Monthly Archives: April 2012

Lead assignment by social proximity. There’s gold in them thar processes.

Lead assignment is at the heart of every organization’s sales processes. Since people buy from people, not companies, the most important question asked of B2B sales managers is “who should work the deal or account?” It can also be the most complicated.

The importance of the process is directly proportional to transaction or account size. For medium to large B2B opportunities, a simple round-robin type assignment process just doesn’t make sense. For these deals, most businesses manage assignment using criteria like industry vertical, geography, opportunity size, product type and track record. Whether the processes are informal or formal, the objective is to apply these rules to maximize sales. Unfortunately, most B2B companies are missing out on a key opportunity to achieve this objective.

As every salesperson knows, people buy from people they know, like and trust. When offered roughly equivalent solutions, buyers will always pick the person who created the “know, like and trust” relationship. What’s more, common relationships, or social proximity, is THE most important factor in relationship building.  

People are psychologically wired with a trust equation that gives disproportionate weight to social proximity. That’s why sales leaders have always subjectively factored relationships into lead assignment. However, this approach was limited by its very subjectivity and perceptions of “unfairness”. Managers also didn’t have the benefit of social network visibility. Before social media, how many of us could list our “2nd degree connections”? If you’ll excuse the cliché, lead assignment by social proximity was only  employed when an insider relationship jumped up and bit us on our collective  asses.

Well, no longer. Thanks to the emergence of business social media, sales managers can now access hard social proximity data . When salespeople share social accounts with their employers (which is happening increasingly), it becomes possible to create objective rule-based lead assignment, using LinkedIn “degrees of connection” and Facebook “common acquaintances”.

The most important factor in the “know, like and trust” equation, social networks, can now be used as a primary means of lead assignment.

For those of you who aren’t yet social media converts, below is an example of how it works. I did a search on LinkedIn for Marc Benioff, the CEO of Salesforce. Two of my connections are directly connected to him, which I would never have known without LinkedIn.

Assuming I am a candidate to work a deal with Salesforce, a sales manager could (i) evaluate my connectedness to decision-makers at Salesforce, (ii) compare my social proximity to other members of our sales team, and (iii) make an informed and objective lead assignment decision.

Successful selling is becoming more relational than transactional. Social selling is accelerating this evolution. Sales leaders cannot afford to ignore the opportunity to assign leads based on social proximity. It makes common sense, and it also makes money.

If you have any experience, processes or tools that you use to take advantage of social proximity in lead assignment, I would love to hear about them.

Advertisements
Tagged , , , , ,

How social is B2B sales? Very.

People often ask me “is social media relevant in B2B sales?” The answer is absolutely YES! People buy from people they 1. know 2. like and 3. trust…that’s Sales 101. Social media makes it possible for salespeople to listen, learn and communicate with potential buyers like never before.  It’s never been faster or easier for salespeople to build relationships and earn trust.

These three stats give a strong answer to the B2B social selling question:

  1. IBM saw a 400% increase in sales in a recent social selling pilot project.
  2. Companies that blog generate 67% more leads than their non-blogging peers.
  3. Companies that Tweet generate 2x more leads.

The infographic below was produced by InsideView. It’s well worth a look.

 

http://www.insideview.com/social-selling?utm_source=infographic&utm_medium=howsocialisb2b&utm_campaign=social-selling

75% of people don’t think like you, 25% don’t like you. Now what?

Admit it. You have a colleague, employee or customer that you just can’t stand working with. For me, let’s call this person Mike Minutia.

Just the thought of meeting with Mike triggers my “fight or flight” response. He turns meetings into endless recitations of tedious details. He has no interest in people. He lacks intuition, rendering him unable to make decisions without reams of data. He talks only about work. And his voice…my god…it should be patented as a treatment for insomnia. You know what I’m talking about, right?

Actually, maybe you don’t. If you are one of the many precise, disciplined and conscientious “introverted thinkers” (as Jung called them) out there, you may hold an equally negative view of “Helping Inspirers” like me.

From Mike’s perspective, I lack discipline. My optimistic nature leads me to take dangerous risks. When I’m not interested in a project, it’s twice as hard to get decent work out of me. Sometimes, he just wishes I’d leave him alone…do I think work is some kind of cocktail party?

Mike and I are “opposite types”. I am what Quadrant Personality Theory calls an “Inspirational Helper”, which means I get energy from people, am comfortable with risk and value intuition as much as analysis. Our communication styles, passions and aptitudes are diametrically opposed. Because it takes effort, patience and understanding to collaborate, we regularly drive each other nuts. But we’ve also achieved great things together, bringing a diversity of strengths to our work.

Viewed objectively, Mike is dependable, analytical and persistent, regardless of the task at hand. He tackles challenges systematically, consistently finding solutions to big problems. He’s everyone’s go-to person for a challenging project. Lastly, his sense of duty and responsibility is unparalleled.

Quadrant Personality Theory, which was first pioneered by Swiss psychologist Carl Gustav Jung in 1921, tells us that understanding self (both strengths and weaknesses) makes it possible to interact more effectively with others.

It also tells us that people fall into the following four personality types in roughly equal proportions:

Whatever your type, 75% of people don’t share your worldview. Their communication, decision-making and working-style preferences differ significantly from yours. What’s more, 25% of people are “opposite types” like Mike and me, who often struggle to work together effectively.

Understanding is the key to harnessing the power of diversity. Companies that do this best use personality testing as a matter of course to encourage effective communication, and get the best out of their talent. Good tests provide actionable information such as:

  • Key strengths and weaknesses
  • Potential blind spots
  • Communication tips for your opposite type
  • Development suggestions
  • How to motivate and manage each type of personality
I did the Insights Discovery test, which I recommend. It provided plenty of actionable advice, including these points on how to deal with my opposite type Mike:
  1. Avoid bursts of emotion, which make Mike uncomfortable
  2. Give Mike time to gather his thoughts and express his feelings
  3. Stick to facts and data if you want to be persuasive
  4. Never exaggerate, even for effect
  5. Avoid humour in serious situations
  6. Allow Mike to keep his personal life very private

Do you know your type? Do you have a strategy to deal with your “opposite”? If the answer to either of these questions is “no”, it’s time to Google “personality testing”.

Sources and additional information:
http://www.colorfulleadership.info/papers/4-quadrant.htm
http://www.insights.com/
Tagged , , , ,
%d bloggers like this: