"Dichotomizing"The "Art" of Sales

One-Size does NOT fit all in the Sales Training Industry

If one accepts the premise that all human interaction involves an element of salesmanship, then the discipline of sales is multifaceted and perhaps less complex than commonly perceived.

Effective sales training cannot be a universal, "one-size-fits-all" approach. Every sector, from large corporations and small businesses to political spheres, medical practices, and fundamental human relationships, relies upon the ability to successfully market either products or concepts.

From commercial transactions to the daily presentation of ourselves, all can be categorized as a form of selling. We naturally develop sales capabilities from a young age; children learn to influence parents and, as they mature, refine their methods to persuade others for personal advantage. Parents are acutely aware of how children strategically approach them to obtain desired outcomes. A child learns that simply demanding something, such as the car keys for prom night, is unlikely to yield positive results. However, by refining their method and employing learned techniques, they can achieve their goal with minimal difficulty. 

Applying for a coveted position, seeking a romantic liaison, or striving to make a positive initial impression are all elements of this pervasive selling dynamic and occur instinctively. My central argument is that we are all inherently adept at sales; therefore, one must question why sales training is often overly complicated and why a significant number of sales professionals fail.  We have unnecessarily convoluted a straightforward process, elevating it from the simplicity of Pavlov's classical conditioning to the complexity of Einstein's Riddle.

To simplify the process and enhance productivity, one must grasp the dichotomy of sales: "Wants" versus "Needs." Understanding these two core concepts completely alters the strategy and basis for training in each respective field. Prime examples of the "Wants" versus "Needs" distinction are Retail sales compared to Service sales. Retail sales primarily revolve around consumer "wants"; one may desire a new automobile, a television, or a larger residence, but one's life will generally remain unchanged by the absence of the "wanted" purchase. Training for "want" sales (Retail) is a distinct discipline requiring an entirely separate skill set.  

The inherent difficulty is that most contemporary sales education is modeled on retail sales training. Strategies that lead to success in retail can have a contrary and sometimes detrimental effect when applied to service sales training. The sheer volume of concepts and tactics in retail sales requires extensive training materials. This complex training involves strategies that would prove counterproductive if implemented in a service sales context. Yet, despite this, most training within the service sector remains based on retail sales methodologies. 

Selling a service is fundamentally based on a "Need," a dynamic so intrinsically easy that labeling it a "sell" seems almost inappropriate compared to the effort required to cultivate, work, persuade, and push retail sales. Service sales are so straightforward that the majority of failures in the service industry are actually caused by service inspectors or technicians who actively "unsell" the service to clients. Consider the following example: if one's furnace fails in sub-freezing temperatures, resulting in visible ice formation indoors, the immediate action will be to contact a repair or replacement company at substantial expense—this is a certainty. This is NOT a "want"; it is an absolute NEED. 

 Numerous examples illustrate this point. Consider the dentist: a diligent patient regularly attends biannual cleanings, yet on one occasion, the dentist delivers news—part good, part bad—highlighting a significant cavity. The good news is that the cavity can be repaired; the bad news is the significant discomfort and financial expenditure involved. Although the patient has no desire for instruments within their mouth or the associated noises, they recognize the NEED for the procedure. This necessity carries a cost the patient will incur (either with this dentist or another dentist), and during the consultation, they will likely be offered upgrades for fillings, crowns, or cosmetic enhancements. Indeed, a sale is occurring. The fact that the service is "needed" does not negate the requirement for payment. If one has dental insurance, it is pertinent to recall that the insurance itself was also a product sold—everything constitutes a sale. One may seek subsequent opinions or comparison shop, but ultimately, the service must be performed; IT IS COMPULSORY. The distinction is clear: one is not compelled to purchase a new car, television, or house, but one is compelled to address a dental issue, a failed furnace, or a recent pest infestation.  

Therefore, given the preceding analysis, one must question the necessity of sales training concerning service or "needs." Understanding the fundamental dichotomy of sales is the initial step toward resolving this paradox. The next step is to implement a sales training curriculum tailored to the respective profession; retail sales training should be excluded entirely from the service industry curriculum. My forthcoming publication, The World Hates a Salesman, provides the service industry sales force with a comprehensive, step-by-step methodology for establishing the foundation of service-based selling.