The Key Components of a Thorough Marketing & Sales Audit

Posted on January 10, 2014June 21, 2018 by Jerry Vieira

The word audit can strike fear into the heart of almost any person or organization that is its target. “Audit” conjures up images of someone in a position of authority digging through paperwork and records looking for evidence of malfeasance, mistakes, incompetence or non-compliance.

However, when a business performs an audit on their marketing and sales function, they typically just want to answer two basic questions:

What can we do to improve our sales results?
What can we do to improve our marketing and sales ROI?

At its purest intent a marketing and sales functional audit should not conducted to uncover incompetence, to fix blame or to penalize, but rather to discover opportunities to make both marketing and sales more effective. If the motivation of an audit is solely to find a scapegoat or assign blame, the problem is not in the firm’s marketing and sales function, but rather in its culture and leadership.

Step 1: A Quick Starting Point – The Self-Audit

We, at QMP use an 8 dimension, quick 50-question self-audit or self-assessment approach to determine whether there is need for deeper investigation. The output is a simple spider graph which illustrates the impressions that the executive team has of its marketing and sales organizational capabilities and effectiveness.

Figure 1

The shape of this figure provides a general idea of where performance gaps are perceived to exist. However, this is a chart which reflects executive impressions and personal observations – not a formal, detailed analysis of processes and capabilities. If the chart reveals high capabilities, but sales performance is actually poor, there is strong misperception among the executive team. But if both the chart output and the firm’s performance are satisfactory, the need for a detailed audit is probably not compelling.

(Click here to request this free self-assessment tool)

Step 2: The Detailed Audit:

If a detailed audit is indicated, the model in Figure 2 provides a framework for conducting that audit. Each of the 8 dimensions of the spider graph will be evaluated within that model.

Figure 2

he Marketing & Sales Engine™

All gears must turn efficiently and together for optimum revenue generation. If any gear is broken or stuck, the engine stalls – and it can only turn as fast as its slowest gear. If a marketing and sales audit is going to identify opportunities for breakthrough or discover where things are malfunctioning, an audit must assess the systemic working of all the gears – even the little ones. One must even include in the audit the oil in the oil pan – which we call Performance Excellence, or the Culture of the firm. A healthy corporate culture can grease, or an unhealthy corporate culture grind to a halt, the firm’s marketing and sales engine.

Auditing the Gold Gear: Market Strategy:

“Even the best soldier becomes a casualty when engaged in unwise battle strategy.”

Audits of Market Strategy often lead to the greatest sales breakthroughs. It is common that a strategy audit reveals a lack of market focus. And though it may seem counter-intuitive to consider narrowing rather than expanding one’s market range, a redeployment of resources to a more tightly-defined, more economically lucrative market segment, almost always results in accelerated growth and less cost.

In one case, prior to a strategy analysis, a rather smug marketing and sales executive said, boasting “I don’t care who buys them (his products) or for what reason. All I care is that they buy a lot.” His attitude reflected itself in the highly unfocused efforts of his sales team. This manager did not expect significant impact, nor did he believe much would be revealed, from a strategy audit. In actuality, the audit triggered a strategic market re-focus which triggered strong double-digit growth for a handful of years while enabling price premiums along the way.

Opportunities for sales breakthroughs are available by looking into other aspects of the firm’s strategy as well, not just its strategic focus. Breakthroughs can be found in analysis of the channel-to-market, pricing policy and the alignment (or rather misalignment) of all the components of the strategy together.

Auditing the Blue Gear: New Business Development

The Business Development gear comprises what most people consider to be classic, tactical marketing. It includes the firm’s e-commerce process, web presence, advertising, sales tool kit, lead generation process, print collateral, trade shows, branding, press relations, publicity and social media. Contrary to the intuition of many – more emphasis on this gear is not always better. Conflicts arise when the strategic intent is to focus while the tactical marketing team is hell bent on “getting our name out there” to as many people as possible.

