Same Side Selling

by Ian Altman

  In some ways, the discussion of resources versus results parallels the idea of features versus benefits. But it is misleading to suggest that resources are what you buy and results are why you buy. That conception implies that all sellers sell resources, and that there’s no meaningful difference between selling resources and selling results. In fact, the difference is far more than semantic.

  A Results-Based Purchase Means a Different Mindset

  In some cases, the difference between a resource-based purchase and a results-based purchase shows up in the contract and on invoices. In a customer service outsourcing agreement, fees could be based on the number of hours worked (resource-based) or on the number of trouble tickets successfully brought to resolution (results-based). Of course, these different arrangements can have many implications in terms of business and legal risks.

  But even when the difference between selling resources and selling results is not literal or contractual, the mindset is extremely important. When buyers believe they are buying resources rather than results, they focus on the specifications of the resource, rather than on the likelihood of reaching the desired outcome.

  Examples of Selling Resources versus Selling Results

  What does this distinction look like? Let’s look at a few examples of businesses we understand, and discuss the difference between selling resources and selling results.

  A resource-based lawn services company sells hours of labor for such tasks as mowing yards and weeding flower beds.

  A results-based lawn services company sells well-groomed yards that its clients can enjoy on the weekends.

  A resource-based accounting firm sells on-call accounting support, report preparation, and strategic input.

  A results-based accounting firm sells compliance, reliable reporting, and peace of mind.

  A resource-based customer relationship management (CRM) software company sells a software package that includes service modules and database management.

  A results-based CRM software company sells effective customer management and communication.

  On the surface, the items in each pair look similar. They might be nearly identical in price and delivery. Yet the distinction between selling resources and selling results is profound in the way the purchase is viewed by the seller and the buyer. It shapes the perception and reality of the sales process and the ongoing relationship.

  Selling Results Even When Billing for Resources

  A common view is that professional services are always resourced-based transactions. But even traditional law firms can sell results instead of resources, as we will illustrate here.

  Let’s say you are facing a legal issue. A client refuses to pay after you clearly delivered exactly what was agreed to in the contract. The client owes you $200,000. You speak with two law firms.

  Firm A tells you, “This is exactly the kind of thing that we handle. Here is a list of our hourly rates. We’ll need a $5,000 retainer to get started. Just sign our agreement, and we can send them a letter right away.”

  Firm B, on the other hand, says, “It must be frustrating when you have delivered as promised and they are not paying their bills. There are three possible scenarios that I want you to know about so there are no surprises. In some cases, just knowing that a law firm is involved will motivate them to send you the money or ask for a settlement. In that case, getting you paid might cost about $2,500. If they are a bit more confrontational, then it could take longer, and we typically see a resolution with an investment of about $25,000. If it ends up going to court, a matter like this could cost $70,000 to get resolved. How would you like to proceed?”

  Can you see that Firm A is selling resources (hours of labor) and Firm B is selling results (reaching a resolution)? Whatever your field, you can sell results instead of resources. Selling results will help you Focus on the Fit and not be distracted by the small stuff.

  Being Unique Allows You to Sell Results

  At this point, there may still be a voice in your head wondering if you are a resource seller or a results seller. That’s OK; let’s take a minute and tie this back to differentiation.

  In Chapter 2, Be Unique, we explained how critical it is to know the specific value that you bring to the marketplace. It means, to borrow Zig Ziglar’s terminology, that you are a “meaningful specific” rather than a “wandering generality.” You have defined a unique offering, a place that you call your territory. You own your own hill, rather than sharing someone else’s mountain.

  Armed with the knowledge of how your pieces are shaped differently than others, you are prepared to position yourself as a seller of results. Selling results doesn’t mean you have to take more risks and guarantee results, though in some cases you might. It means that you have:

  • A track record of relevant success

  • Confidence and expertise

  When you sell results, you are claiming specific expertise to solve a problem better than the buyer’s organization can solve it on their own. This is an essential premise of your sale, and it must be clear to you as the seller and to the buyer.

  The Need for Clear Boundaries of Expertise

  The results-based sale carries an important implication: the seller is the expert on delivering the results. To maintain focus on the fit, both the seller and the buyer must be confident in the boundaries of their mutual expertise.

  This principle is intuitive for many familiar purchases: if I need an appendectomy or an addition to my house, I know that whomever I buy from (the surgeon, the contractor) must have the appropriate knowledge and skill. I don’t expect them to ask me, “so, what kind of incision would you like?” or “does this look level to you?” We know that they are the experts.

