Start making customers’ goals measurable by making their benefits measurable. Build their safety zones as large as possible. The more measurable the goals, the larger are the safety zones. You then qualify, clarify, and verify each filter in terms of how it affects the customers’ ability to achieve their goals.
When you connect customers’ filters to their goals, and not to your products, they do not feel manipulated by the questions you ask. For instance, think of how you would feel if a computer sales-person, who did not know your goals, asked you, “How much money have you set aside to buy a new server?” Compare that question to this one from a computer salesperson who knows your measurable goal: “How much have you budgeted to reduce your system maintenance costs by $35,000 annually?” (See Exhibit 6-6.)
Exhibit 6-6: Your questions should reference customers’ goals.
Customers appreciate how your questions help them to make better purchasing decisions. When you deal with measurable goals and the specifics of filters, the room for unmet expectations decreases dramatically. You also create an environment where it does not feel like you are grilling them with rapid-fire yes-or-no questions.
Reinforce to customers the concept that details of measurable benefits, filters, and systems of evaluation determine whether you can achieve their goals. They are offering you challenges that become more formidable as they disclose more filters. Readily accept these challenges. The requirements for achieving their goals become more difficult not only for you but also for competitors as well. Again, if you chose your market segment correctly, these requirements help you to provide more value than do competitors. You are building your case to receive fair compensation for the unique or measurably better value your products provide.
Note If you cannot achieve a customer’s goal or satisfy the attainment measurement, the details enable you to explain why. You can tell the customer what goals you can achieve and why. You might need to forgo this sales opportunity but not the prospects for future business.
Although it is not the desired outcome, it beats wasting everyone’s time, energy, and resources for one to three months. Typically, customers take this long to inform you that it does not make sense to do business with you. Ironically, positive customers who do not want to hurt your feelings might take longer, while negative customers usually require less time. They cannot wait to tell you why they are happy with their existing suppliers. Use the create-and-wait strategy in their case.
Case Study
In Step Three: Eliminate Unknowns, Steven uses his active listening and questioning skills to quantify and obtain details about Olivia’s goal (reducing downtime) and her filters. Pay special attention to how Steven will link each of her responses to his next question concerning that filter or the next appropriate filter. Clarifying points and comments are in parentheses and italics. While her answers could probably take you to two or three different filters, the case study will follow them in the order prescribed in Exhibit 6-6.
Steven uses the vague-clearer-measurable questioning pattern to quantify Olivia’s answers. His qualifying, clarifying, and verifying questions will be his tools to find out both Column 1 and Column 2 details. In real life, various filters can surface at the same time and one question often prompts the customer to provide measurable answers. For illustrative purposes, each filter will surface one at a time and require Steve to ask versions of the following three questions for most of the filters to get to measurable:
What does that involve?
How does that affect you?
How much does that cost? or What are those details?
Steven also receives all the details of the nine filters on this first call. Typically, salespeople need more than one meeting to find them out. They figure out which details they missed when they fill out their Quick-Entry Sales Management (Q) sheets. They then call to find them out or schedule another meeting to do so. Remember to make it a two-way street. If you want new information, you must give out new information.
In addition, when reading this section, ask yourself, “Where do you stop with your questions?” Do not stop until the answer to this question is when you receive measurable or detailed information. You and customers will reap the rewards as a result.
Continuing from Step 2: Purpose and Goals:
Steven: Olivia, what does reducing downtime mean to you? (Steven seeks to quantify her vague goal.)
Olivia: Our goal is to get our downtime reduced to no more than nine hours annually. (Olivia provides a clearer answer.)
Steven: What has prompted you to select that target figure at this time? (He wants to understand the filter of goal motivation—and why nine hours.)
Olivia: No matter what we do to address downtime, we still average about eighteen hours of production loss yearly. (Olivia explains her negative motivation and provides an answer that still needs to be converted to dollars.)
Steven: What does that end up costing you? (He seeks to quantify the dollar amount of downtime.)
Olivia: It costs us about $40,000 per hour of downtime. (Olivia provides a measurable answer and her SOE—dollar per downtime.)
Steven: So, you have been averaging about $360,000 of downtime annually? (He turns an hourly figure into an annual dollar total.)
Olivia: You got it. (Steven uses his next question to link her measurable response to the filter of current situation.)
Steven: What are you currently doing to reduce these costs?
Olivia: We have increased our monitoring of the equipment. (Olivia provides a vague answer.)
Steven: What does that involve?
Olivia: We dedicate two people per shift to constantly inspect the equipment for any warning signs. (Olivia provides a clearer answer.)
Steven: It sounds expensive. What do they cost?
Olivia: Each person costs about $40,000 annually; and with two shifts, that’s a lot of money.
Steven: In other words, these four people add $160,000 to your production costs? (Steven always wants to get to the total dollar amount.)
Olivia: Hey, you seem pretty good with numbers. Yeah, $160,000 sounds about right. (Olivia provides a measurable answer. Steven uses his next question to link her measurable response to the filter of plans.)
Steven: So, what are you planning to do to get to those nine hours?
Olivia: We are looking at installing redundant equipment. (Olivia provides a vague answer.)
Steven: How many pieces of equipment will you need to buy?
Olivia: We are looking at purchasing three new pieces of production equipment. (Olivia provides a clearer answer.)
Steven: What will something like that cost?
Olivia: It could end up costing us almost $600,000. (Olivia provides a measurable answer. Steven uses his next question to link her measurable response to the filter of alternatives, which might include other suppliers.)
Steven: Besides purchasing new equipment, what other options are you looking at to reduce downtime?
Olivia: We might buy used equipment, which would cut our costs in half, although we might be risking reliability. Also, we have received presentations from PricePoint Services and FastShip Technology (Steven’s competitors) about their predictive maintenance services and production equipment. For what it’s worth, you are definitely making me think a lot more about my situation than they did.
Steven: Thanks. I hope you feel the information we are discussing will make it clearer what you want to accomplish and what it will take for a company to help you. (Steven does not take the bait and go into a product pitch or fall for the “What do they do for you?” trap. He knows his competitors’ strengths and weaknesses from his Competitor Product Profile sheets. Once he finds out Olivia’s goals and filters, he will then know how to connect his products to them, and not have his solutions compared with his competitors’ products. Let them compare their features to his features, and leave out Olivia’s goals. In addition, he knows if he helps Olivia to define her purchasing requirements, she will view him more as an industry expert than his competitors.)
Olivia: I will let you know when I don’t think it’s making things clearer.
(Steven uses his next question to link Olivia’s previous measurable response [half the costs of new equipment or $300,000, and knowing his competitors’ price ranges] to the filter of final decision maker [FDM].)
Steven: Fair enough. When you are evaluating these different options, who will be involved with approving these types of decisions?
Olivia: I’ll make the initial recommendation to my boss, Ronald Reuters, the CEO of the company.
Steven: What will he do with your recommendation?
Olivia: I have final approval if it achieves our goals and stays within budget; otherwise, he needs to get corporate approval. (Steven uses his next question to link Olivia’s detailed response to the filter of dates [he could have also linked it to budgets].)
Steven: Upon approval, when would you and Mr. Reuters want to start?
Olivia: When the new budget goes into effect on October 15.
Steven: With that budget date, when do you want to make your decision, and then begin and finish the project?