A Business Development audit can reveal such things as: a) misaligned messages and focus, b) opportunities for shifting resources from expensive promotional efforts (trade shows, advertising) to more effective and less expensive targeted publicity and press relations, or c) a poorly conceived sales tool kit.

One of the most common gaps in a firm’s Business Development program is the lack of a “Thought Leadership” program. In general, thought leadership is the process of building a highly visible industry presence and reputation for your firm and your people, as industry experts. When people look for a solution, they often seek out the experts first – most of the time these days, with an internet search. Thought Leadership is typically the role of technical specialists, marketing spokespeople or senior executives of your firm – the people with enough technical or industry knowledge to be considered experts. “Thought Leadership” involves public speaking, writing and publishing articles, writing blogs, participating in industry association panels, conferences and committees and even involvement in community issues. That activity is heavily reflected in internet presence.

Auditing the Red Gear: Sales Process Disciplines

Within the sales function, the audit checklist is long. Here’s a sampling:

the reality, quality and current value of the sales pipeline
the usefulness of the sales tool kit
the relevance, effectiveness and currency of the sales training program
overall sales process effectiveness
the discipline of providing, and quality of, market intelligence feedback
the sales person’s understanding of the value proposition, differentiation and ideal customer profile, particularly for new products
the alignment of the compensation plan to the strategy

Something as simple as re-establishing focus on the Ideal Customer Profile can achieve rapid and significant results. While running a mini-audit, one of our clients discovered their sales people did not have a clear idea of the types of opportunities they should be pursuing. Sales sent in everything they dug up for a bid, swamping the quote department.

We took the client through a focus exercise and profiled the ideal opportunity. It took only a couple of hours to formulate. Within 9 months of this re-focus, their win rate had increased by more than 15% while the number of quotes generated decreased by nearly 33%. They won more of the right kinds of profitable opportunities. It was that simple. Less waste. More success. No blame.

Low-to-no-cost adjustments to issues discovered in an audit are common and can significantly increase sales productivity.

For example, research has shown that 35% to 50% of the customer opportunities in a sales person’s pipeline will never reach a “buy” decision. These are costly, unproductive investments of sales and support resource that have ended up in the “No Decision” bucket.

The likelihood of an opportunity ending in a “No-Decision” is inversely proportional to the degree of the “Compelling Need” a customer feels about solving their business problem. If a customer is not faced with a compelling need to fix their problem they will not buy any solution – yours or your competitor’s. A quick audit of the sales opportunities in the “No Decision” bucket brings cold reality to bear on the need to do a better job of qualifying customers.

Auditing the Soil: Performance Excellence, aka the Culture:

Think of a company’s culture as its soil. At its best, it is nutrient rich and encourages growth. Think of strategy as the seed. Even a genetically perfect seed will not grow in nutrient starved soil. On the other hand, a genetically inferior seed, planted in nutrient rich soil, will at least yield some crop. Culture is everything.

The nutrients in a firm’s culture are its values and its behavioral norms. In our experience, the best cultures exhibit the following characteristics:

the setting of clear expectations
individual and organization accountability
clarity of ownership of initiatives and results
measurements and metrics
rewards and consequences tied to performance
honesty and openness in communications
periodic progress checkpoints (at minimum, monthly)
a sense of urgency to deal with barriers and challenges to progress
teamwork
a creative problem-solving orientation focused on solutions not blame

In our engine model the culture is the oil in the oil plan pan in which the gears move. The culture lubricates and sustains a healthy engine. Without oil the engine seizes up. Without a solid culture of performance excellence, your business seizes up.

Conclusion:

A marketing and sales audit is simply a periodic analysis of what’s working and what’s not. It is a discipline that requires digging into the marketing and sales process to look for opportunities, barriers, bottlenecks and trends. We know from experience, that initiating an audit and analysis, with the discovery of root cause as its objective can spark sales breakthroughs and improve marketing & sales ROI.

