This popular sales approach is not working now and will continue to fail

A few weeks ago, my wife yelled at me for leaving a mess in the kitchen. It was a little out of character, so I apologized and asked some questions and soon found out that the outburst resulted from some other things that were bothering her. I am sure you can relate. Sometimes the reaction, the words, or the demeanor we sense from another person are the consequence of something else happening. Just addressing the surface problem really does very little to solve the issue.

Interestingly I was helping some salespeople and I used this as an analogy. Often the "resistance" we feel from a prospect during a sales exchange is very similar; it represents something else, simply attempting to handle exactly what was shared does not solve anything and actually becomes frustrating to the person. To them, it feels like you just don't get it; even though they have not been entirely clear, they expect us to work that out. Rather than allowing that to frustrate you, embrace it and recognize that this is exactly why salespeople are still needed. If everything were obvious and devoid of humanity, we would use a bot and be called digital commerce analysts (or something like that)

At the same time, I have been reading a lot of the content on linked in that focuses on improving sales skills. But, many of the promoted techniques and solutions that some experts recommend fail to address this reality. Instead of dealing with the real reasons behind a buyer's resistance, they suggest punchy questions to challenge the buyer. They promote methods that make the customer an opponent that needs to be "corrected" or "put in their place." They encourage putting their prospect into a defensive position. They have the potential of feeling more like an argument than a conversation. Let's be clear; arguments with prospects do not win deals. They never have, and they never will.

Part of the problem is the terminology - over the years, we have developed a list of descriptions for situations that might occur between the prospect and the seller, and they all encourage this adversarial relationship. We describe actions by the prospect as "put-offs," "stalls," and "objections" when in reality, these are probably just doubts, constraints, or questions.?We describe them as being protected by "gatekeepers" and resent their presence. We believe that buyers should accept calls from everyone and especially ME. However, the reality is that the buyer does have the right to call the shots, delay the decision, consider other vendors, and satisfy their internal processes. Behaving in a way that communicates that we don't feel they do makes us look foolish, uninformed, and rude. Working against this reality over and over again is the definition of stupidity.

Just as we have tweaked the terminology to put the prospects or buyers in a negative light, we have adjusted it to favor the actions of salespeople. We refer to their tactics as "aggressive" or "persistent" rather than insensitive or unaware. We shower them with praise for "walking away" when in reality they may have simply failed to connect or understand the buyer. We flatter "not taking no for an answer," which is something we discipline toddlers for and we encourage them to have total disrespect for any process or company guidelines that potential clients have in place and demand to be treated as an exception to their global and mandated policies, which is arrogant.

Sales organizations and salespeople may not like it. Perhaps "name-calling" or re-framing these happenings makes them feel better. Still, the reality is that they have probably failed to appreciate and empathize with everything decision-makers fully are required to do today. My personal experience involved managing a global sales group, and I had signing authority for up to 500K and managed an annual budget of almost $100MM. I was the decision-maker. BUT, I had to follow the internal company process; it was part of my contractual obligation, signed every year, as a company executive. Even when my answer was a yes, I needed to follow the process of vetting everything through procurement, legal, IT, Facilities, and HR. Even when these departments were not impacted, they were included. You may think that this is stupid or inefficient, and you would be right in many cases. Many decision-makers would agree with you, but they will not ruin their career because you as a salesperson challenge them or accuse them of not being the decision-maker and threaten to "go over their head."

Upon occasion, some of the salespeople I encountered attempted these methods, and let's say it never worked out for them. So, instead of handling something that the prospect says as being adversarial, why not attempt to understand why they are delaying respectfully. Try collaborating to help them in any way you can with no quid pro quos. Chances are something is happening behind the scenes or in their thoughts that are prompting the response.

As we watch business getting more complicated, putting more focus on diversity in decisions, thinking more globally, and adding key metrics around sustainability and fair trade, the concerns and stakeholders that are involved in every buying decision are going to continue to increase. The situation I described is not going away, and neither will it be limited to huge corporations. Salespeople either need to adjust and grow into these new circumstances or limit themselves to one on one direct selling to the consumer - cars, phones, real estate, etc.