomes.  Context in the sense of Seller vs. Trusted Advisor is a huge point to make on its own, but I was thinking about how this notion applies to the work that I do day-in and day-out for clients as a B2B Marketing Services Bureau.  And there’s an interesting connection between context and the identification of business drivers and their relationship to more qualified opportunities (or what are perceived as “more qualified” opportunities).

Here’s a quick excerpt from the article I read: (If you’re interested, the rest of the article is here.

In a study conducted by the Washington Post, Joshua Bell, “one of the finest violinists alive” walked into a subway station dressed in jeans and a baseball cap—during rush hour—and played his $3.5 million Stradivarius violin for 43 minutes. The vast majority on the platform that day didn’t notice and he collected approximately $32 for his efforts. Just days before, tickets to one of his performances in Boston went for $100 per seat. Of the 1,097 people who passed him, only a few paid him any attention.

Why? According to the Pulitzer Prize winning Washington Post feature, Context: Their perception was not of a concert violinist, but of a street musician.

If people do not stop and listen to one of the best musicians in the world playing some of the best music ever written, is it possible that overworked executives could hear the best product sales presentation and not care?

Similarly is it possible that our clients and their salespeople could be receiving outstanding sales opportunities and also not care?

In sales situations, as well in leads themselves, context is critical.  A fair portion of how lead generators, cold callers, appointment setters, or (dare I say it) telemarketers, are perceived and/or judged - on an individual or organizational level, relies on how clients’ salespeople perceive the leads, action them, and close business as a result.   How they receive and perceive leads is directly related to how they choose to work the leads, and ultimately how much return clients get out of their investment.

I speak to clients and prospects all the time, preaching the importance of 360-degree visibility, transparency, and buy-in from sales.  If they’re not in it as collaborators, co-conspirators, or at least willing participants - everyone loses.

But what does this have to do with context?

Context can change interpretation. Context can change meaning.  Most importantly for the lead generator, context can change outcomes.

In the terms of a lead, the context surrounding the flagged opportunity can influence the perception of the lead quality, the recipient’s level of engagement, and strategies for pursuit.

For example, a given lead may very well be for a rock-solid date and time to speak with a self-identified decision maker, with a budget of X, interested in obtaining Y-number of servers/switches/ads/licenses/widgets… but as rock-solid and/or qualified as it may be, without context it’s easy for that scenario to lose appeal, or to appear “less qualified” than it could.

Consider;

• Why are they interested?  Why us/you?
• Why do they feel they need it?  What problem does it solve?  What pain does it remove?  What value does it bring?  (Did an old one catch fire? Are there performance issues that they’re hoping to address?)
• How did they come to the decision that they needed it? (Is your contact the one who discovered the need and/or is feeling the pain/need?  Or is it other end-users (other departments, users of a particular, etc) that are feeling the pain, and your contact needs to make them happy?)
• Why do they need it now (or 6 months from now, or 12 months from now)?  (If it’s soon, why? What’s causing the urgency?  Is it spend the budget before it disappears, or is there pressure internally to get it done?  Or is the product/solution or problem/pain that critical that they need it ASAP?  If it’s a lead that’s in the future, why then?  Why is the project/purchase deferred?  Are they waiting to do it when budget’s available?  Are there other projects ahead of this one on the list of priorities? What are those other projects? Are they waiting for management approval to get it done?)

This type of contextual information can offer a lot of insight into what the business drivers in a scenario might be, and can offer the person on the receiving end more options in how they follow-up.  It can even lead to more opportunity to add-on services and/or other product depending on the scenario.

I’ve seen my fair share of “leads” where it amounts to not much more than information from a business card.  In other cases there are leads where’s it’s a simple “Mr. X is interested in purchasing # widgets in <timeframe> because <benefit/driver>.  Please follow-up with Mr. X on <Date/Time> at <Contact Details>. ”  … and while that scenario is more attractive than the “here’s a name, go get ‘em” option, it still leaves me wanting more.

