Dale Furtwengler - The Invaluable Leader: August 2006

The Invaluable Leader by Dale Furtwengler

Eliminating the Close
Monday, August 28, 2006

Can you be an effective salesperson without closing?

More often than you think.

In the world of sales it's said that there are three types of salespeople door openers, rapport builders and closers. It's rare to find an individual that possesses all three skill sets. For those of you who hate asking for the order, you're going to love this. For you great closers, here's an opportunity to take your game to the next level.

What I've learned over the years is that I rarely have to ask for the order. Instead, I get clear buying signals from my prospects. They ask "What do we need to do to get started?", "What's the next step?" or "When can we get started?" How can you get these buying signals? It's a four-step process:

1. Discover the prospect's pain
2. Describe a similar situation in which you were involved
3. State the results your offering produced (don't tell them how the results were achieved; you want them to pay for the solution)
4. Ask a couple of questions that indicate that there is more to the issue than what's been discussed so far

Step one allows you to target their interest. Step two tells them that you've been listening and have had similar experiences. Step three says that your offering has proven successful in similar situations. Step four shows them that you have the ability to anticipate and avoid unwanted peripheral effects. At this point, you'll get a buying signal.

Conventional sales training says you have to ask for the order. It's counter-intuitive, but eliminating the need for a close demonstrates a higher level of sales ability.

If there are topics you'd like me to address, email me at dale@furtwengler.com.

Learning from Chess Masters
Monday, August 21, 2006

How many moves do you need to plan?

Fewer than you think.

Mark Weeks, who is a chess master and writes extensively on the subject of chess, tells us that an effective opening requires ten moves. That's looking a long way down the road. In business you don't have to plan that far ahead to dominate your industry. Why?

Many business leaders:

react to competitors' moves rather than initiating change themselves
react to, rather than, anticipate changing market conditions
perform superficial analysis rather than exploring the root cause of the issue they're facing
implement plans, then modify or abandon them without allowing adequate time for their moves to produce results

In business, you'll be an industry leader if you:

plan two or three moves ahead
base that plan on thorough analysis
implement quickly
give your moves time to produce results

Think about that as you prepare your next strategic plan. It's counter-intuitive, but in today's highly reactionary business environment, a solid two-year plan implemented well is all that it takes to gain industry leadership.

If you have any topics, you'd like me to address email me at dale@furtwengler.com

When "Win-Win" Isn't
Monday, August 14, 2006

Is it possible for everyone to lose when they get what they want?

You bet it is!

I wish I had a nickel for every time a harried leader said "My employees won't make a decision." This dilemma stems from all parties getting exactly what they want - their emotional needs satisfied.

Many leaders need to be recognized for their knowledge, experience and problem-solving ability. Many employees need security.

The combination results in a co-dependent relationship. Leaders depend on employee questions to gain the recognition they seek. Employees depend on leaders' answers to provide an umbrella to keep blame from raining down on them. Neither party anticipates the nasty consequences of co-dependent relationships. What are those consequences?

Leaders become so absorbed in solving other people's problems that they don't have time to move the organization forward. At the same time employees become automatons, doing only what they're told, which diminishes their value to the company.

It's counter-intuitive, but giving people what they need instead of what they want produces a true "Win-Win." Don't fall into the co-dependency trap. Require your employees to find solutions to their problems. Get your satisfaction from finding ways to outperform your competitors. Now that's a "Win-Win."

If you have any questions on how to reverse a co-dependent relationship or you have specific topics you'd like me to address, email me at dale@furtwengler.com.

Budgets - Leg Up or Leg Lock
Monday, August 07, 2006

Do your budgets aid or hinder performance?

How can we make the process simpler AND more effective?

Budgeting is a goal-oriented activity. The purpose of the budget is to lay out a plan of action with targeted line-item revenue and spending goals. Intuitively that makes sense; plan the work; work the plan. The reality is far different.

In companies using budgets we often see:

inefficient managers being rewarded with large budgets
efficient managers padding budgets to avoid losing resources
managers accelerating or delaying contracts to protect their budgets
good business decisions foregone because the spending required "isn't in the budget"

You can avoid these pitfalls and simplify the budgeting process. How?

With the leadership in each strategic business unit (SBU), establish composite revenue growth goals and spending rates based on where the unit's products/services are in their life cycle. A unit with significant product launches may have revenue growth targets of 30% to 50% and spending requirements that exceed those rates. Conversely, a unit with products/services nearing the end of the life cycle may be looking at a 10% drop on revenues and a cut of 25% in spending
Don't limit your managers with line item budgets; trust your management team to make the right decisions based on these parameters
Have a formal review process for unanticipated spending requirements
Give preference to the projects of managers who consistently produce desired results with minimal resource spending

This approach can take months out of the budgeting process and enhance your company's ability to adapt to changing market conditions. It's counter-intuitive, but limiting the budgeting process to defining composite revenue and spending rates by SBU can dramatically improve your bottom line.

If you have any questions on how to implement these ideas, email me at dale@furtwengler.com Please let me know if there are specific topics you'd like me to address in the future.

Dale Furtwengler

Dale Furtwengler is an internationally acclaimed author whose work is recommended by:

University of Glasgow
University of New South Wales
Australian Institute of Management

If you'd like to make your life easier while creating enviable results, subscribe to my special reports for step-by-step instructions on becoming invaluable. Back issues are available.

