Is Sales Connecting the Dots with Buyers?

B2B sales enablement is a hot topic. The problem is that there are a lot of differing ideas about what that means. In fact, if you ask sales, I can pretty much guaranty you that their definition will be different than if you ask marketing.

However, I think this bit of research about how buyers answered this question — shared by Scott Santucci on the Forrester blog for Technology Sales Enablement — pretty well sums up what needs to be enabled:

“When you meet with a vendor sales person, in general how often are they prepared for the meeting in the following ways" (% are for respondents who answered “usually’)

• Knowledgeable about their company and products — 88%
• Knowledgeable about my industry — 55%
• Can relate to my role and responsibility in the organization — 34%
• Knowledgeable about my specific business — 29%

Bit of an eye-opener to see the buyer's perspective, isn't it?

While it's great that your sales reps know your company and products, buyers just don't care as much about you as they care about themselves. This is basic human nature.

But what's concerning is that the majority of salespeople aren't making the shift to meet their buyer's needs. I just read Pipeline Management Adaptability: Improving Win Rates in a Down Economy by CSO Insights (check out their new blog).

Given the percentages above, it shouldn't be surprising that win rates are at an all-time low of 47.7%. [No decisions came in at 22.3% with losses at a tinge above 30%]

Are you starting to connect the dots?

Salespeople don't need to know more about your products' feeds and speeds, they need to learn and assimilate information about their prospects. And they need to learn it well enough to have conversations with those prospects so they can earn the right to play a role in helping them craft the solutions to their most pressing business issues.

In another post on the Forrester blog for Technology Sales Enablement, Scott writes:

"Basically, the overwhelming majority of executive level buyers tell us that how a vendor engages with them differentiates them a lot more than what their products and services are or do." 

It should be becoming clear that what sales enablement should, um, enable is better and more valuable conversations between salespeople and buyers. Not just the end-game decision maker, but all the people involved on the buying committee.

And — for those of you wondering where I'm going — marketing should be helping to facilitate this outcome.

Salespeople need to shift their thinking to apply all that great stuff they know about your company and products to how that insight can help their buyers. They need to know about the business their prospects are in, the key trends affecting their industries and how their roles and responsibilities play against project outcomes. 

If your marketing team is creating content that does just that [and they should be], then they need to create versions, talking points and seed ideas that can help salespeople have conversations that count.

Comments

[Leah Neaderthal]

It’s true that Sales and Marketing may have different definitions of what Sales Enablement is, but that really needn’t be the case. As you point out, it’s about enabling salespeople to have better conversations, every single time. Marketing can absolutely play a role here, beyond traditional lead generation. Increasingly, Marketing’s role is less about producing content and materials for salespeople, but rather being the hub for all types of information that sales needs. In my company we’re finding that the information that salespeople are tapping into most is the knowledge of the tribe (tips and nuggets from the field like competitive intelligence, customer sound bites, and a few bullet points about a case study) and reaching out to subject matter experts to help them with a particular deal. Using a Sales Enablement platform, marketing can absolutely harness this information, along with the traditional marketing content, institutionalize it among the organization, and deliver it to their sales team for each sales conversation. This provides direct value to sales by giving them access to the absolute best and critical information for each conversation, and as you say “help salespeople have conversations that count.” This is one of the pillars of Sales Enablement that both Sales and Marketing can rally around.

[Robert Lesser]

One other consideration: integrity. A recent InformationWeek survey of IT buyers indicated that a top concern was for sellers to deliver on what they have promised.

Sales should ensure that they are honest with buyers as to what their solution can and cannot do.

This is even more pertinent for the SaaS seller who can't lock customers in and must focus on customer retention.

[trish bertuzzi]

Great post! I am a firm believer in sales enablement but what hit home for me was the Forrester research. Look at the numbers...it is amazing how unprepared our salespeople are when they launch a sales process. But can that failure to prepare be blamed on a lack of sales enablement alone or is the issue also one of lack of sales management?

Most organizations provide their reps with all the information they need to have conversations with their buyers that resonate. We can debate format, content, who delivers the information etc. But where the rubber meets the road is in the absorbtion of that information by the sales organization.

If sales management had the ability and bandwidth to go on sales calls and/or listen in on prospecting calls on a more regular basis - don't you think those numbers would increase in a positive way? Net/net - what I am trying to say is you can lead a horse to water but the only one who can make him drink is his boss. Just MHO - Ardath, you always make me think!

[Ardath Albee]

Leah -
Thanks for your comment. In particular, I agree that marketing should be the hub for information, but I don't think that discounts content development, but should influence the type of content and aggregated information made available to help the sales team. And, I agree - the SAVO platform can help.

Further, the tribal information is an asset companies need to do more to leverage. But all tribal knowledge is not of equal value. What is hugely valuable is to take that tribal knowledge and weave together the choice nuggets into relevant stories buyers find relevant.

Robert -
Integrity is huge. I agree. This is why customer stories play a big role. Not the chest thumping ones all about our companies, but the thoughtful stories written to help our buyers glean insights that help them grasp the nuances of solving their problem that they might not have considered.

Proving our companies can walk our talk is an imperative. But, the only way to do that believably with a buyer is by relating those stories to their perspective.

Trish,
Good points! I like making you think :-)

I would disagree that "most" organizations provide reps with the right stuff to have conversations. I think they get a lot of information, I'm just not convinced it's the right kind of information or they don't know how to use it in a relevant way for buyers. This said, your absorption comment is a critical component for success. As is your sales management involvement point.

What do you think it will take to see that happen in a way that makes a difference? And, out of curiosity, wouldn't that also fall into the sales enablement bucket?

Thanks to all 3 of you for your comments. Keep those ideas coming!

Ardath

[Nick Crown]

Great post!

Upon reading this, the first thing that popped into my mind was "Buyer Personas". Their primary purpose is to drive the behavior and outcomes that your post described. I almost included a link to Adele's blog on this topic, but I noticed that you already have it in your blog list.

Nick

[Ardath Albee]

Thanks, Nick. And you're spot on with buyer personas. Only by getting to know your buyers really well can we impact our buyers' perceptions about the value we bring to the table.

One of the reasons companies tend to talk about their products, solutions and companies so much is because it's what they know best. Unfortunately, that's often what keeps companies from winning over buyers.

[trish bertuzzi]

Ardath, you are correct. "Most" organizations do not provide the right information to their reps. And, btw, thank goodness because we develop those messages and tools for our clients and that work pays the bills here at TBG. But, the point I really wanted to make was about how sales management (and yes good sales management is sales enablement)has to go back to the olden days when "managing" was not as important as "mentoring".

You asked what I think it will take for that change to happen. I think it will take a shift in the way sales managers are measured. The revenue goal is one component but wouldn't it be great if there was also a goal for personnel development? A quota so to speak for spending time in the field or double jacked in listening to phone reps. So many benefits to be had by doing this...not just coaching but think how much exposure the exec would get to the market and how they are reacting to the message etc.

Thanks again for a great discussion!

[Ardath Albee]

Hi Trish,

As always, more great thoughts! I really like your quota idea for personnel development. I would love to see that for marketing as well. There are too many false assumptions being made by people not spending the time to really get to know what's happening with their buyer's reality, instead just relying on what they've always done in the ways they've always done it.

If sales and marketing are going to work together - which I truly believe they have to with this shift in how buyers buy - then they need to spend time in real-world scenarios experiencing situations from the buyer's perspective.

Thanks back atcha for the great insights!
Ardath

[Rod Macbeth]

Thank-you for a very informative post.