A Final Note: A Marketing & Sales Organizational Self-Assessment is not the same as a Marketing & Sales Audit

A Self-Assessment is an organized compilation and scoring of your perceptions about the capabilities of your marketing and sales organization and processes. An Audit is a validation or invalidation of those perceptions from a deep dive into weaknesses and root causes of performance gaps. Self-Assessments record perceptions. Audits discover reality.

*********

Learn more about what kinds of growth opportunities a QMP Marketing and Sales Effectiveness Audit can reveal. Or, request a free QMP Marketing and Sales Organizational Capabilities Self-Assessment through our Contact Us Page. We’re here to help.

Finding New Markets

Posted on April 15, 2013August 27, 2020 by Jerry Vieira

Where does one begin the search to find new markets?

The good news is: new high-potential market opportunities are typically discovered closer-in than you would imagine. Some await discovery hidden in the clutter of your current customer list. Others find you, not the other way around. In either case, your task is to recognize and quickly assess their viability.

The biggest barrier is not that opportunities do not exist, but rather that firms have not dedicated a resource, and put in place the discipline to continually explore, vet and test their viability. New market opportunities can quickly and positively impact the bottom line. So, the key to growth is learning a) how to consistently be on the lookout, b) how to recognize possibilities and c) how to test their reality and viability.

Places for discovery:

Here are six places that have created the biggest up-sides for our clients.

Current customer list: it’s the small customers, not the big ones
Fulfilling customers’ unrecognized needs: the iPad and the SUV are good examples
Your competitors’ current markets: they are not as homogeneous or impenetrable as you might believe
Channel-to-market: is your channel providing more or less value to your customers than your customers need?
The sales pipeline: most sales people are poor at assessing an opportunity for its real, bigger-picture potential
International: some international demographics and economics are compelling

If you think you’ve already looked in these places, you might want to check again after reading this blog post.

Your small customers:

Some of the most significant growth opportunities we have seen have come from analysis of small, unexpected customers that have, under the radar, slipped into a firm’s customer list. They are typically considered insignificant and/or outliers for two reasons: 1) the revenue amount represented was relatively low and 2) they came from outside the primary market targets of the firm. However, a quick analysis in several cases revealed that these customers were actually representative of much larger markets – markets with large numbers of customers with the same significant unmet needs that were already being satisfied by the firms’ product lines better than any other offering available.

In one case, the small “insignificant” customer was representative of 20,000 similar organizations nationwide, none-of which had as good a solution to their problem as was being delivered by the firm’s software. This new market opportunity was tested and validated within 90 days. Growth over the next two years in that market more than doubled the company’s revenue

Well-known business thought-leader, Peter Drucker, in his book “Innovation and Entrepreneurship”, named this phenomenon “the unexpected success”. “Unexpected successes” are characterized by customers buying your product from markets you had not considered, getting benefits you had not conceived because your solution was inherently better than alternatives they had to consider.

This common dynamic means that someone in your firm should always be asking your “unexpected-success” customers these four questions:

Why did you buy our solution?
How many more people like you are there, out there?
How many of those other people have a good solution now?
Where do these people hang out?

The lack of a consistent asset dedicated to this analysis, delays the discovery of breakthrough new opportunities.

Your customers’ unmet needs:

The iPad, the SUV and the microwave oven are examples of new product ideas that were formulated to meet customer needs that were “subconscious” or simmering just below the surface of a customer’s “experience” with current solutions. The key words in this sentence are “subconscious” and “experience”.

Typically, in smaller companies, not enough time is dedicated to thinking about the subconscious needs of customers and the customer use experience. Most product development roadmaps we have seen are driven by; a) urgent responses to competitive moves, b) the drive to reduce product costs, and c) evolutionary feature extensions to current offerings. None of these create new market breakthroughs.

