How do you prefer to sell: through email & the web, by phone, or face-to-face?
How do your prospects like to buy?
What happens when these preferences conflict?
Famed management guru and my professor, Peter F. Drucker, was fond of pointing out that there are at least three kinds of customers:
(1) Readers
(2) Listeners, and
(3) Writers.
To his list, we can also probably add
(4) Talkers and
(5) Viewers.
These are the main modalities through which people like to get their information.
The general idea is we should respect customer preferences, communicating through media that are appropriate to each individual.
But is this the way we should sell? Should we defer to apparent customer preferences, or assert our own?
For instance, let's say you receive an inquiry through your web site's email, requesting additional information about your products or services. It's easy to reply by scribbling something, or by attaching documents, and then by clicking the mouse.
This, it would seem, is what the inquirer is requesting, right?
But let's say, at the end of the email, the person has "signed it" with his name and phone number. Should we take that as an invitation, or at least permission to respond by phone?
While I'm a writer, and I'm comfortable crafting responsive emails, I prefer to sell prospects in real-time, face to face, or by phone. I believe calling an inquirer quickly, not only shows I'm interested in earning his business. It gives me a chance to learn more about his project, his needs, budget, and I get to assess his sense of urgency and seriousness from his voice.
I can find out about his authority to buy, where he is in the process of evaluating sources of supply, and if he's operating under a deadline. Also, how did he hear about me—from a referral, a search engine, one of my books?
I just can't surmise this detail from an initial email, so there are solid selling reasons to get back with him by phone.
But there are risks, as well.
He may think it's too aggressive, or premature, preferring to keep potential sources at arms length, for the time being. He may be a reader, preferring to sift through documentation, comparing sources, and planning his second dispatch.
But if I call, I can always follow that chat with literature, if that's his wish.
I prefer to play to my strengths, rather than deferring to a prospect's. So, I'll make an effort to discover a person's phone number, even if they haven't provided one in their email inquiry.
When I call, I say that I wanted to make sure I sent the right information, and to do that it's best to get acquainted a little with their specific needs.
What if they reply, "All I wanted was some basic information."
This suggests they aren't serious prospects, or that they're simply going through the motions of shopping so they can seem that they've "objectively" settled on using someone else, a source they already decided to work with.
Or, they could be calling as shills for my competitors, to learn more about what I'm up to, for intelligence.
In any case, I can disqualify them from receiving further attention or more detailed information.
Ultimately, the question is who will control the buying process: him or me?
I'm comfortable taking control, as a principle of economy, not power, or personality.
The goal here is not developing an ideal relationship, it's doing profitable business. That doesn't always happen in an egalitarian context, or necessarily by putting the customer, first!
Dr. Gary S. Goodman, President of Customersatisfaction.com, is a popular keynote speaker, management consultant, and seminar leader and the best-selling author of 12 books, including Reach Out & Sell Someone® and Monitoring, Measuring & Managing Customer Service. He is a frequent guest on radio and television, worldwide. A Ph.D. from USC's Annenberg School, Gary offers programs through UCLA Extension and numerous universities, trade associations, and other organizations in the United States and abroad. He is headquartered in Glendale, California, and he can be reached at (818) 243-7338 or at: gary@customersatisfaction.com.
No comments:
Post a Comment