I'd Rather Sweat...

Many years ago, a rather excitable, red-faced gentleman (USMC Drill Instructor) wearing a strange hat with a flat, circular brim, drilled a concept into me that continues to resonate after all these years. There was absolutely no questioning of his words – they were to be acted upon immediately and were never, ever, to be forgotten. He made me, along with about 70 other of my peers, memorize the following phrase verbatim, “I’d rather sweat in training, than bleed in combat.” Simple, yet very effective.

He was right. Success comes down to proper execution of a process, be it in war, or, in business. Proper execution doesn’t occur by magic; it’s the result of rigorous training. Sweat, whether physical or metaphorical, is good because it will improve execution of a process, or a move.  

We help design sales process programs for businesses, and often use this as a discussion point in our work. Following a training roll-out, we help these clients learn to manage to their adopted new processes.

 Along with my colleagues, I recognize that the very best execution of sales performance systems comes from practicing elements of the process. The practice I’m referring to means continued training and repetition, of the process within the organization, well after the consultants have collected their fees and gone home.

Besides practice, it makes pretty good sense for someone to observe, inspect, and assess the results of the adopted process, recalibrating where necessary.  When these things are done, it’s much easier to reap the results from a significant training investment.

The Case for Connecting

How do salespeople execute their sales process competencies if they are unable to make successful connections? I’m referring to people-to-people connections with potential high-value influencers. How does a salesperson access and engage a decision-maker, or other key player to champion their cause?

Within our client base there are many different kinds of selling roles. It is interesting that best practice selling skill sets seem to apply across the sales role spectrum. In each area, the ability for the salesperson to connect is crucial.

Skills applicable to the inside salesperson are just as critical to an outside or, direct rep, as well as for the high-end, global account salesperson. This discussion will focus on what most organizations refer to as inside, or telesales. It's understood that different organizations may use a variation of the label or title, so a little latitude, please.

In the marketplace the introduction of a hot, disruptive new offering sounds fun, right? It is. But success is elusive if you can’t get anyone to listen to your story. It’s pretty important in any business that those in a customer-facing role be capable of articulating the corporate message in a factual manner. However, it falls on the shoulders of a salesperson to initiate a conversational dialogue. These result in connections.

Inside sales, or telesales pros, catch a lot of grief for a variety of reasons. Some are fair and some are not. The good ones, though, are a huge value to any selling organization. Along with the marketing department, they are the real tips of the revenue spear. They have the ability to transfer a specialized message, causing a potential prospect to form a mental “maybe,” or “what if” question in their mind.

Think about it. In the outbound prospecting role, there’s that whole primeval hunting thing. The savvy seller is searching from a potential candidate pool from which personal connections must be established. The seller must be capable of multi-tasking, concurrently qualifying or disqualifying potential candidates.

The crucial, initial encounter must be meaningful enough that the seller is allowed the opportunity to share a compelling story with a potential customer (who, by the way, is often a complete stranger).
In a perfectly executed scenario that “stranger”  become engaged and wants to learn more. A personal connection has been made, a next action activity scheduled, or perhaps it's a one-call close. For salespeople it’s the power of the connection. Considering that this scenario sometimes is initiated with a very short, succinct phone conversation, the outcome can be amazing!

But wait, there’s more! (Pun is intended) the seller must also be agile, responsive and immediately helpful if the initial encounter was from an unsolicited, inbound caller. This “prospect” may be shopping information. They can be time-killers if the seller is not careful. Earlier the term “disqualification” came up.  We know many inbound callers have already educated themselves to some degree via the web. The seller’s skill here is to very quickly qualify or, disqualify the caller.

If this is a legitimate inbound inquiry, and I'm the salesperson, I must quickly grasp the caller’s existing perspective and then help them expand that view.  This can cause the prospect to now consider our own unique offering, or differentiator, as viable solutions.

Ideally, that initial connection serves as a birthplace for ideas a prospect hadn’t yet considered. This may also be an opportunity for a seller to set a competitive trap. Change the evaluation rules by asking the prospect to add the seller’s unique differentiator to the buyer's evaluation criteria. This won’t be accomplished unless a meaningful connection has been established between a salesperson and a potential buyer.