March 2006
April 2006
May 2006
June 2006
July 2006
August 2006
September 2006
October 2006
November 2006
December 2006
January 2007
February 2007
March 2007
April 2007
May 2007
June 2007
July 2007
August 2007
September 2007
October 2007
November 2007
December 2007
January 2008
February 2008
March 2008
April 2008
May 2008
June 2008


FURTWENGLER.COM \| SPECIAL REPORTS \| SEMINARS \| COACHING \| CONSULTING \| FACILITATION
	Eliminating the Close Monday, August 28, 2006 Can you be an effective salesperson without closing? *More often than you think.* In the world of sales it's said that there are three types of salespeople door openers, rapport builders and closers. It's rare to find an individual that possesses all three skill sets. For those of you who hate asking for the order, you're going to love this. For you great closers, here's an opportunity to take your game to the next level. What I've learned over the years is that I rarely have to ask for the order. Instead, I get clear buying signals from my prospects. They ask "What do we need to do to get started?", "What's the next step?" or "When can we get started?" How can you get these buying signals? It's a four-step process: 1. Discover the prospect's pain 2. Describe a similar situation in which you were involved 3. State the results your offering produced (don't tell them how the results were achieved; you want them to pay for the solution) 4. Ask a couple of questions that indicate that there is more to the issue than what's been discussed so far Step one allows you to target their interest. Step two tells them that you've been listening and have had similar experiences. Step three says that your offering has proven successful in similar situations. Step four shows them that you have the ability to anticipate and avoid unwanted peripheral effects. At this point, you'll get a buying signal. Conventional sales training says you have to ask for the order. It's counter-intuitive, but eliminating the need for a close demonstrates a higher level of sales ability. If there are topics you'd like me to address, email me at dale@furtwengler.com. 0 comments Learning from Chess Masters Monday, August 21, 2006 How many moves do you need to plan? *Fewer than you think.* Mark Weeks, who is a chess master and writes extensively on the subject of chess, tells us that an effective opening requires ten moves. That's looking a long way down the road. In business you don't have to plan that far ahead to dominate your industry. Why? Many business leaders: react to competitors' moves rather than initiating change themselves react to, rather than, anticipate changing market conditions perform superficial analysis rather than exploring the root cause of the issue they're facing implement plans, then modify or abandon them without allowing adequate time for their moves to produce results In business, you'll be an industry leader if you: plan two or three moves ahead base that plan on thorough analysis implement quickly give your moves time to produce results Think about that as you prepare your next strategic plan. It's counter-intuitive, but in today's highly reactionary business environment, a solid two-year plan implemented well is all that it takes to gain industry leadership. *If you have any topics, you'd like me to address email me at* *dale@furtwengler.com* 0 comments When "Win-Win" Isn't Monday, August 14, 2006 Is it possible for everyone to lose when they get what they want? *You bet it is!* I wish I had a nickel for every time a harried leader said "My employees won't make a decision." This dilemma stems from all parties getting exactly what they want - their emotional needs satisfied. Many leaders need to be recognized for their knowledge, experience and problem-solving ability. Many employees need security. The combination results in a co-dependent relationship. Leaders depend on employee questions to gain the recognition they seek. Employees depend on leaders' answers to provide an umbrella to keep blame from raining down on them. Neither party anticipates the nasty consequences of co-dependent relationships. What are those consequences? Leaders become so absorbed in solving other people's problems that they don't have time to move the organization forward. At the same time employees become automatons, doing only what they're told, which diminishes their value to the company. It's counter-intuitive, but giving people what they need instead of what they want produces a true "Win-Win." Don't fall into the co-dependency trap. Require your employees to find solutions to their problems. Get your satisfaction from finding ways to outperform your competitors. Now that's a "Win-Win." *If you have any questions on how to reverse a co-dependent relationship or you have specific topics you'd like me to address, email me at* *dale@furtwengler.com. 0 comments Budgets - Leg Up or Leg Lock Monday, August 07, 2006 Do your budgets aid or hinder performance?* *How can we make the process simpler AND more effective?* Budgeting is a goal-oriented activity. The purpose of the budget is to lay out a plan of action with targeted line-item revenue and spending goals. Intuitively that makes sense; plan the work; work the plan. The reality is far different. In companies using budgets we often see: inefficient managers being rewarded with large budgets efficient managers padding budgets to avoid losing resources managers accelerating or delaying contracts to protect their budgets good business decisions foregone because the spending required "isn't in the budget" You can avoid these pitfalls and simplify the budgeting process. How? With the leadership in each strategic business unit (SBU), establish composite revenue growth goals and spending rates based on where the unit's products/services are in their life cycle. A unit with significant product launches may have revenue growth targets of 30% to 50% and spending requirements that exceed those rates. Conversely, a unit with products/services nearing the end of the life cycle may be looking at a 10% drop on revenues and a cut of 25% in spending Don't limit your managers with line item budgets; trust your management team to make the right decisions based on these parameters Have a formal review process for unanticipated spending requirements Give preference to the projects of managers who consistently produce desired results with minimal resource spending This approach can take months out of the budgeting process and enhance your company's ability to adapt to changing market conditions. It's counter-intuitive, but limiting the budgeting process to defining composite revenue and spending rates by SBU can dramatically improve your bottom line. *If you have any questions on how to implement these ideas, email me at* *dale@furtwengler.com* *Please let me know if there are specific topics you'd like me to address in the future.* 0 comments	Dale Furtwengler is an internationally acclaimed author whose work is recommended by: University of Glasgow University of New South Wales Australian Institute of Management If you'd like to make your life easier while creating enviable results, subscribe to my special reports for step-by-step instructions on becoming invaluable. Back issues are available. March 2006 April 2006 May 2006 June 2006 July 2006 August 2006 September 2006 October 2006 November 2006 December 2006 January 2007 February 2007 March 2007 April 2007 May 2007 June 2007 July 2007 August 2007 September 2007 October 2007 November 2007 December 2007 January 2008 February 2008 March 2008 April 2008 May 2008 June 2008