New market breakthroughs come from insights into customer behaviors, problems and product usage.

Your competitors’ current markets:

In the 1970’s GM (50%), Ford (25%) and Chrysler (15%) collectively owned 90% or more of the United States automobile market. Now some 40 years later, imports represent a huge portion of that same market. The lesson learned is that if you do not fragment your own market, a competitor will do it for you. The caveat: In each segment of the competitor’s market you target, you must have a relatively advantaged solution.

Imports won their initial US auto market share by fragmenting the US automaker’s markets and offering a value proposition that represented a significant value proposition improvement in one specific segment – the industry’s most vulnerable – small, economic compact cars. After establishing that foothold and clinching their quality reputation in the compact segment, they then stepping-stoned through the other segments – leveraging that quality reputation.

Your new market opportunity may simply be created through a focused initiative at a segment of your competitor’s markets that is most vulnerable due to that competitor’s neglect of the segment. This is particularly effective if the competitor is much larger. You should never attack a competitor on all fronts at once. However, all competitors are vulnerable to fragmentation and differentiation aimed at dissatisfied or under-satisfied customers in some sub-segment of their business.

Your channel to market:

Most firms decide on their channel-to-market based on what benefits it provides in market coverage. The market (customers) really only care about the services the channel provides to them – not the exposure it provides to the firm. If the channel is under-satisfying the needs of the customers’ this represents an opportunity for a) increasing value delivered and compensation received, or b) increasing market share based on service.

Amazon was launched as a channel alternative to brick and mortar book stores. It didn’t capture all book customers – but it did exploit a vulnerability and weakness of the then current book stores by offering convenience and in-home browsing. It created the on-line-bookstore market.

Your sales pipeline:

A sales person’s effort in pursuing an opportunity is typically influenced by three factors: a) the anticipated initial purchase amount, b) the magnitude of the long-term opportunity as communicated to the sales person by the customer’s purchasing department and c) the commission rate associated with the opportunity.

The first thing to recognize is that customer predictions of ultimate volume activity (part b above) are typically overstated – many times to hold up a carrot in order to exact the best pricing for whatever it is you are going to quote. More important than the volume prediction, is its logic. It should never be accepted at face value. Discovering the logic is what separates pursuit of a typical opportunity from discovery of a breakthrough market.

To test the validity and logic of a large prediction the savvy sales organization pursues a revealing question chain:

What ultimate economic, regulatory or demographic market factors will drive such high demand for your customer’s product?
Is this product introducing a whole new revolutionary value concept that no one has offered before (like the first microwave oven) or is it an evolutionary product (like current microwave oven offerings) – just bouncing along an incremental improvement curve?

Purchasing managers almost always over-predict the anticipated adoption of their new products. However, the answers to the two questions above may reveal a truly large and compelling market opportunity. For example, a firm that makes metal fabricated parts for military and aerospace customers may find in its pipeline an opportunity for a part for a medical device. That opportunity may represent a number of situations: a) someone looking for a competitive quote to replace their current supplier, b) the need for a part for an evolutionary incremental product or c) a breakthrough new product. Looking at the face value of the opportunity may not reveal the truth behind the opportunity. Only by delving deeper can the truth of new market opportunities be discerned.

International:

The demographics and economics of India and China are intriguing. The average age of the population is much lower than in the United States, their educational levels are growing, their income per capita is growing and their middle class is also growing. Indra Nooyi, the current CEO of PepsiCo, when asked where her company will be investing in the near future stated those facts – along with two population statistics that clinched the answer. India has a population of 1.1 Billion people and China a population of 1.5 Billion people. (Current stats are 1.2 Billion and 1.3 Billion people respectively). For PepsiCo the investment decision is made.

Those investments will require infrastructure and support – a “demand-halo” – from smaller companies, creating an opportunity for international expansion. Navigating the local laws, regulations, cash repatriation and other idiosyncrasies of international expansion is a bit of a challenge but it can be done. If you don’t do it, someone else will – likely some competitor.

