| 
         
        
          The Power of Quality Thinking in Sales and Marketing 
        
        Paul Selden, President 
        Performance Management, Inc. 
        (From Quality Progress Magazine, Fall 2000)  
        
        
          In the past decade a growing number of pioneers have explored out how 
          quality thinking can be applied to sales and marketing (1, 2, 3, 4). 
          As applied to sales and marketing, quality thinking holds the credo 
          that in the long run, the most effective way to increase earnings is 
          to view revenue as the outcome of a process, and further, that process 
          can be improved systematically by applying principles of quality (see 
          Note 1). 
        
          Older ways of looking at sales and marketing field put a 
          straightjacket on our ability to improve. The better we understand how 
          quality thinking can help us break free of limitations imposed by the 
          old constructs, the better we will serve our customers, the more 
          likely we will fulfill the promises of quality programs such as "Six 
          Sigma," and the more success our organizations will achieve. 
        
          This article outlines a number of key differences between the old and 
          new ways of looking at sales and marketing, highlighting the concrete 
          benefits of quality thinking. Part One presents an example of how 
          process mapping can help us analyze sales and marketing. Part Two 
          presents examples of how five firms applied quality thinking in their 
          sales and marketing processes to increase profitability and leadership 
          in their field. We finish with three brief personal examples. The 
          conclusion is simple but powerful: because quality thinking offers a 
          new and more systematic approach to improvement, further investigation 
          along these lines should pay great dividends to businesses ready to 
          extend their quality journey into the field of sales and marketing. 
        Part One: OLD VS. NEW WAYS TO MAP THE PROCESS
        
          For many people, systematic thinking is thrown out the window when 
          examining the world of sales and marketing. In 1999 a popular observer 
          of the sales scene, writing in a respected publication (both shall 
          remain nameless), wrote that what happens in sales is "magic." The 
          author's analysis of the process is that a potential customer appears. 
          Then abacadabra-a sales transaction is consummated-each one a 
          surprising, mysterious, fleeting, and discrete event. We may hope the 
          customer buys again, but if they do not it is nothing to lose sleep 
          over. There's plenty more out there. 
        
          The old "Sales as Discrete" event view (hereby dubbed the SAD view of 
          sales, tongue firmly in cheek) is illustrated in Figure One. This 
          approach tends to treat each transaction as the result of a minor 
          miracle. 
        
        Figure One. Old "Sales as Discrete" (SAD) View of Sales Process
        
          
        
         
         
  
        
          By contrast, when quality thinking is applied to the field of sales 
          and marketing, we are likely to draw a high-level flow chart that 
          looks more like Figure Two. 
        
        Figure Two. New View of Sales Process (High Level)
        
          
        
         
         
  
        
          Figure Two illustrates the flow of much more tangible events 
          across the functional departments typically responsible for them in 
          business to business selling. In smaller companies or in consumer 
          sales environments such as retailing, any given individual may play 
          many roles, but the flow itself is fairly similar. Marketing is 
          typically responsible for attracting potential customers. If Marketing 
          is successful, Sales then meets the potential customer for the 
          first time, and an initial mutual review of customer needs and wants 
          versus the supplier's general capabilities takes place. If a general 
          fit seems to make sense, a more careful needs analysis takes place, 
          often with specialists from Engineering (designers or other 
          technical experts) and Accounting (credit staff, pricing, etc.) 
          working as part of a team coordinated by Sales. If the project looks 
          feasible, a proposal is created, with Sales typically presenting the 
          proposal to the prospective customer. If the deal is approved, 
          Service (or shipping, production, installation, etc.) provides the 
          products and services and deals with complaints regarding the order. 
          Marketing observes what happens in the field to apply any lessons 
          learned, and the cycle begins again. Once a customer has a purchase 
          history, responsibility for getting a customer to return and make 
          repeat purchases often shifts more directly to Sales. 
        
          Of course, the process flow for any given business can be different 
          than the generic one illustrated above. 
        
          Notice that, even though the process mapped out in Figure Two lends 
          itself to systematic analysis, it does not illustrate the customer's 
          side of the flow. From a customer's perspective in the business to 
          business environment, the buying process often resembles Figure Three. 
        
