The Balance of Power

As a professional in charge of a sales force, how often have you wished for a way to explore and improve the performance of individual members of your team?

Or, as a sales executive yourself, wouldn’t it be helpful if there were a method to better understand your own personal strengths and weaknesses in selling, so you could capitalize on the strengths and work to overcome the weaknesses?

Until now, few reliable diagnostic tools for assessing selling skills have been available in the industry. In these days of heavy competition, though, being successful at sales requires more than fast talk and a charming smile, so evaluating skills is essential.

Don Staunton and Ed Finn, two leading sales training consultants, have developed such a method, an instrument aimed at helping salespeople discover how their personal selling techniques can be improved. Called “The Balance of Power,” the method not only helps identify problem areas, but also aids in correcting them.

At the heart of the new philosophy is the idea that effective selling power is actually a blend of two kinds of power representing two different types of skills. They are planning skills and persuasive skills.

A salesperson who possesses good planning skills has competent knowledge of his product and of his customer, he organizes his time and jobs well, sets goals for himself and develops sales strategies. A salesperson with persuasive power is likely to be a good listener and a good conversationalist, he prepares his presentation carefully and gives it creatively, and he follow through on his contacts.

It is easy to see why a salesperson with all these skills would have a greater chance of succeeding than one who doesn’t. But few people are so graciously endowed by nature with all the planning and persuasive skills so important in selling.

Most people inherently are more adept in one area than in the other. But, according to Finn and Staunton, a salesperson who is heavy on planning skills but weak in persuasive power will be mechanical, autocratic, demanding and impersonal. On the other hand, a salesperson with good persuasive techniques but inept at planning will be perceived as manipulative, cajoling and harassing. Lacking either skill, they say, the seller is likely to try to influence a buyer through intimidation, pressure, deceit or manipulation.

It is important for a salesperson to understand his natural selling style before he can discover whether his planning or persuasive skills need improvement. “The Balance of Power” program uses a logic box to illustrate differences in personal style and to show how individual tendencies compare in their aptitudes in the two power areas.

Though natural styles may differ depending on the selling skill involved, most people will find they generally fall into one of the following categories:

The MOTIVATE STYLE represents the ultimate balance of power – a high degree of both planning and persuasive talents. This is the most desirable style for sales. A salesperson with this style is organized, analytical, well-prepared, knowledgeable, understands his customer’s needs, communicates well and is oriented toward results.

The INTERMEDIATE STYLE represents average sales capabilities in both planning and persuasion, though such a salesperson would not be as adept at both as someone with MOTIVATE STYLE. A salesperson with INTERMEDIATE STYLE does not recognize the need for a balance between the two powers, so he should work to refine selling techniques that will bring him closer to the desired balance. Individual scores on “The Balance of Power” test will indicate whether there is greater need to improve planning or persuasive skills.

A salesperson with DIRECT STYLE shows a tendency to have better planning skills that persuasive skills, so the goal would obviously be to improve the persuasive. Some negative traits associated with this style include inflexibility; over dependence on structure and game plan; not attuned to seller’s needs and situation; impatient with any lack of faith in the printed word, and reluctant to explore alternatives or consider changes.

Conversely, the INVOLVE STYLE sums up a person with a high degree of persuasive powers and low aptitude for planning. This person is likely to be disorganized, relying too much on a buyer’s perceptive and sympathetic understanding of his proposal. He’s a person whose act is not together.

Other negative characteristics may include low credibility and reliance on charm rather than logic to get results. It is also thought that such style is associated with near-cajolery on the part of the salesperson, who may resort to making inappropriate claims or promises. Commitments that are obtained often fall through or must be revised.

The least effective selling style is REACT. Such style depends on force and often borders on bluntness. Lacking both planning and persuasive skills, the salesperson doesn’t spend time exploring needs and solutions, is loud, brash and may come across as shallow with a lack of compassion. He is insensitive to a buyer’s needs, ill-informed about products, the market and competition, and overly dependent on price cuts and deals. When results aren’t forthcoming, he may apologize and back pedal, wasting time and energy trying to mend fences but never really producing.

In the logic box, the horizontal dimension of persuasion is measured by degree of participation on the part of the buyer – low participation (or persuasion) can only move people, while a high degree of persuasion can actually motivate them. The goal of balancing planning and persuasive powers is to develop motivation in a customer. The more a customer is persuaded to participate in the selling process, the more it becomes his buying process.

The arrows cutting across the logic box indicate the most people inherently lean in one direction or another. When it comes to evaluating, planning and persuasive skills, one of the two powers will usually be dominant.

Most people in selling will lean toward either the DIRECT STYLE or the MOTIVATE STYLE, but variations can show up depending on the individual selling skill being evaluated.

The ideal is a meshing of the two styles, and it is toward this end that “The Balance of Power” program is directed. Self-evaluation guides aid in establishing what a salesperson’s personal style is, and from there, the program helps the salesperson determine whether he needs to improve planning or persuasive powers, or both.

Individual ability in 10 distinct selling skills is evaluated. They are planning, product knowledge, customer knowledge, selling process, communication skills, territory control, pre-call preparation, time management, securing action, and personal impact.

According to Finn and Staunton, the average salesperson will discover at least three skills in which he can improve.

The bottom line: most training efforts are geared towards skill improvement where the trainer feels it’s needed. With “The Balance of Power” program, the training efforts can be geared towards the salesperson’s real need. This is an approach that is more likely to affect personal growth and profits.