|
If you conduct sales training and your sales numbers rise shortly thereafter, was your training successful? The answer to that question is a definite maybe. That’s the trouble with relying strictly on sales numbers to evaluate whether or not your training was effective – you don’t know what worked and what didn’t work, what specific affect the training had on your sales numbers and where adjustments need to be made. If you don’t know these kinds of details, you can’t ensure an upward trend in your numbers over the long term
In 2006 DaiShõ did an analysis for one of its clients into the recall and effective use by salespeople of the sales training they had during the previous 6 months. That training focused on teaching salespeople to uncover buyer needs and then match an option, from the company’s services, that would be the “best fit”.
After creating a realistic, scenario-based, multiple-choice test salespeople were asked to choose the answer that most indicated what they should do in each situation. DaiShõ wasn’t concerned about people regurgitating terms or acronyms that were used in the training. Instead, we looked to see if they had absorbed and could use what was taught.
The results revealed that individuals who did well on the test saw an improvement in their individual sales. Far more interesting, however, were the findings that most salespeople did not ask enough questions to get a complete diagnosis. And even those that had asked the questions, failed to listen to the answers given by the customers. Instead they subconsciously relied on the company’s features and benefits, which they assumed the buyer already knew.
Regardless of the training they had received, many salespeople made the assumption that customers would buy if they were happy with the benefits of their products. So, instead of asking questions and then listening effectively for the answers given, they simply resorted to telling customers about the benefits of their products. The important thing to most salespeople was to close the sale and move on to the next customer, even if the benefit they were offering was not quite right.
Armed with this information DaiShõ changed the training model. Instead of using classrooms as the forum for training, salespeople were given short (2.0 hour) workshops on specific aspects of solutions selling which were then practiced and reinforced by their sales managers, in the field. In addition, the sales culture was reassessed. Instead of pressuring salespeople to close the deal the focus changed to solving customer problems. Finally, the activities in the sales call were examined.
DaiShõ found that in a one hour sales call only about 20.0% was dedicated to actually selling. The rest of the time was used with “relationship building” and general chatter.
The changes introduced resulted in sales calls being restructured. Instead of the 20.0% sales time, salespeople were shown how to use the time more productively and invest more time in asking questions and building effective business cases for a sales proposition. The result, in the same 1.0 hour sales call 40.0% was dedicated sales time with more information being gathered and a better sales case being developed.
The combination of coaching and effective use of time in sales calls, dedicated more to asking questions and listening, increased sales by 32.0% over the alternative of just classroom training.
|