Conclusion:

Given the incredible amounts of money spent today on branding, websites, Search Engine Optimization, sales promotions and tradeshows it is sad that a small portion of those funds do not find their way to support a “market opportunity sleuth” (MOS). Even if your firm has only 10 people in it – assigning the job of MOS to even one-half a person would be wise. That person should be responsible for scouring the areas listed above and reporting monthly on findings. After all, even if only one breakthrough opportunity is discovered in the course of a year – the investment would be worth it.

Read our related posts “Diagnosing Stalled Sales” and “Foundational Marketing – and please send us your comments.

For more information about Finding New Markets and Assessing their Viability call QMP at 503.318.2696 or eMail Jerry Vieira at jgv@qmpassociates.com

******

Common Sales Myth #2 – You’ve Lost to an Inferior Offering

Posted on January 3, 2013March 20, 2014 by Jerry Vieira

When we ask salespeople in our workshops to raise their hands if they have ever lost a deal to an inferior competitive offering, they almost universally raise their hands – even though we have told them ahead of time, “It’s a trick question.”

The truth is: No one ever loses to an inferior offering.

“How can that be true?”, you ask. “How,” you may ask, “could anyone consider that crap, superior?”

If you lost, all the evidence indicates it wasn’t really an inferior offering, after all. That truth of it lies in two facts; 1) the decision-maker’s perspective and the values from which the relative superiority and inferiority judgement arose both differed from yours and 2) the outcome satisfied only one person’s needs – and that person wasn’t you. But, ultimately, the outcome is the final proof.

At the moment a customer, and/or the ultimate decision maker, makes a decision to buy another “inferior” offering instead of your “superior” offering, that other offering is being perceived as a superior alternative in the eyes of that decision maker – by a unique, hidden or secret set of evaluation criteria that you simply don’t understand or chose to ignore. Your personal opinion doesn’t, and didn’t matter. Relevant value is only in the eyes of the beholder – not the seller.

There are several reasons we are led to self-deceptively believe this harmful myth.

1. We, in sales, think all value is economic. That’s the reason we put so much emphasis on price competitiveness.

Perceived value can be economic, but it can also be emotional or physical. When my family was young, I remember spending a lot of time analyzing car models and test driving a half dozen or so, narrowing them all down to two finalists. I sequentially drove both of them home for my wife’s final OK. She ran out to the driveway, a new-born in her arms and our other child, a two-year old, clinging to her jeans. She sat in the first car while I held the baby. She didn’t drive it. No excitement.

I returned that car and came back with the other option – a different brand and model from a different dealer. We repeated the drill. While she was sitting in the second car, she reached down, ran her hand across the seat (not leather in those days) and said, “This is it. It feels right.” We bought that car. It had nothing to do with the performance, reliability, handling or any other criteria I was discussing with either sales person. I didn’t have a clue that a “feel” test was going to be the ultimate consideration and the final decision point. I thought, as the salesperson did, that I was acting as the “official” power purchaser and “ultimate” decision maker.

This “feel test” was an obvious physical value – not an economic or emotional one – and it held importance in the criteria by a “hidden” decision maker.

2. We don’t understand the real decision criteria. In the story above, I narrowed down the choices. However, there was another final hurdle that neither the sales person or the purchasing agent (me) knew of.

3. We don’t understand all the decision makers (See my new car story, above)

4. We emphasize the wrong product (or service) strengths. Not all strengths are meaningful to all buyers – or with the same relative importance. There is nothing more irritating and distracting than a salesperson spewing data, stats and features when you are trying to focus on the one, two or three most important things in your personal decision tree.