It’s interesting that in some (not all) organizations, the inside salesperson isn't afforded the same  status as the traditional direct or installed account rep. I don’t understand this. The inside sales group is often used as the training ground for field-based salespeople. Maybe that paradigm should be reversed. See how that plays out.

OK, bad idea. But if the inside sales team is a viable mechanism for professional development and provides significant revenue stream for a lot of companies, then let's give them their props.  These professional salespeople are part of the corporate treasure chest. The salesperson skilled at making good connections is shaping your customer’s buying experience. Treat them like gold bullion. Don’t let them get away from you.

Mindful Conversations

In my business it’s really important to listen carefully when others speak. Conceptually this sounds pretty simple, doesn’t it?  Not as easy as you’d think. Imagine being able to eavesdrop in on business meetings, be the fly on the wall, or simply an unseen objective listener – privy to the interaction from both sides of conversations. As the observer, its possible to identify dysfunctional communication occurring - from both sides. So from a business perspective, as salespeople, it's important important to review our own habits.

During a conversation, more than a few of us mentally leapfrog ahead while the other party is speaking. Our eyeballs are locked in, but in truth we’re planning on what we want to say, or how we should respond, instead of being in the moment while we listen to our client’s concerns.  For me, managing a mindful conversation has been one of my biggest business challenges. My guess is that this will be a life-long journey.

It becomes even more problematic because, lacking anything remotely close to a photographic memory; I’m forced to take notes – lots of them. So, instead of truly being at one in a shared conversation, I find myself multi-processing (difficult for me), which in essence degrades my true comprehension of the dialogue in play.

Some people are uncomfortable being recorded, so notes and confirming questions are how I manage to capture and retain the most salient points of a business conversation. Confirming my understanding of the discussion points seems to score points with my clients. It’d be great if I’d been born with a rewind button allowing me to reach back and review key conversations. But I can’t, hence the note taking.
Many salespeople seem to have an overdeveloped speech gene. We talk too much, often attempting to over-control a conversation. It’s almost a compulsion, I know, I'm cursed with it. We become so passionate about our message we run the risk of overwhelming the listener with our point of view. 

It’s ironic.  Intellectually, we know that we can communicate much more effectively when we slow our conversational pace, conducting via internal content review, the words of another before responding. Without this content review , it's very possible to become so over-enthusiastic that we diminish our own message. Sometimes verbal response isn’t necessary, or even appropriate. This is where many have struggled. People - particularly salespeople, communicate much better after taking the time to think about the subject at hand.

After telling me for years that I speak without listening, my wife guided me towards a helpful source – she loaned me a copy of The Art of Power written by the Vietnamese monk, Thich Nhat Hanh. My wife encouraged me to learn to be mindful, “about what?” I’d ask. “Just read the book.”  I learned
that mindfulness can be applied to many aspects of business, and life.

Thich Nhat Hanh teaches to “be in the moment,” it sounds religious (it’s not), but it is spiritual – eastern, calm and seemingly impossible. Personally, there seems to be way too much activity going on in my mind, to fully appreciate the concept. They call it “monkey mind.” I call it struggling with my demons. But relaxing (meditating) before, and during a business meeting is like taking medicine without the pills. 

Thich Nhat Hanh has written a number of pieces that explores the importance of relaxation. He suggests we can all learn to be mindful in our thoughts and actions. When I’m considering a client’s needs I find that in a business situation, when I am able to effectively block outside distractions – I’m being mindful, and as a result  I’m able to do a much better job. Here’s the conundrum, most of us stumble through work and life assaulted by ongoing distractions and don’t even realize it. Sometimes it takes a vacation on the beach and a couple of drinks with tiny parasols in them to realize how stressed many of us are.  The notion of learning to be calm – even briefly, is hugely beneficial.