While direct, and to-the-point… and seemingly self-explanatory… Where’s the situational info?  Where’s the context?  Where are the juicy nuggets that help me to better understand the sales scenario I’ve been presented with?

As a lead generator, context is key.  Context can change interpretation. Context can change meaning.

Context can change outcomes.

Food for thought.

In last week’s episode, This Place is Death, while Ben and Jack toiled away to get the Oceanic Six together and off to the lovely Eloise Hawking for some much needed inspiration, our time-challenged group on the island found themselves skittering across space-time at an alarming pace, with increasingly painful side-effects as things progressed.

Poor Charlotte, Juliet, Miles and even Sawyer… hemorrhaging more and more with each blistering flash and jump through time.

Once at the Orchid station (or rather, the mysterious well, as Charlotte directed), Locke had his grand master plan to fix things:  to somehow make his way off the island, bring the Oceanic Six and co. back, and get his lonely band of misfits un-unstuck in time… somehow.

As Locke prepared to lower himself down the well to nowhere, Juliet states rather simply;

“If whatever you’re trying to do works… thank you.”

She has no idea what Locke is about to do, or how exactly he’s planning to get it done.  But, here she is going through excruciating head trauma, nosebleeds, and I’m sure all-around weirdness on an increasingly regular basis… all she’s concerned about is a solution to the problem.

While I’m sure there’s all sorts of legal faux-pas’s around inflicting head trauma, nosebleeds and time/space displacement upon our unsuspecting prospects… in the sales context, when prospecting we should be doing everything in our power to help them to understand the depth of their problems, implications, and with a little effort build that same level of anticipation for the proposed solution - the solution you’re equipped to provide.  The solution that solves their problem like none other.

In fostering this anticipation, you build a connection with customers that reaches an almost emotional level that can truly set yourself apart from your competitors.

Not unlike the must-see movie trailers, the rich aroma wafting at you as you set foot in the coffee shop, or that incessant speculation you’re going through between episodes of Lost… anticipation pulls you towards the irresistible end-result.

What can you do with your current customers and prospects to make yourself and your solution irresistible?  What tactics might we employ to move prospects from concerned…to hemorrahaging?

Now we’re getting somewhere!

The second reading block provides us with a wonderful summary of the business case around reinventing the Sales and Marketing philosophies to a funnel-oriented model that better moves prospects through the standard sales cycles (or rather, moving to a customer centric model where we reorganize the sales and marketing cycles to synch with the buying cycles).

The early parts of the book are fairly superficial where we’re being introduced to the characters, relationships and scenarios that ultimately become the whiteboard of ideas.

The second block begins to bring more value as we’re taken through a board meeting where our champion is presenting the all to common challenges (referred to as the “Four Anchors”), exploring their implications, and ultimately what payoffs may be realized by making what are considered “minor changes”.

The aforementioned anchors are:

- Sales and Marketing are on different planets (the all too common disparity)

- Buying process is ignored (as is common with most traditional outbound marketing)

- Indicators tell us nothing (how well metrics line up with business/sales/buyer cycles)

- Tactics are arbitrary (marketing for the sake of marketing?)

The metafore of the “Four Anchors” works very well here, suggesting that while nearly every organization has anchors of sorts - aspects of their operation that is restricting overall growth…and while they’re resticting, they don’t prevent the ship from staying afloat. Which is I’m sure part of the reason so many anchors exist - often perceived as just part of the business, or the way thing are done.

It’s almost comforting to hear the characters suggesting that these same Four Anchors exist within their competitors and the majority of businesses. That notion adds credibility to the context…but it would be interesting to see some sort of research material backing this assumption to add real-world context. While I can relate to it from my experience, I’m still craving raw data… I guess I may still be struggling to adjust to the “business allegory” style.

While it’s not my usual fare, one very cool part of the narrative style is the inclusion of memos, emails and the PowerPoint slides and whiteboard sketches from the Board meeting in this chapter. I don’t know why the slides really grabbed me, but they certainly did. Again, that might be my wanting for a more business oriented approach in delivering the content… But different strokes for different folks. Content is King, after all.