5. We try to sell to the wrong target customer in the wrong target market. We continually hear, particularly from inventors and entrepreneurs when we ask them who their target customers are, that “everyone” can use their new product, service or invention. This leads to inefficient use of sales time, and significant mismatches in message. Telling the whole story, while missing the relevant customer or market-specific benefits, is common and leads sales people to say things like, “They (the customers) just don’t get it.”

We have witnessed a company that believed so strongly in the universality of their value proposition nearly go out of business as they scattered their message as broadly as possible. Panicked by their rapidly dwindling marketing and sales pocketbook, lack of success and anxiousness to avoid failure, they engaged us. We told them to focus very tightly on markets and customers where the value received was the greatest. They finally agreed and the business began to turn around in less than 3 months. That simple change resulted in a four year run of breakthrough growth.

6. We don’t understand our own value proposition and differentiation: Each of our products or services should have a clearly articulated value proposition and differentiation in all three value areas; economic, emotional and physical. These values must be enhanced by the corporate brand – the ambient light that our products shine in. Johnson & Johnson, 3M, GE and Apple (to a somewhat lesser extent these days) all bask in the glow of that favorable corporate light. The corporate light typically shines an intangible emotional and implied physical light on products and services.

Don’t bail on price as a last desperate attempt to fix your perception mistake.

One final point: To think that price is the only variable available to trigger a buy is flat wrong. But that is the topic of another myth. Suffice it to say, if that were true we’d all be driving the cheapest cars on the road.

Watch our QMP Insights blog for Sales Myth #3: “It’s relationship business”

*****

Click to learn more about the QMP Sales Process and Skills workshops or call us at 503-318-2696 or through our Contact Us page .

Common Sales Myth #3 – Sales is all about Relationships

Posted on January 2, 2013April 29, 2014 by Jerry Vieira

It’s a Relationship Business!

That four-word phrase is probably the most common statement we hear when we talk to sales people about their business. It is even more common than the statement, “It’s a Price-Driven Market” – though more often than not those two statements travel closely together.

Do You Have Brothers and/or Sisters? The Limits of the Relationship

To challenge the assumption that businesses are primarily relationship-driven we ask salespeople the following questions. Here they are, with the typical answers.

Q. “Do you have a brother and / or a sister?” A. “Yes.”

Q. “Do you have a good relationship with your brother or sister?” A. “Yes”

Q. “If your brother or sister tried to sell you something that would be detrimental to your business, would you buy it?” A. “No (expletive deleted) Way”

Q. “What if they threatened to would tell your Mom that you refused to buy from them, would it change your mind?” A. Laughter. “No”

Here’s the point: All relationships, even good ones, have their limits

Relationships are based on trust.

Any activity that violates trust, violates and detracts from the relationship.

Let’s look at the Trust Equation, developed by David Maister, Charles Green and Robert Galford in their wonderful book “The Trusted Advisor“. According to Maister et al, Trust equals the sum of= (Credibility + Reliability + Intimacy) divided by (Self Interest).

T = (C + R + I) / SI

Anything a sales person or their company does to lower Credibility, Reliability or Intimacy, lowers Trust and damages the business Relationship. As you can also see from the equation, anything that blatantly demonstrates your, or your firm’s, Self-Interest also damages Trust and thereby the Relationship.

Nothing in the equation can affect Trust more than the amount of your self-interest perceived by the customer. The higher the Self-Interest perceived, the lower the Trust.

Here’s the point. Depending on the Relationship alone can be perceived by the customer as inherently demonstrative of high Self-Interest. In Relationship terms, “They want me only for my money.”

What Relationships Can and Can’t Do

Relationships can:

Get you an audience to make your case
Buy you some time and patience when you or your company screw up
Get you early, but not necessarily exclusive, notice of a new opportunity at an account

Relationships can’t:

Make up for a significant competitive shortcoming in your product or service offering
Repeatedly cover for your operational team’s inability to deliver
Make up for poor product or service quality
Find and win completely new accounts
Provide you more than a few percent price premiums
Make up for poor market targeting
Make up for fundamentally slow market momentum
Fix functional short-comings in your products

Here’s the Point: Don’t get complacent because you have good relationships.