        Figure Three. New View of Buying Process (High Level)
        
          
        
         
         
  
        
          Like the selling process diagrammed from the supplier's point of view 
          in Figure Two, the buying process can be viewed as a sequence 
          of steps. Marketing functions are constantly assessing how the 
          market is reacting to their own current offerings and formulating a 
          "wish list" of desired alterations to the current line up. At some 
          point the desired changes are communicated with other departments. 
          Engineering works out specific ways that Marketing's ideas will 
          impact the current product or service. Internal Users of the 
          proposed change (such as production, service, and installation groups) 
          comment on the quality of how well the previous approach worked in 
          practice, and pros and cons of the new idea. Purchasing reviews 
          its current supply base for potential sources of the product or 
          service, and may help prepare and issue a formal Request for Proposal 
          (RFP). As proposals come in they may be reviewed by any or all of the 
          groups involved in issuing the RFP in the first place. If an agreement 
          is reached, the goods and services purchased are deployed and used, 
          and Accounting pays the supplier. The cycle continues as 
          experience with the new approach is gained and fed back to the 
          company's departments in more or less formal ways. The role of 
          Management is not shown in either diagram, but Management obviously 
          plays an important role. Managers may or may not possess expertise in 
          all the particular functional areas, but they often have financial and 
          personnel responsibilities, must juggle priorities across multiple 
          projects, and are in a position to provide their own inputs to the 
          process or to alter the design of the process itself at various 
          points. 
        
          Just as in Figure Two, Figure Three is a generic process map meant to 
          convey the general idea of how quality thinking can demystify a 
          heretofore "mysterious" process. The experienced reader will also 
          understand that Figures Two and Three only begin to hint at how easy 
          it is for a myriad of inefficiencies, breakdowns, bottlenecks, delays, 
          cost overruns, missed communications, and quality problems of all 
          sorts to play havoc throughout the cycle. Even these simple process 
          flowcharts underscore Dr. Deming's observation that process stability 
          is rarely a natural condition, and that to achieve it requires active 
          management. (5) 
        Moments of Truth
        
          Mapping one's own selling process helps to surface a host of 
          opportunities to improve. Quality thinking tells us, however, that we 
          will not get very far by improving areas that do not matter to the 
          customer. Stated in more precise behavioral terms, what "matters" to 
          the customer are antecedent stimuli that prompt the customer to 
          approach a supplier and enter into purchase agreements, and the 
          consequences of doing so at each step that reinforce (or weaken) this 
          chain of behaviors in the future. The map of the customer's buying 
          process helps us see these observable stimuli and events with more 
          clarity.
           
            A powerful strategy on the road to Six Sigma is to learn what is 
            most important to the customer at each point the supplier and 
            customer come into contact during the  buying cycle, and to 
            focus quality assurance and improvement efforts on those critical 
            and highly visible "moments of truth." A number of such moments of 
            truth are shown in Figure Four.  
            Figure Four. Moments of Truth in the Buy-Sell Cycle
            
              
            
             
             
 
  
          Supplier improvements that are not noticeable to the customer or 
          that address the customer's concerns of yesterday but not the needs of 
          today or tomorrow means resources may be spent on improving services 
          and products without having any impact on overall sales volume or 
          market share. This point has not been lost on Jack Welch, who has 
          stated, "The best Six Sigma projects begin not inside the business but 
          outside it, focused on answering the question-how can we make the 
          customer more competitive? … One thing we have discovered with 
          certainty is that anything we do that makes that customer more 
          successful inevitably results in a financial return for us." (6)  
        Part Two: FIVE DIMENSIONS OF SAD vs. QUALITY THINKING
        
          The old-fashioned point of view puts the sales rep at the center of 
          the universe. By treating each sale as the result of mysterious 
          forces, that is, by failing to distinguish special from common causes, 
          the old approach is constrained by its refusal to even attempt to 
          distinguish the two. Consequently, the old school usually seeks to 
          improve sales chiefly by focusing on how reps can increase their 
          activities and close more deals. Unless we know what contributes 
          to or hinders a sale at each step throughout the entire process, of 
          course the only approach is to do more of whatever it is that you are 
          doing, and hope it results in more output. Hence the "sage" advice to 
          new sales reps, "It's a numbers game." The old way of thinking is not 
          entirely wrong, but it's like a one-note musical instrument, much too 
          limited. 
        