For salespeople, calmness can bring clarity to one’s thoughts and optimal results for one’s efforts. These results represent a tactical improvement – and for some, a clear advantage. When I consider the conversational dance that we engage in for the pursuit of business, it’s quite clear to me that if people can learn to listen more carefully, the character of their thoughts will find their way into words that are situationally more applicable, while impacting interpretation and outcome.

I’ve seen instances in business where the act of modeling mindful listening influences the other party to also practice better conversational behavior. Thoughtful dialogue allows participants a chance to slow down, relax and align. A point of clarity may emerge, providing individuals, whether they’re speaking or listening, the space to expand perspectives, blending ideas and mutually building upon them – an intellectual chain of events resulting in mutual gain. 

Discussions consisting of shared concepts can illustrate thoughtful ideas and words. Mindful listening and speaking helps eliminate barriers, enhance learning, and afford others the opportunity to consider your ideas.

In the Shadow of Sun Tzu - When to do Battle

If one considers the nuances of the buyer / seller opportunity lifecycle, it's a pretty safe bet that if a prospect organization is going to spend funds on a new business solution, they've already conducted to some degree their own analysis of the various vendors before going public with the vendor selection process. However, it’s important that the buying entity have multiple appropriate vendors respond to their proposal requests. It has long been whispered that some selection decisions are made prior to inviting in a group of qualified vendors to compete for the business.


This notion presents a serious dilemma for those who’d like to engage, but feel as if they’re not likely to get the chance to do so on a level field. Our thoughts are, if you commit yourself, your organization and reputation to combat, you’d better execute a plan that will ensure success. There is a high risk of failure in this scenario if one chooses to follow the rules as designated by the buyer, or the “unbiased” 3rd party consulting entity.  Here’s a thought for those who like to think tactically.  Change the rules of engagement, or don’t play.
Ask any salesperson who’s ever carried a bag if they’ve heard the seductive whisper in their ear, "We're looking to buy and we're going to give you serious consideration." The seller quickly runs this 'steaming hot" lead up the flag pole and the appropriate organizational response has been to marshal the necessary resources and react by putting their best team on it. However, by being “reactive” a seller can easily squander an opportunity to control the field.  Thus begins the slippery path to sales perdition, the vendor showing its willingness to serve as column fodder. When invited to participate, many salespeople (and/or their managers) completely lose their critical thinking skills, abdicating power in the pursuit of checking a selection criteria box.

If a seller hasn’t participated in the creation of a buyer's initial buying vision, then there can be a reasonable assumption that someone else did, or, the buying entity has researched the web and formed their own conclusions without benefit of your input. In either scenario, the seller is merely a comparative column in the evaluation process.

With happy ears in full extension, sellers fall over themselves to accommodate the whims of the buyer, who probably has already mentally selected something else.

Consider this: If as a sales organization, management decides to commit the internal resources necessary to win, then salespeople should insist that the prospect’s organization provide them the opportunity to properly present products and services to those stakeholders (decision makers)   most impacted by the proposed change. It is, after all, a fair thing to ask, a very valid quid pro quo. If denied this reasonable request, it’s time to disqualify the opportunity.

Most people would agree that in a sales situation, the selling entity incurs significant costs just to compete. If not given the opportunity to expand the prospect's existing vision to one biased by the seller’s offering, why compete? It’s time to apply the qualification / disqualification litmus test. Are the existing rules of engagement fair? Are rigid rules in place restricting who a sales person can speak with? Are these rules unfair?

Has your sales team found itself blocked from interacting with true stakeholders – unable to demonstrate what they do best? Have your resources and efforts been spent on presenting to a "designated representative?" Our guess is that the engagement rules have been designed this way for a purpose. It is futile for anyone to attempt to sell to someone who can't buy. But, oh, how we try! In the fog of battle, unless the sales manager possesses an acute insight into the seller’s behavior under duress, the risk factors will be very high. 


At the risk of being cynical, if a selling organization is invited to compete in a competitive situation but hasn’t participated in the creation of the buyer’s initial vision, then what has been purported to be a level playing field, is probably skewed towards a competitor.

Continuing with this scenario, it’d be interesting to know just how many competing vendors are forecasting the same opportunity. In situations like this, a savvy salesperson may still have a trump card. Think of the prospect diligently preparing the columns in his vendor spreadsheet. Column A represents the vendor of choice - the favorite. However, this prospect actually needs the participation of several vendors to represent additional evaluation columns. This makes good business sense. Internal requirements (and in some cases, the law) demand a record of due diligence in the selection process. They certainly want to enhance their own negotiating & pricing position with the true vendor of choice.

Through the power of suggestion - happy ears, and other more nefarious means, they keep all competing vendors hopeful. Without realizing it, you've been pre-designated as a "Bronze Medalist" or, in some cases, the more exalted, "Silver Medalist," but to become the “Gold Medalist,” it may require the seller to break (or change) the rules

So salespeople beware! If it smells bad, or feels as if the fix is in, challenge the status quo. Ask for an audience with those key players in the buying organization who would be most impacted by the scope of your offering. If denied this reasonable request, walk away. Better yet, run like the wind and be vocal about it.

Chances are the seller's time and the selling organization’s resources will be squandered on this boondoggle. Why participate? Why not pursue something you have a fair chance of winning? Interestingly, a formal withdrawal or refusal to participate on the basis of fairness (or lack thereof), may compel the buyer to grant the necessary face-time.


If this hardball tactic is successful, and the audience request is granted, the seller is now afforded the opportunity to reengineer the existing vision to one that is now biased by the sellers' differentiator(s). If the seller succeeds at redefining the buyer’s perspective with a capability unique to his/her product, try the following tactic for grins and giggles. After proving to the stakeholders your offering's unique capabilities, insist (no guts, no glory) that the buyer have your competitor(s) demonstrate that same capability.  Crash and burn.

Conquering Sales Burnout

 By Michael Kenney

 Fear and Stress Today

 Coping with years of economic instability and job uncertainty has resulted in workers being stretched physiologically and economically.  Fear of job loss has generated a culture of “do more with less”. In the beginning, this was accepted because it was necessary to make it over the hump. Over time, this culture has coupled burn-out with job protectionism, resulting in unhealthy and unsustainable behavior. Last year, about 57% of working Americans had unused vacation time at the end of 2011, and most of them left an average of 11 days unused - or nearly 70 percent of their allotted time off. The main reason for not using the time was “they felt there was too much work”.

 Direct Impacts on Sales People

 Narrowing the focus of this culture switch to sales shows continued assignment of larger revenue quotas with less help and more reporting demands. Mix in the 7/24 availability created by modern technology, and you have “do more with less on steroids”.

 Strategy to Help Cope

 As sales people go faster to do more, their sales pipelines become Boa Constrictors. As the pressure increases, the tendency is to add more deals, which just adds more pressure. In this state of increasing turmoil, it could be time to refresh the skill of disqualification. Not every deal is winnable, so the earlier we disqualify out of those opportunities, the more time we can spend on “real” opportunities.   

 Key Steps in Disqualification

A good starting point for disqualification is to consider the following:

   1. Do we have access to the power to buy – the key players in this project

   2. Does the prospect understand our solution and our differentiators, if any

   3. Has the prospect determined the money they will make or save with our solution

   4. Do we understand the prospect’s buying process

   5. Does the prospect understand the implementation path and services we offer

Into Action

A sanity test of “Is this a good use of my time!” If not, grab the Boa Constrictor and cut that part out.

Sales as Combat  

These words are dedicated to those of you who sell for a living.  I don't mean for the title to put you off, I just want to explore a sales theme with you.

Have you ever reflected on the notion that your chosen profession has led you into something akin to a combat zone? For those of you who haven’t served, this may be a stretch; but take a leap of faith with me.  I’m not talking body counts here; I’m just drawing parallels between two demanding environments. So please humor me for a few paragraphs, because I believe there is a valuable business lesson that can be learned from our brothers and sisters under arms. Direct correlations can be made that the proactive, strategic and tactical planning axioms used in combat, can be applied in business with the proper training and leadership. These concepts are global – applicable anywhere on the planet.