  How Murky Expertise Leads to Micromanaging

  For many services, the boundaries of expertise are less obvious, and that murkiness can cause problems. Ambiguous expertise is a foundational flaw that causes many buyer-seller conversations to devolve back to a game-based mentality. When it is unclear who the expert is, producing maximum value between the buyer and seller becomes much harder. Instead of focusing on how the pieces fit together, the conversation can sink deep into the weeds, often spurred by a sentence like one of the following:

  “How do you handle configuration management? Our IT group has specific standards.”

  “Will we get to approve anyone you hire?”

  “We need these custom reports to monitor at the level of detail we’re used to.”

  Does this sound like Finding Impact Together, or more like an elementary school teacher checking your work? When you feel over-managed as a seller, you may need to assess whether you are selling results or resources and whether you have effectively established your expertise.

  Buyer’s Perspective: We’re looking for partners that have experience and a confident point of view about their solution. We want them to know the details, and that’s why we pay them. If we have to worry about how they’re doing their job, it’s worth much less to us—we might as well just hire extra staff.

  Define Your Expertise

  The first step in establishing your expertise is being able to articulate it. (Revisit Chapter 2, Be Unique, if needed.) Assuming that you are confident in your unique selling proposition, you may benefit from a “who’s the expert?” conversation with your client. It’s worth using a whiteboard or a piece of paper to write down a simple two-column list. One column is for your areas of expertise, and the second represents the buyer’s expertise. To illustrate with a website design company, it might look something like this:

  Seller’s Expertise

  Buyer’s Expertise

  Website optimization

  Buyer’s company

  Technical objectives

  Business goals

  Search engine optimization (SEO)

  Website content

  Technical application

  Website look and feel

  Table 6-1: Separate Areas of Expertise

  As s
imple as this exercise appears, it is likely to generate useful questions. In the example above, is it obvious that the buyer would be the expert in the website’s look and feel? You can imagine that a seller might assume that, or might assume the opposite. The expertise list erases assumptions and provides clarity.

  If your team is getting stuck on defining where the expertise lies, it may help to start from a different point that identifies where expertise is shared.

  Address Shared Expertise

  Jack recently helped a company review its relationships with communications vendors, which had become problematic. Company management believed that they were spending too much money in this area and their efforts seemed disorganized Early in the process, the team tried to answer the question, “Who is the expert?” It proved difficult to cleanly separate where expertise resided, so we added a third column for shared expertise and completed the table to reflect the current reality. Jack calls this table an “expertise map,” and it looked like the following example:

  Seller’s

  Expertise

  Shared

  Expertise

  Buyer’s

  Expertise

  Marketing tactics

  Advertising placement

  Marketing strategy

  Online strategy

  Customer knowledge

  Buyer’s company

  Buyer’s overall strategy

  Customers

  Table 6-2: The Expertise Map Reveals Overlapping

  Areas of Expertise

  When the team stood back from the whiteboard, they had a collective “a-ha” moment. Every problem they saw in the relationship tied back to shared expertise—that is, areas where it was unclear who the expert was.

  “No wonder we’re arguing about what the customer wants—we both think we’re the experts in that.”

  “We’re paying for them to create our marketing strategy, but we have our own people who do that.”

  “Online has been so hard because we keep stepping on each other’s toes!”

  “Shared expertise” is a nice way to say that expertise ownership is unclear. This uncertainty can create many problems as a client relationship develops. If the buyer bases a purchase decision on the wrong understanding of who the expert is, that confusion has the potential to ruin the relationship and erase any impact that you may have created.

  When Expertise Is a Sensitive Subject

  Part of your job as the seller is to ensure that buyers have a clear understanding of your expertise. When they trust your expertise over their own in an area, they will trust you on the details and it will be easier to focus on the fit.

  Getting to that understanding can be delicate when the expertise you bring encroaches on the buyer’s perceived expertise. In some cases it may provoke disagreement on the buyer’s team and objections to the sale.

  “Why should we bring in your company to help with this, when we have a whole group doing this?”

  “Any changes in ____ have to go through Bill—that’s his area.”

  Is it worth stirring up these potential objections? What will happen, for example, when the IT manager who is a self-styled social media expert sees in writing that his company is hiring an outside firm to help with social media?

  When areas of expertise overlap, it is especially critical to address the boundaries and define them. The sooner the conflict appears and is addressed, the better. You can often resolve the conflict by stepping back and asking questions that bring the focus back to the fit.

  Artfully Direct the Client Back to the Fit

  When questions or comments reveal that the buyer and seller may have different ideas of how the expertise is divided, it’s critical to move the focus back to the fit. Statements and questions like the following can help:

  “We may have gotten ahead of ourselves, so I just want to confirm. Are you looking for help in this area, or do you have it pretty well figured out?”

