Let's (simply) put it this way... What would you do?...

TW,

Originally Posted by -TW

Remi -- I don't take it personally, exactly. That is, I don't take each individual 'rejection' personally. What begins to grate on my (very) soul, eventually, is the CUMULATIVE + PREDICTABLE rejection. And it's not even the rejection, exactly. It's the (what I perceive to be) rudeness of it. "Please contact me, I'm interested." Then I contact them... then NO RESPONSE -- repeatedly (either way - yes OR no) -- even with people I already 'know' well! It's incomprehensible, imo.

As I keep saying, there must be some (polite) way to make them see that -- and to 'train' them to (at least) respond.

I'll keep searching for the answer (+ going to therapy in the mean time).

-- TW

The answer is quite simple. You have not qualified them yet. Remember sales in any industry is a system of qualifying and then disqualifying the prospect.

I have been in your situation before and the hard lesson I had to accept is that I was targeting the wrong people and I was not closing the sale properly.

Seeing how you mention CUMULATIVE + PREDICTABLE rejection, tells me that your target market is not the correct market to target.

Have you searched the SRDS books yet to determine if your product/service is in demand for the markets you are targeting?

(((Aaaaarrrrgh!)))

The catch-22 is that I DO have the correct market (depends how you define 'correct'). Additional catch-22 is, if I keep following up with these 100 (100 3x / year) hand-raisers, many of them DO end up signing up.

The frustration comes when I must maintain ONE-HUNDRED PERCENT of the initiative during the sales 'process.'

Analogy: I end up marrying enough of the 100 girlfriends to make it worthwhile (?) -- but the 'relationships' are 100% ONE-SIDED (me putting in ALL the effort ALL the time).

What you say about qualifying them better rings true -- which is why I called it more of a 'sift + sort' issue.

When they say, 'please call me back in two months,' I think it would be fair for me to ask them, 'before I say I'll do that, would you say your interest level is low, medium or high?'

See, part of the problem is, these sales can be very complicated and the sales process can be moths or years long. I'm selling to city + county gov-mints -- things must be approved, sometimes involving grants and all sorts of BS. I must keep them fired up and keep them championing the whole thing. It's hard to tell who's really doing that, and who's "F.O.C." (f stands for 'full'). The real problem is, when the actual SALES (the ones who DO sign up) are traced backwards (to see the trail success left behind), whether they return my calls, etc. is *NOT* an indicator of whether they end up signing up.

So, sifting + sorting + qualifying CANNOT be enhanced by paying attention to who returns my calls + who does not. NONE OF THEM return my calls -- fruitless prospects and (eventual) sign ups alike!

-- TW

PS: I've been doing this (rolling the boulder up the hill 3x/year) for 15 years. It's the fact that I must do it singlehandedly with NO help from the (supposedly win-win) customer, that drives me nuts. Like I said, I'd be fine if I'd have to provide 98% of the initiative -- but, ONE-HUNDRED % ?!?!!?

PPS: Feel free to substitute the word 'marrying' with another more accurate + graphic word, if you wish.

I'm selling to city + county gov-mints -- things must be approved, sometimes involving grants and all sorts of BS

THAT's the problem right there and there.

Me? I am the Howard Roark approach... never do business with a Committee. If I am not speaking to the Decision Maker, and a decision needs to go to a committee, I am not interested. And for that matter, I am not interested in making money from the theft of other people's incomes - which is what Govt money is.

Now, TW, you know what your choices are. For 15 years nothing has changed. And with Gummit it ain't likely to. So you'll just have to either grin and bear it - or - move on. You cannot expect anything from a civil servant who gets paid whether they do nothing or do something. And who only does something if they absolutely positively have to.

Of course, being Govt, there is usually a Fee which can be paid for Speedy Service. Call it whatever you like, it's just a polite word for Bribe.

Ross out...

If/when they do have $$, they HAVE TO spend it!

-- TW

TW,

Originally Posted by -TW

When they say, 'please call me back in two months,' I think it would be fair for me to ask them, 'before I say I'll do that, would you say your interest level is low, medium or high?'

Correction #1. Don't ask them to call you back. They have proven to you, over the course of 15 years to be unreliable. Set a time and advise them, "I will call back at..." and then move on to your next contact. When you do call back, quickly update who is still in the mix and who has been added or eliminated. Those that have been added, make sure to contact them and bring them up to speed, and then find out how this new contact is now part of the mix.

Originally Posted by -TW

See, part of the problem is, these sales can be very complicated and the sales process can be months or years long. I'm selling to city + county gov-mints -- things must be approved, sometimes involving grants and all sorts of BS.

Correction #2. This is not a problem, this is the way ALL government agencies purchasing process works. It will never change. Anyone willing to sell to or be a government vendor has to know that this process will always be a long process. If this process is not worth the return, then it's time to seek out non government customers.

Originally Posted by -TW

I must keep them fired up and keep them championing the whole thing. It's hard to tell who's really doing that, and who's "F.O.C." (f stands for 'full'). The real problem is, when the actual SALES (the ones who DO sign up) are traced backwards (to see the trail success left behind), whether they return my calls, etc. is *NOT* an indicator of whether they end up signing up.

Correction #3. It's time to fire some customers. Before you do this, consider, all government agencies want what the private sector has invented and is using. Since governments do not "INVENT", they rely on the private sector to bring new things to the market. So before you fire any of these customers start looking harder at the private sector customers. Their decisions are made quicker and that equals less out of pocket expenses for you.

Originally Posted by -TW

So, sifting + sorting + qualifying CANNOT be enhanced by paying attention to who returns my calls + who does not. NONE OF THEM return my calls -- fruitless prospects and (eventual) sign ups alike!

Correction #4. ALL participants must be considered. Each one effects your costs and profits and must be factor in when you do a cost analysis for operating expenses. If you discover that this group is costing you more and chipping away at your profits, it's time to fire this group.

Originally Posted by -TW

PS: I've been doing this (rolling the boulder up the hill 3x/year) for 15 years. It's the fact that I must do it singlehandedly with NO help from the (supposedly win-win) customer, that drives me nuts. Like I said, I'd be fine if I'd have to provide 98% of the initiative -- but, ONE-HUNDRED % ?!?!!?

Correction #5. Sales people have always had to provide 100% to close the sale. There is no such thing as win-win in sales. It's winning and winner. The sales person is winning when they close the sale. The customer is the winner if they get the product/service when they want it, how they want it, and at the price they want to pay.

Originally Posted by L.B. Jenkins

TW,




Correction #5. Sales people have always had to provide 100% to close the sale. There is no such thing as win-win in sales. It's winning and winner. The sales person is winning when they close the sale. The customer is the winner if they get the product/service when they want it, how they want it, and at the price they want to pay.

Hi LB...

Thanks for the advise -- it all makes good sense -- except for #5, imo. After 15 years, there SHOULD be a certain amount of 'coasting' that I SHOULD be able to enjoy. The boulder should be PARTIALLY pre-rolled up the hill, no? I shouldn't have to start from absolute zero every time. And that includes being given the respect of getting called back when I contact them because they ASKED ME TO CONTACT THEM.

Also, as for gov't selling taking a long time, I'm fine with that. What I was pointing out is, the give + take on the phone (phone tag, etc.) is over an extended period of time, which means the client's motivation must also be spread out over a long period of time -- therefore it's more likely to disapate, compared to a normal (shorter) sales cycle.

-- TW

PS: Thanks again.

TW,

Originally Posted by -TW

Hi LB...

Thanks for the advise -- it all makes good sense -- except for #5, imo. After 15 years, there SHOULD be a certain amount of 'coasting' that I SHOULD be able to enjoy. The boulder should be PARTIALLY pre-rolled up the hill, no? I shouldn't have to start from absolute zero every time. And that includes being given the respect of getting called back when I contact them because they ASKED ME TO CONTACT THEM.

Also, as for gov't selling taking a long time, I'm fine with that. What I was pointing out is, the give + take on the phone (phone tag, etc.) is over an extended period of time, which means the client's motivation must also be spread out over a long period of time -- therefore it's more likely to disapate, compared to a normal (shorter) sales cycle.

-- TW

PS: Thanks again.

One never coasts in sales. Coasting is just another form of sitting back on one's laurels. If you take that route another will see and swoop in when your guard is down and take your customer. Diligence and continual attentiveness is the method of staying on top.

TW, L.B. is quite right as to the realities of THAT TYPE of SALES.

IMHO you'd be better off in another type of sales as you seem to find this long-term relationship building sales very frustrating. Why do that to yourself?

Another option might be to hire someone (a patient but persistent type salesperson) to do the actual follow up after you've done the initial stuff. A partner might solve a LOT of your problems. Just an idea.

Know I said I wouldn't bother but you're hurting and I hate to see people just butting their head against a brick wall...even if a wall gives eventually, it still hurts like hades.

Sandi Bowman

Originally Posted by Sandi Bowman

I hate to see people just butting their head against a brick wall...even if a wall gives eventually, it still hurts like hades.

Sandi Bowman

Wow! You sure got that right! I don't mind being patient + persistent. I don't even mind beating my head against a brick wall. It's just those last couple of whacks that get to me. That adding insult to injury of: "I'm interested, please call me," then I do exactly that, then they never return my calls/emails.

I don't mind walking the 10 miles barefoot on broken glass to their office -- it's when they then make me walk up 10 flights of stairs, that's when I snap.

That last 30 paces.

-- TW