Don’t Shoot Yourself in the Foot

Believing that your relationships give you enormous power is, for the most part, fallacious thinking, and can actually ill-inform you on what you and your company need to do. Here are some examples:

If it’s all about relationships, what impetus will your engineering team have to design better products?
If it’s all about relationships, why should your firm ever reduce prices or negotiate terms?
If it’s about relationships, why should operations need to worry about quality? Or delivery?

Here’s the point: Bragging about the customer relationships you have can simply provide unjustifiable cover for others in the organization to not execute their job as effectively as they should. Remember, it’s still a very competitive world out there.

One More Point: The Fallacy of the Rolodex of Relationships

More often than is advisable, a client will enthusiastically recruit a sales person based on the contacts that sales candidate has amassed during their illustrious sales career. Sales people treasure and protect to the death, their sales contacts and consider that list as a strategic personal asset. It becomes a key feature in the personal selling proposition they use in seeking a new job.

Rolodex provides a great tool for managing those. However, even the best list of Rolodex or CRM-managed contacts, can rarely, for the long term make up for business shortcomings in product, service, delivery, quality, competitiveness and value.

Let me illustrate. In 1970, General Motors had roughly a 50% share of the US auto market. That market share was supported by an incredibly, well-established national network of dealers and sales people. Everyone knew everyone.

Since 2000 General Motors had lost roughly 50% of that 50% share.

Here’s the Point: Relationships aren’t everything.

Recommendations:

As much as has been written in this blog about the fallacies and dangers of dependence on customer relationships, let me make a final few points.

You must continue to develop your business relationships
You must continue to nurture those relationships based on paying close attention to each of the key elements of the trust equation
You must not, for a moment, let the rest of your business team off the hook by bragging and convincing them they only need to depend on your ability to develop and maintain good customer relationships

*****

Click to learn more about standard and tailored QMP Sales Skills and Process Workshops or Contact Us at 503-318-2696 to discuss your sales and sales management challenges.

Common Sales Myth #6 – The Biggest Accounts are the Best

Posted on December 31, 2012March 20, 2014 by Jerry Vieira

Here is the last in the series of Six Common Sales Myths.

For small to mid-size businesses, the decision to commit resources to target a large account should considered carefully. The primary considerations are: “What are the implications of winning?” and “How, should we go about it?”

So let me provide you both sides of the story.

Why the Largest Accounts are NOT the Best Sales Targets

The Competition is the Highest: Sales managers and sales people almost universally drool over the thought of landing the big account. Some folks call them “Whales”. With these whales come visions of top line revenue waves carrying on their crests big commission checks and bonus trips to Bermuda for exceeding sales production quotas. The bad news is that every competitor’s salesperson is striving for that same, beach-front room in Bermuda.

It Reduces Your Negotiating Power: Have you ever been presented with 90-day or 120-day payment terms by your large customers? Have you been confronted by corporate edicts from your large customers to buy overseas, or forced to share your product cost models or had to make a pledge of cost-downs (targeted and contracted cost reductions delivered directly to the customer). All of these can be relentless.

You May Become Too Dependent on Them: Bankers, these days, have tightened their requirements for business loans. One of the things they look closely at is the vulnerability associated with one customer presenting too large a proportion of a firm’s business. Having a hefty chunk of business from one large customer may also make one complacent.

Under What Circumstances Can Large Clients be Good?

When You Are Selling a Unique Value Proposition That Is IP Protected: This greatly relieves the pricing pressure and competitive threats – but it is likely short-lived.

When you are adding desperately needed capacity to overheated market demand for your product/service commodity: When there are overall industry shortages of the product or service commodity you deliver, because of very high market demand for your customer’s products, those large “whales” swim a lot farther to find the krill they need to survive. They also become a lot less demanding. Again, this somewhat relieves the discomfort associated with working with large customer accounts – but heated up industry demand does not last forever.

