Most of us have been training reps on questioning techniques for years, but have seen limited results.  

And here’s why– it’s not that reps don’t know what questions to ask, or how to ask them…it’s that they’re not even trying to ask questions.  They’re trying to close the deal. 

Most companies believe the best way to improve needs discovery capabilities is to build reps ‘ questioning skills – but skills are not the problem. The bigger barrier you must overcome is reps’ unwillingness to ask questions.

In today’s world of complex solution selling, we’re selling bigger, more complicated solutions that reach across multiple departments within customers’ organizations. And this complexity introduces a whole host of new challenges to closing deals.  

There are hundreds of reasons why deals could go off the rails…and that makes reps afraid. Reps aren’t asking the right questions for fear of introducing or uncovering additional obstacles that could give the customer a reason to say No. 

Rather than adding even more risk to the equation, reps just try everything they can to close the deal and sort all that stuff out later.  A member recently referred to this as “drive-by selling.”  Close now, and ask questions later.  Read More »

The topic of sales competencies and rep development has been coming up quite frequently in our recent conversations with members.  Some sales leaders are getting more frustrated with training’s failure to make behavior changes “stick”; some have started realizing that the new economy calls for a new set of skills that is largely lacking in reps; and some are simply looking for ways to boost rigor around training to increase the likelihood of success.

All good reasons to be talking to us, especially as we’ve learned that nearly two-thirds of all sales reps (61%) are unsatisfied with the business and sales skill training provided by their companies.

The bad news is we know that training alone has a relatively small impact on improving productivity – only 22%.  The good news is companies that take a more comprehensive development approach— integrating training, coaching, and real-world experience—have seen a 4 fold increase in productivity up to 88%.

We’ve set out to find what it is these companies do differently and will be tackling this subject of training and rep development over the next few months. Here’s what we have learned so far:

1) Do not limit rep development to just classroom learning.  Our research shows that reps forget 87% of training content within 30 days. Most of the actual learning and skill improvement happens as reps repeatedly “apply” and “perfect” new knowledge and skills on the job with continuous support and reinforcement from their managers.      Read More »

Tacit selling skills have always been important, but as our work on the new high-performing sales rep has shown, these skills (things like tailoring and asserting control) are absolutely crucial for success in today’s more complex selling environment.  

The problem is, tacit skills don’t lend themselves well to traditional rep upskilling approaches. Classroom training alone is insufficient because these skills require judgment and context (things that that can’t be accurately captured with process and how-to guides), and coaching by itself can also be insufficient, because managers may struggle to explain and demonstrate these intangible concepts.

In fact, the best way for reps to acquire tacit skills is through experiential learning.

One way for reps to gain this experience is to practice in live-fire settings, in front of the customer. But I think we’d all agree, that can be incredibly risky—things can go horribly wrong if not done well. 

So, the other way to provide reps with experience is to practice via role plays in training and coaching sessions. But the problem with role plays is that they typically feel so artificial. Usually, you break up in pairs and someone says, “OK, you’re the rep, and I’m the customer…” and off you go. Not only is the exercise too fake to feel real, it’s too fake to feel valuable. 

So how do you find the compromise?  How do you simulate a customer interaction with a high degree of reality, but a low level of risk?

St. Jude Medical came up with a pretty ingenious answer to those questions. St. Jude split the difference between the fakeness of internal coaches and the riskiness of actual customers by having reps role play with someone they named the “customer proxy.”    Read More »