  “We’ve had great success with helping many companies about your size achieve lasting results. The recipe that works is one where we can bring all that we’ve learned and apply our methods. We don’t want to do it halfway.”

  “How and when will you ultimately measure success on this? If we’re agreed on that, are we free to use our tactics as long as we can measure and report on the success?”

  We want to stress that these are not manipulative tactics to silence a problem personality on the vendor’s team. It is important to seek and listen for the truth. That truth may lead to an adjustment of the buyer’s expectations or attitudes, or it may lead to a conclusion that your offering is not a good fit.

  Buyers may want to hear a few technical answers to bolster their confidence, and that is fine. But too much emphasis on the how may reveal that the boundary lines of expertise are faint or overlapping. If your prospect will not focus on the fit even after one of these replies, you may need to consider whether his company will be a long-term, high-margin client or is looking for a different type of resource.

  If your goal is to have long-term clients and referral business, then it is very much in your interest to make sure your prospect is focused on the fit and the end result. As with getting all of the buyer’s puzzle pieces right-side up, maintaining this focus takes discipline—especially when the buyer is ready to buy and is congratulating you on your brilliant product. But your efforts to gently move your prospect’s attention from the details to the greater objectives will pay dividends.

  Here are some ways to refocus:

  “We can’t promise that Joe will always be on the project, but if we can define what success looks like and report on that quarterly, we’ll make sure that we always get you strong results.”

  “Our database is a great asset, as you have noted. The real power comes in our ability to use that information to meet your goals. So before we get started, let’s make sure we understand those goals.”

  “Sometimes our clients ask for something specific, and we realize down the road that we failed to ask enough questions, only to discover later that the clients would have been better off with another approach—in many cases, a less expensive approach. Would you mind if we asked a few questions before we get too far down the path?”

  Put Same Side Selling to Work

  The puzzle pieces you have are your resources. They are relevant, but only because they lead to results. Your pieces are valuable only if they fit the holes in the client’s puzzle. If you and the client have trouble seeing why her company needs your products or services, then perhaps your pieces are not a fit for their puzzle.

  It is natural for buyers to ask questions about vendor costs, personnel, and process. These factors can all affect the quality and delivery of the end product. But an emphasis on the seller’s costs, rather than on the buyer’s value, can derail a possibly great deal. Ultimately what matters is the puzzle piece. The people and process behind it matter to the extent that they determine its shape.

  Are you looking at each other or looking at the pieces?

  Review your biggest client account. Is your arrangement with this client results-based or resources-based?

  Think of the most recent conversation you had with a prospect. Estimate what percentage of the time you talked about resources and what percentage you devoted to results.

  Review your standard customer agreement. If you had to classify the document as either resource-based or results-based, which would it be? Why?

  Of all of your customer relationships, which is farthest from where you would like it to be? For that customer, are the boundaries of expertise clear? If not, create two versions of an expertise map for that relationship: one that reflects the current status, and one that would be the target. Consider reviewing that expertise map with the client.

  Create an expertise map for your optimal client engagement.

  CHAPTER 7

  Don’t Force the Fit

  Traditional sales training goes deep and wide on how to close the sale, o
vercome objections, persuade prospects, and upsell buyers. Behind these tactics are two working assumptions: that a sale is better than no sale, and that a bigger sale is better than a smaller sale.

  In this chapter we take a different view. We’re not arguing that smaller is better or that losing the right deal is a good thing. What we are saying is that the practice of restraint is more important than upselling. Being willing to say no—even when the buyer is ready to say yes—is an essential element of Same Side Selling.

  Sometimes the fit and impact we seek just aren’t there. This reality may be slow to emerge. What looked like a perfect fit from a distance turns out to be something less after getting to the truth. What happens then?

  This chapter is about what happens after that disconnect appears. We’ll explain what it means for a seller to force the fit instead of showing restraint, and why forcing the fit is so common and so problematic. Then we will explain why restraint can be the best path toward easier selling, more profitable clients, and more referral business. We’ll also cover the right way to refer a prospect to someone else so the referral benefits all three parties.

  What It Looks Like to Force the Fit

  When you force the fit during a sale, you are almost always doing one of the following or a mix of both:

  • Selling services outside of your expertise

  • Selling a solution to a problem that the client doesn’t have or perceive

  Buyer’s Perspective: Unfortunately, a couple of our vendors are like hammer salesmen. By that I mean they only sell hammers, so to them all of our problems look like nails. This is such a turnoff and it limits the relationship to a very tactical level. It means that instead of getting their help to diagnose our problem, we have to be on guard that they’ll try to fix it with the wrong solution. A hammer salesman can never be a trusted advisor.