Archive for October, 2007

Doctor or Post-Hole Digger?

There are two approaches to writing proposals.

The post-hole digger approach is about efficiency.

I’m not putting down people who dig post-holes. They do have to space the holes evenly and dig to the right depth. Their job is about consistent repetition. And to win that game they have to be efficient.

However, maximizing efficiency when writing proposals is death. It puts the focus on the writer/contractor. Choices are made for easier production. And no matter how efficient a proposal was to make, if it doesn’t win it’s worthless.

How can you tell if a proposal was written by a post-hole digger?

Simple. Read it. If you can’t tell what that particular customer’s problems are, then it was written with a post-hole in mind.

Every proposal must identify the customer’s specific problems. That’s what your offering is trying to solve. Your solution is what customers buy. This is the consultative part of all modern sales methods. Even if its for a one-page proposal only. Especially if it’s for a one-page proposal.

Now think about your doctor. He or she takes your temperature, looks down your throat, and takes your blood pressure BEFORE prescribing medicine. After the exam, good doctors will tell you about your illness before they tell you how they’re going to cure it.

Same is true with good proposals. In them you can read about the customer’s illness. You’ll then read about a proposed solution. This solution is for a specific course of medicine. It’s carefully prescribed for what ails that customer.

Good proposals have all that - customers’ ills and a prescribed solution for a cure. These are the persuasive proposals, and they’re the ones that win more often.

How do you write proposals, as a doctor or as a post-hole digger?

~~~~~~
Chris Arlen
President, Service Performance

Technorati: proposals, selling, writing

Add comment October 16th, 2007

Contractors’ Competitive Advantage

Competitive AdvantageMost contractors believe their services are remarkably different from competitors. Their (fill in the blank) technology, operations, quality, etc. are noticeably better than the next guy’s.

However, customers only see shades of gray. They don’t see a remarkable difference. Contractors look pretty much the same.

I’m not saying great technology, operations, or quality aren’t important. They are. But they’re no longer differentiators. They’re the ante just to get into the game. You couldn’t play if you didn’t have them. Harsh but true.

Where is competitive advantage?

Does the contractor with the most offices or largest annual revenues have the advantage? Nope. Otherwise the largest contractor would win every time. And you know they don’t.

Does the cheapest or highest price have the advantage? No again, because low ball or high price doesn’t win any more bids than middle market pricing.

Competitive advantage lives here

I believe it’s in the most compelling customer solution. That’s what customers’ buy - solutions to their problems, or fulfillment of their wants.

Competitive advantage is with the contractor who best understands a particular customer’s specific problems and wants. And then creatively solves and presents that unique solution.

Everything else, fancy offices, web this-and-that, are all necessary, but not the tipping point.

It comes down to contractors’ abilities in sales analysis, solution design, and then presentation. And this often is a lot more work than most sales people want. But that’s the edge between average and exceptional.

~~~~~~
Chris Arlen
President, Service Performance

Technorati: competitive advantage, buying, selling

Add comment October 9th, 2007

Calendar

October 2007
M T W T F S S
« Sep   Nov »
1234567
891011121314
15161718192021
22232425262728
293031  

Posts by Month

Posts by Category