Think of the corporate landscape over the last few decades. Many well known businesses are no longer with us. Now envision these failed brands as a metaphor that represents the killing fields of business. These fields are strewn with the remains of high profile organizations beaten into submission. World events and innovation surely were the cause of some of the carnage, but I’m guessing leadership, or lack thereof had something to do with it, too. 

Proper operational planning is too often overlooked as a critical tool in the leadership war chest. How can a new product launch succeed, or a targeted strategic account be won without it? What are the over-the-horizon initiatives? What competitive product strategies are in play?   Some executive management groups or committees do attempt to develop viable battle plans – but often the planners aren’t operating in the realm of reality, and the results are dismal because they just don’t know what they’re doing. Hire a vet! 

It seems like many selling organizations tend to be reactive instead of proactive. Collaboration is an excellent way for a leader to gather ideas – but there should be only one commanding general at the top of the organizational chart – decision by committee has been a great crippler of sales organizations. Waiting for the smoke to settle and infighting to cease ties the hands of a leadership group. Consequently they lose their agility; simple initiatives are weighed down by sheer numbers and egos. Want a recommendation?  Have the committee members serve to develop and present thoughtful strategies in the planning sessions. Then it’s time to let the person in charge make the decision whether or not to execute. Boom! It takes a leader.

Consider those who lead subordinates into harm’s way. Whether in business or military, the professionals’ mandate is to keep their troops in a constant state of operational readiness. Maintaining situational awareness in either endeavor is critical. Business vigilance should consider the competitive landscape as a free-fire zone, 24 x 7.

Executive teams as well as small unit leaders must study their craft and maintain the manpower, expertise and resources necessary to execute the mission. Guess (may not be for the squeamish) what?  In sales, the job description is to crush the competition by providing an overwhelmingly superior solution coupled with a compelling customer centric selling process. Not looking for prisoners here, take ‘em out! 

In business as in life, expect the unexpected. In spite of your planning, sometimes the smelly stuff is going to hit the fan. Preparing your troops for contingencies requires unit discipline. Those that prepare for problems fare far better than those who don’t.  With that in mind, the military grooms its leaders – those on the upward promotion track, attend graduate school. They call it, no surprise, War College.

 In war and in business, winning combatants learn to improvise, adapt and overcome* in the face of adversity. Salespeople execute better because good training prepares them not to panic or succumb to baser instincts (discount, concessions, etc.) when the unexpected occurs. When considering professional development, consider the notion of constant vigilance. In order to maintain this high alert status the military seeks out high achieving candidates for selection and admission to the service academies. Even at the small unit in-the-field level, corporals and sergeants (first line managers), are continuously cycled through combat specialty training and leadership courses. It’s no small wonder that our military functions as our nation’s most effective unofficial business school. We could learn from their examples.

Enlightened business organizations have developed internal learning universities where participants are afforded the opportunity to absorb the tactical and strategic lessons learned from sales combat.  Professional development, usually administered from an HR training element, will help ensure optimized operational efficiency. Training, lot’s of it, is needed…repetitive, over and over again (war games), until it becomes second nature.  Doctors and lawyers do it, dentists do it, and police and firemen do it.  Marines do it. Salespeople, not so much.

Management should brainstorm programs that are patterned danger-close to real tactical selling situations. It’s important that in the heat of battle, the correct words and phrases will go racing down from the brain housing group and out of the lips of your sales person.

 “It’s far better to sweat in training, than to bleed in combat…. now get on your *#&!^@%$&@*!$ faces, and give me another fifty.”

I don’t know who first screamed those words, and one would certainly modify the phraseology for the business world – but think of the concept. Training ensures proper execution, which in turn helps shorten time to revenue, while strengthening market hold and sustaining profit cycles.

We hear it all; “we’re spending too much time out of the field, too expensive, not necessary, etc.” When times are tough, training programs are the first to go, or, are ignored far too often. This is counter intuitive, lack of preparation contributes heavily to the casualty count referred to earlier in this piece.

 

A thought - look at your existing training regimens. If they’re inadequate, fix them. That’s part of being a leader.