When Your Large Customer is Enlightened: Enlightened means they have embraced the concept of true partnership – recognizing the need for mutual investment, mutual trust, mutual innovation and mutual ROI.

When Decision Making is De-centralized: De-centralized decision making increases the probability that you will find either: a) an enlightened decision maker in one or more of the myriad divisions of the “whale” or, b) divisions and circumstances to which you can deliver significant value from your company’s specific combination of value proposition and differentiation.

When They Spur You on to Innovation or Breakthroughs: The promise of a big payoff, with lots of business from a large customer, can spur creativity and product innovation. What it should not encourage is gambling. By gambling, I mean taking a long-shot that requires stretching beyond reason the laws of physics or the organization’s overall capabilities. Such gambling can quickly destabilize the financial safety net of the firm.

How to Eat a Whale

Yes, yes. No surprise. The answer is one bite at a time. But where you bite first is the real question. Here are some guidelines on selecting where your bite will be most productive, profitable and nourishing.

There are 6 basic strategies in war and business – 3 F’s and 3 D’s, and no, these F’s and D’s in no way reflect my 6^th grade report card. Here are the strategies, by name:

– Frontal

– Fragment

– Flank

– Defend

– Depart

– Develop

The subject of strategy is simply too large to cover in this blog post, so suffice it to say that 5,000 years of military history and 75 years of marketing science have demonstrated, unequivocally, that the most productive strategic combination from the list above is the combination of Fragmentation (segmenting) & Flanking (differentiation). History and research have also demonstrated that frontal assaults can lead to disaster even in the case of great initial success. Remember Napoleon in Russia, Lee at Gettysburg, the English at Gallipoli, the German army in Russia and the Charge of the Light Brigade in the Crimean War. Or, in business terms, think Texas Instruments’ frontal assault on the watch market, Raychem in fiber optics and IBM in PCs. All were frontal assaults by large, highly confident organizations with huge assets behind them. All failed miserably.

By Fragmentation we mean, finding a business segment or Division of the “whale” to which your value proposition provides disproportionate economic value compared to its cost. By Flank we mean identifying, matching, communicating and demonstrating your differentiated value to the fragmented business segment that gets the most value from it, in effect, multiplying your overall value proposition.

A Case in Point:

Long before I was a market strategy and sales consultant, I was involved in a business that sold factory automation software. The division was attempting to sell this software solution to some of the largest, multi-site, multi-divisional manufacturers in the United States. We were spurred on by the knowledge that every large manufacturer we spoke with had active, funded corporate programs to find solutions to the common manufacturing challenge extant in all their manufacturing business units.

Talking with these corporate types, our software team energetically began to design and add capabilities to our system to assure we could handle all of the needs they had identified.

Unbeknownst to us, a competitor had been making inroads with what we perceived as a vastly inferior, inconsequential, less complete offering. They were selling low level, simple solutions into the divisions where decisions did not require corporate “influence”. They were, in effect, fragmenting the account -taking lots of little bites of the whale. By the time we had developed our comprehensive solution, the low level competitive solution had penetrated so expansively, in so many fragments of the business, that retrofitting was out of the question.

This is just one example of how subversive fragmentation can be used to penetrate a large account – one small bite at a time.

The Take-Away:

Large accounts are not inherently good or bad sales targets. They are good or bad sales targets depending on:

the strategy used to penetrate them,
the “enlightened partnership nature” of their corporate procurement,
the centralized or decentralized nature of their decision making,
the strength of your IP and the economic value proposition it delivers, and
whether or not you are adding industry capacity to overheated market demand

That’s the long and short of it.

For more information regarding QMP’s Sales Process and Skills Improvement Workshop or Sales Improvement Consulting Services, call to 503.318.2696 or connect through our Contact Us page.

*****