One of the tenants behind Microsoft's successful Solution Selling Process (MSSP) is to offer the customer "proof" of capability. Rather than doing "sexy demos", however, it is far superior to put the prospect in contact with another organisation - that had the same business problem as the prospect - and that solved the problem with our solution. Anyone can do a good demo - but not everyone has a track record of solving this particular prospect's problem. (Actually - very few people can do a good demo - but that's another blog entry!)
A different way of providing "proof" is to mention analyst's reports.
Microsoft's Peter de Haas has provided a very useful summary of analysts' reports here, with a fuller list of the reports on the Microsoft site here.
But - really - what good is a positive analyst's report in a sales situation?
In February 2007, Forrester made some extremely positive comments about Microsoft's Dynamics CRM product:
Microsoft CRM ... "provides all-around core CRM capabilities in an intuitive, Outlook-style UI and leverages other Microsoft technologies like SharePoint and SQL Server Analysis Services to deliver more advanced capabilities"
This is a great quote - but it doesn't answer the prospect's "so what?" question? We can't be lazy - we can't just send this stuff out to customers - we have to answer the "so what?" question on a case by case basis.
For example - we tell a customer that Microsoft CRM provides "an intuitive, Outlook-style UI": SO WHAT? Well - probably less training time and expense compared to other solutions, greater chance of user acceptance, higher user productivity etc.
"...leverages other Microsoft technologies...": SO WHAT? Well - no need for the additional expense and hassle of having to install other middleware technologies, increased ROI from existing technology investments, higher customer satisfaction due to more targeted and relevant emails derived from customer data analysis etc.
This is all standard "feature/benefit" stuff.
But is this the end of the story - NO!
Just because we've moved from feature to benefit, it doesn't mean the benefit we're quoting - the answer we're giving to the "so what" question - is relevant to the prospect we're talking to. This is the problem with mass produced brochures - we print a number of benefits - but we're not tailoring the benefits to the situation.
If I'm a Sales Director, and I'm not paying for the technology, I'm probably not interested in an argument about increasing the ROI out of existing technology. I am, however, interested in more productivity from my sales team - and hence the arguments around user interface and Outlook integration are particularly relevant.
Think back on your last customer/prospect discussion - are you answering the "so what" question, and if so in the right way?
Comments