* Phrase used by Gunnery Sergeant Thomas Highway (Clint Eastwood) in the movie, Heartbreak Ridge.  Silly movie, but great lines used in context.

Establishing the relationship between value and  negotiation   

“Where Do We Need to Be?” Any variation of that theme will suffice. Thinking about it makes me squeamish because we’ve just queued-up unnecessary concessions. Our willingness to do so indicates that we’ve raised the white flag of surrender. We’ve subjugated our negotiating position and acknowledged a willingness to forego some of our margin, and perhaps some of our dignity.

All of us have fallen on our swords at one time or another. The important thing is to learn from our mistakes. Once those words have been uttered to anyone within the buying organization by a seller, the buyer has been given carte blanche to have their way with you. Your engagement rules are now out the window - abandoned.

By acknowledging willingness towards unilateral concession, the selling entity has effectively commoditized itself. The buyer can then begin the vendor dance, playing the price point game.

This is why early in the buy/sell life cycle, the seller must negotiate some form of a Business Value Analysis (BVA) event. This is the forum that a potential buyer can use to determine the economic, and/or operational changes likely to occur from the usage of your offering. Think of this as a great qualification /disqualification tool. Why wouldn’t they want to explore the projected value of their investment?

The key to a successful BVA is that the output must be the buyers’ projection. The seller should negotiate a value event early in the buy/sell life cycle, before agreeing to commit resources. It’s an often successful tactic, because structuring a value event makes good business sense to an objective buyer - unless you’re being positioned as column fodder

Establishing value recognized by both sides is one of the most important early negotiating steps in the buy/sell life cycle. The buyer has a much better understanding of the impact of the sellers’ offering and is now able to justify the investment. The seller is empowered from the BVA. When it comes time for the negotiation, it is much easier for a salesperson to resist costly concessions if both sides understand value.

The Most Expensive Six Words in Business

"Where Do We Need To Be?"

Think About It...We'll Discuss in the Morning

Speaking in Tongues

It seems doubtful that a buyer will choose a particular solution or offering without understanding the economic or operational impact of a seller’s solution.  Just doesn’t make sense.  Most of our clients sell product, service or solution-based capabilities that if used properly, will impact multiple stakeholders on the buyer side.  Sellers tend to hamstring themselves by failing to reach those stakeholders in order to discuss usage of the sellers’ product.

A thought – if you’re going to commit your time and organizational resources on an opportunity, then it’s critical that everyone on the potential buyer side being impacted understands how, or what is likely to occur.  Ideally, each stakeholder should be capable of projecting what will change resultant from the sellers’ product or offerings.  That could be a tall order, but it must be done.

For discussion purposes, let’s assume your offering will significantly impact the directors of finance, operations, engineering, IT and sales/marketing organizations of a particular prospect.  Who will ensure that your sales team has had business conversations with these stakeholders? Where in the buy/sell life cycle are these conversations going to occur?

Here’s a thought. Prior to expending significant resources on the sales effort, attempt to negotiate a series of best practice events as part of the evaluation process. It’s an effective tactic because if an organization is seriously looking, it makes good business sense to thoroughly evaluate a potential vendor. The key is that the salesperson must ask for the events to occur. It’s a great time to exercise quid pro quo.  

One of the most important of the scheduled events should be some form of a business value analysis. Each stakeholder must be able to understand how usage of the sellers’ product will change the status quo.  The business value analysis should be conducted in the business language  of the stakeholder. This requires the seller to be skilled in multiple business languages. If a seller is speaking to finance, then the spoken tongue must be that of finance. If the conversation is conducted with operations, the seller needs to speak fluent ops. The same concept applies to engineering, IT, sales/marketing, etc.  

But wait! There’s more. It will likely become necessary that sellers understand and be able to converse in many of the sub-dialects impacted, i.e., purchasing, customer service, data processing, and so on.

So, for critical opportunities it’s important to ask good questions, and provide clear responses in the language of the stakeholders. Negotiated events in the buy/sell life cycle can ensure these conversations occur. Organizationally, sales or training leadership should provide the messaging and conversational tools that facilitate these events.

Testing the Sales Hypothesis

There is a question we like to pose to clients in our sales and sales management workshops:

How often in your selling career have you been caught off guard by a loss involving an opportunity that you were convinced was yours?

You gave it your very highest degree of confidence on the forecast only to receive the crushing news that you've lost to a competitor or worse yet, no buying decision was made at all. Besides the obvious embarrassment, there are painful business ramifications to an inaccurate forecast. Senior executives have been known to slash their wrists when, after receiving profuse assurances from everyone, a critical account fails to materialize. Why were opportunity assessments so far off the mark?

The reason may be due in part, to that pervasive selling malaise known as Happy Ears. Nearly every salesperson (and often their managers) contracts the dreaded Happy Ears Syndrome at some point in their careers.

Known to gleefully infect salespeople of all ages, creeds and color, Happy Ears strikes without prejudice. If not treated early and aggressively early in the buy/sell lifecycle, the result can be crippling. There is no known inoculation to prevent it other than common sense. The resultant impact can generate searing consequences. Bad forecasts have caused stocks to tumble, earnings projections to be missed and left promising careers in shambles.

As an undergraduate, we were required by my university to prepare a senior thesis which was, by design, to be rigorously analyzed and challenged using the scientific method as a testing process.  As a graduation requirement, candidates had to form a hypothesis relative to a subject of interest within their area of academic concentration. Then, using meaningful statistical analysis, the student was expected to either prove or disprove the hypothesis, defending the findings before a committee consisting of departmental faculty. There is a concept here that if applied, could have a beneficial impact on a selling organization's ability to better predict closing at the opportunity level. 

As in school, this effort will requires diligence and occasionally, a degree of behavioral modification. Some say that the mantra of a salesperson is, “hope springs eternal”, bringing to mind the false hopes and illusions of Willie Loman in Arthur Miller's Death of a Salesman.  An unsettling concern is that many executives forecast sales revenues based mainly upon the gut reaction, or opinion of a salesperson. Revenue performance forecasting based solely on opinion or false hope, is as much of a tragedy as that portrayed in Miller's story. That the practice continues suggests that there may be some fundamental shortcomings relative to pipeline validation practices.

Salespeople love to present their offerings on management's altar with great panache. In order to add a veneer of credibility, they'll crunch their forecast through the appropriate CRM machinations and present it on PowerPoint or a spreadsheet for all to see. Managers and higher-ups shudder in delight and anticipation, sellers preen in the spotlight and onto the forecast it goes.  Ironically, many of today’s CRM and BI solutions really are effective, provided they capture valid data.

Many sales professionals struggle with the ability to properly qualify a potential lead - even more destructive is the lack of disqualification skills. Sales leadership should define exacting criteria when identifying forecast milestones.  Fine - sure, every organization does that, right? Wrong, they lose their way with their process integrity, by not adhering to their own rules.  Soon, the exception becomes the rule.  If sellers and managers would leverage testing rigors to examine and test their opportunities against their milestone criteria the way they did in school, they would be much more likely to disengage themselves from non-opportunities and spend their time on more productive pursuits.  Testing should occur throughout the life cycle of the opportunity.

Here’s the problem, instead of testing the veracity of the seller's opinion based upon agreed upon events, and/or completed milestones, managers in their rush to judgment often add their own spin, further enhancing the illusion of imminent closure. Sadly, the root information is still suspect at best, because it hasn't been truly validated or tested.  Salespeople, and often 1^st line managers, are seduced into a costly, resource intensive, web of calculated disinformation, designed for a single primary purpose: to create hope in the mind of a desperate salesperson. This seduction facilitates a virulent breeding ground for Happy Ears Syndrome within a sales organization because now (remember our CRM?) it has been reinforced with technology. What happens when this forecasted opportunity continues up the food chain in a sales organization? 

Enamored in the glow of that which is state of-the-art, someone forgot to test the sales hypothesis. The forecast is not worth the powder to blow it up.