What's wrong with one guy's opinion?

Selling has been in the news. The Sunday New York Times (February 7, 1999) feature article in "Money & Business" addressed the issue of how the field has changed. The article "Salesmanship Without the Punch" features the work of James Werth and what he calls "High Probability Selling"; which by no great coincidence is the title of his book. As best I can tell, "High Probability Selling" advocates focussing your attention on probable buyers and kicking the others out of your funnel quickly.

My issue with Werth and the Times is not over the utter common sense of his approach. What prompted my letter, which they elected to publish (NYT, Money & Business, 2/28/99), is that they chose a guy like Werth for the centerpiece of the article and not Neil Rackham. What sets Rackham apart is the scientific nature of his model supported by mountains of research. SST^® is heavily influenced by Rackham's work with our emphasis on questioning and listening skills.

As my undergraduate adviser (Dr. John Ross) at St. Lawrence used to exhort: "If you want social opinion go down to the Tick Tock (a popular watering hole). There will be plenty of it. The later the hour the more of it. But this is about social science."

I never recall Professor Ross raising his voice, but clearly, his emphasis was on "science" and what sets it apart from one guy's opinion. And, that is what the likes Werth and Hopkins give us: one guy's opinion.

What is wrong with one guy's opinion? Nothing when the topic is something harmless like sports. But when the business is as important as selling, relying one guy's opinion can be dangerous. After all, the guy could be wrong.

The field of selling has been rife with wrong opinions: Here's a short list:

Close early and close often.

The sale doesn't start until the buyer says ‘no'

Clever trial closes make a difference

People who talk a lot excel in selling

Handling objections makes a difference

Any approach that treats buyers as adversaries to be manipulated into something they don't want or need

Old friend Tom Hopkins is also cited in the article which adds insult to the injury of missing Rackham. Here's what Mr. Hopkins (The Times would never use a first name) has to say: "I couldn't wait on my butt until people came to me; I had to knock on doors."

Pardon me Mr. Hopkins, but this isn't about working hrad. The issue at hand has to do with what you do when someone answers the door. Rackham's research shows that the more sales people do what you advocate (clever closing scripts and manipulating affirmative responses to questions) the less likely they will succeed.

Relying on one guy's opinion has led to a generation of sales people doing the wrong things. From the New York Times we come to expect the very best in journalism. Where else would use a word like "verisimilitude" in a business article?

We should get more than one guy's opinion from the New York Times. There are plenty of those at the local pub. However, quality research on selling is as rare as bad syntax in a William Safire column.