The Random Thought Generator (RTG)

Current Articles | RSS Feed RSS Feed

Does your sales force think Inside-Out or Outside-In?

Posted by Jeff Williams on Fri, Feb 13, 2009 @ 06:03 PM
  | Share on Twitter Twitter | Submit to Digg digg it |  Submit to StumbleUpon StumbleUpon |  Share on LinkedIn LinkedIn 


At some point in their evolution, all sales organizations go through a thorough analysis of their sales process, with the goal of maximizing the efficiency of pulling customers through their new and finely tuned sales cycle. The prevailing notion is that if we just understood our selling process better – what the steps are, who performs them, the timing of each step, etc. – then we could optimize our selling process, thereby improving our closure rates and overall quota achievement.  Viewing the world in this way – what is best for us – is what I call an Inside-Out approach.

Instead, we should recognize that the only reason that our selling process even exists is because our customers have a buying process that they are trying to get through as efficiently as possible.  Once we make this realization, things can really start to fall into place.  Rather than trying to find all the ways to more efficiently pull our customers through our selling process (Inside-Out), we should focus on how well our selling process aligns to our target customer’s buying process, which is what I call Outside-In.

Let’s take an example of a potential sale near the close of our fiscal quarter (end of January) for $150k worth of forming equipment for a small lamp shade assembly plant.  In the normal Inside-Out (sales cycle) approach, our sales team would naturally be fixated on convincing the prospect how our forming machine is superior to anything on the market, and at a price that beats the competition.  We would focus on moving the customer through the stages of our sales process, including: 1) confirming that they need a new forming machine, 2) verifying that our machine meets all their requirements,  3) checking that the price of our solution fits within their budget, and 4) that we can deliver our solution in a timely manner.  Sounds like we have this deal in the bag, right? 

Wrong. 

If we had been focused Outside-In rather than Inside-Out, we would have put ourselves in the shoes of our customer.  Doing so would have indeed verified all the steps above, but would have also uncovered the fact that any purchase for over $100k requires Board approval, and that the Board only meets four times per year, just after the close of each calendar quarter.  Since that meant the Board held their recent meeting about a week ago, we now have no chance of closing this deal until next quarter!  Bummer . . .

This is Part 1 of a continuing series on Outside-In thinking.  Please let me know what you think – post your own “ah-ha” moments in the comment field – and stay tuned for more to come.  

Tags: , , , , , , ,

COMMENTS

Jeff, I agree with everything you have said. If we focused more on our customers, our customers' customers, our customers' business processes, and our customers' critical success factors, we would all be ahead of quota. Part of the problem is that Sales Managers put most of their emphasis on internal issues such as pushing new products, increasing margins,and reaching short term sales goals. What do you recommend?

posted @ Monday, February 16, 2009 3:56 PM by Carl Eidson


Carl, It sure looks like you and I share the same passion about focusing attention outward on the customer! You hit the nail on the head in bringing up the constant internal pressures that tend to consume the sales rep, drawing them away from an Outside-In perspective. I am not sure I have any magic bullet answers, but the root of the problem seems to be that the entire sales management team (all the way to the top) typically gets measured only by short term quota results, and not by other metrics that are more indicative of the customer relationship (which drives FUTURE business). I have found that when customer satisfaction metrics are taken seriously (part of the mix for sales bonuses), the right Outside-In behaviors can begin to emerge.

posted @ Thursday, February 19, 2009 7:21 PM by Jeff Williams


Interesting perspective indeed. Would you go as far as recommending that the first step of your process should be to gather from the prospective client what is his/her own buying process? Or create a taxonomy of standard buying processes (or behaviors) so you can set your own process accordingly? Making your sales process agile and "adapatative"?

posted @ Friday, February 20, 2009 10:06 AM by Jean Pommier


Jeff - Your "outside-in" approach fits well with relationship-focused selling frameworks (Miller Heiman, CCS, etc.) as a paradigmatic tenet. And/or added to a formal sales process as one or more checklist item(s).  
 
Or are you hinting at a more structurally disruptive enhancement?

posted @ Friday, February 20, 2009 10:45 AM by Sanjay Saigal


Jean: I agree with your idea about emphasizing agility and adaptability in a sales organization, which allows it to continue to add value as changes occur in the market place.  
 
 
 
From a process perspective, I once witnessed a very successful sales organization in the U.K. launch an effort to streamline their sales process by interviewing some of their key customers to better understand their buying cycle. Starting with a diagram of the customer's buying process, they were then able to map out each step of the selling process, and ask the question, "How does our selling process align to and accelerate the customer's buying process?" This turnaround in perspective to an "Outside-In" approach resulted in a significant uptick in sales and customer loyalty.

posted @ Tuesday, February 24, 2009 3:03 AM by Jeff Williams


I like the concept. I'm not sure that many companies would understand what your proposing, but given the current economic client, this could help a middle of the road individual performer up his game. Thanks

posted @ Wednesday, May 20, 2009 1:33 AM by Angelo J Rossi


Post Comment
Name
 *
Email
 *
Website (optional)
Comment
 *

Allowed tags: <a> link, <b> bold, <i> italics

Subscribe by Email

Your email: