Upload
others
View
5
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Sales Consulting Firm
Focused exclusively on Sales Force Effectiveness
Leverages the benchmarking method to generate client results
Mystery ShopDiscovery Review
1/1/2011
Methodology
SBI’s mystery shopping methodology is designed to answer one question: “How competitive is your sales force?”
The 3 C’s framework is used to determine:
– Cost- The amount of labor needed to close a sale vs. the competition.
– Competitors- The quality of rep call performance vs. the competition.
– Customers- Length of time to go from inquiry to opportunity vs. the competition.
Case Methodology
The territories that Acme, Inc. services were established.
A representative city from each of the territories was identified.
2 competitor services were mystery shopped.
The consultant stated he was new in his position. He needed help from a rep to make a buying decision.
The consultant made it clear that he was ready to start service in 2 weeks, that he was the decision maker, that he needed Product A. He also wanted to hear about other services he might be able to use.
Note: Each mystery shopping exercise is custom built. Our approach with you will be different. This is meant only to illustrate the process.
Call Summary
WY, UT, CO
WA,OR, ID
CA, NV
VA, MD, DC
ME, RI, MA, CT, NH, NY,
TX, LA, MS
AL, GA, FL
Customer Regions
Denver
Portland
San Jose
D.C.
Boston
Dallas
Miami
Cities Mystery Shopped
Comparative Ease of Use of Communication Systems
Automated PhoneAnswering System
CSR Greeting andInfo Intake
Rep’s Voicemail
box
Call-back from a
Rep
Rep answersthe phone
Current Acme, Inc. Process Typical Competitor Process
Comparative Call Response Time
Average Company ABC time to get a Rep on the phone:
289 minutes
Average Competitor time to get a rep on the phone:
33 seconds
Comparative Call Performance
31%37%
66%
100%
83%
96%
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
120%
How often the rep attempted to close a deal
How often the rep looked to follow up after the call
How often did the rep record contact information
Acme, Inc.
Competitor
Comparative Rep Assessment
4.33
3.923.89
4.17
3.60
3.70
3.80
3.90
4.00
4.10
4.20
4.30
4.40
Avg Product Knowledge Score Avg Pricing Knowledge Score
Acme, Inc.
Competitor
Rating Scale:1 – Poor2 – Below Average3 – Average4 – Above Average5 – World Class
Conclusions
ACME’s selling cost is not competitive. There is too much labor involved in making a sale.
Acme’s call performance lagged that of its competitors. ACME has a skills issue.
Acme sales cycle takes too long. In some instances, it is 10x slower than the competitors.
AppendixDiscovery Methodology
Raw Data
Competitor ACME Regional
Automated Answering or Live Pick Up Live Automated
Voice Message Left N/A N/A
Time Elapsed for Return Phone Call (if applicable) N/A N/A
Hold Time (If applicable) None 20 Seconds
Number of Rings if Live Pick Up 2 N/A
Name of Rep Sheila Brian
Did the Rep Do the Following? [5 = Excellent 4 = Good 3 = Average 2 = Fair 1 = Poor]
Display Knowledge of Pricing 4 5
Display Product Knowledge 4 5
Attempt to Gather Pertinent Information to Allow him/her to Close Yes No
Attempt to Close the Deal Yes No
Record Your Contact Information Yes No
Speak to a Follow Up Call Yes No
Total Call Time 6 Minutes 4 Minutes
Hold Time During Conversation (If applicable) N/A Short (10 Seconds)
Was a Quote Emailed at the Conclusion of the Call? No No
Grade of Overall Experience 4 3
The rep displayed adequate pricing and product knowledge and did attempt to close a deal. She recorded my contact information and said she would follow up with me in 48 hours.
The rep displayed excellent product knowledge and was able to answer all of my pricing questions. He did not record my contact information, he did not ask questions that would have allowed him to close a deal. He did not try to follow up with me.
Discounts offered were inconsistent
Train on financial selling
Aren’t using a transactional
approach
Role play on closing
Training is an event
Continuous training &
improvement
Reps spend too much time in
the field
Establish Inside sales force
The people who answer the
phone aren’t equipped to sell
Either (1) don’t let them sell, or (2) train them
Reps spend too much time handling
customer service issues
Increase utility of service force
Getting a trained rep is difficult for customers
Either train or make the Reps
available
Rep response time to warm leads is
sluggish
Establish acceptable guidelines and accountability
systems
Customer gets confused & frustrated when told that Rep is unavailable, but then CSR attempts to sell
Clear job duties
Ineffective SR Rep Availability
Inefficient Sales Structure
Ineffe
ctive Sale
s Force
About Sales Benchmark Index
Sales Benchmark Index provides sales consulting services to leading organizations across the private and public sectors. These companies are seeking to increase their rate of revenue growth. Unlike traditional sales improvement approaches, such as software implementations or skills training, we offer superior value because we rely on the benchmarking method to deliver results. This method of sales consulting allows for results to be delivered quickly with little organizational disruption. This is accomplished through the use of best-in-class diagnostic tools and solutions that are supported with verifiable truth. Each project is executed by the most experienced team of advisors in the industry.
Visit our website