          Quality thinking leads us to is a much larger view of what generating 
          revenue is all about than the "sale-as-discrete-transaction" approach. 
          By contrast, quality thinking considers the entire set of variables 
          that govern customer purchase behavior, separates special from common 
          causes, and seeks to improve the systems that deliver or affects these 
          variables. 
        
          Consider how the "sale as discrete" transaction crowd treats five 
          common business process dimensions: quantity, money, time, quality, 
          and variability. (Tongue in cheek, we will continue to saddle the old 
          view with the acronym, SAD.) As the examples show, the old, SAD 
          approach limits profitability in many ways. 
        Quantity  
        SAD Focuses On: How much time reps spend with customers (see 
        Figure Five).  
        
        Figure Five. SAD vs. Quality Thinking: Dimension of Quantity
        
          
        
        Typical Recommendation: "Increase customer face time and watch 
        your sales soar." 
        How Limits Profitability: Two people are involved in this 
        equation to increase face time. If the customer does not see the value 
        in longer or more frequent visits, this tactic is bound to add cost 
        unmatched by income.  
        Ignores: Engineering principle that the best alternative is the 
        one that most economically satisfies customer requirements.  
        
          By contrast, sales quality thinking understands that the best approach 
          may be a coordinated mix of techniques that cuts across traditional 
          functional departments. In 1993 Victor Hunter bought a floundering 
          company called Team TBA, a distributor which sold Shell-branded tires, 
          batteries, and accessories to Shell service stations. Hunter 
          immediately asked the service station managers how THEY would like to 
          receive information about new products and receive service: by email, 
          fax, phone, or in person? Many dealers chose to receive their 
          information by email, fax, or by phone. Hunter cut his field rep force 
          from 83 people to 18, hired 6 outbound telesales reps and 7 inbound 
          customer service reps. The result? By honoring his customer's 
          preferences, dealer satisfaction increased, total sales expense 
          dropped 65%, sales increased, and Team TBA made its first profit in 
          years. Amazingly, even though the number of face-to-face contacts went 
          down by 70%, dealers perceived that face-to-face contacts increased by 
          17%. (7) 
        Money  
        SAD Approach Focuses On: How much money can I make off this 
        deal? (See Figure Six.) 
  
        
        Figure Six. SAD vs. Quality Thinking: Dimension of Money
        
          
        
        Typical Recommendation: "See each customer as a bag of 
        groceries." 
        How Limits Profitability: Sales reps are trained to screen out or 
        "qualify" prospects with apparently low initial purchasing power. 
        Inevitably this means that customers with potentially larger follow-on 
        purchases or a stream of steady purchases will be repulsed, both 
        literally and figuratively, by the behavior of the sales rep. The words 
        of the immortal W.C. Fields come to mind at this point, "Go away son, 
        you bother me." 
        Ignores: Economic principle that the lifetime value of a customer 
        is often 10-20 times larger than any single transaction. (8) (See Note 
        2.)  
        
          By contrast, sales process thinking shows up in the work of Dan 
          Sewell, who calculated that his lifetime customers will spend some 
          $332,000 at his Dallas auto dealerships. Sewell created systems that 
          increase the likelihood that his customers will do just that, citing 
          the work of Deming, Taguchi, and Ohno among the chief positive 
          influences on his own thinking, and remarking, "Systems, not smiles," 
          are the most important part of customer service. (9) At the time he 
          made that observation, his reps were selling 15 cars per month, nearly
          twice the national average. Sewell's techniques for achieving 
          this goal are spelled out in his highly readable book. In addition to 
          familiar techniques, such as using surveys to better understand 
          customer opinions and ongoing employee training in customer service, 
          Sewell has instituted quality oriented measurements (for example, 
          percent of retained customers) to help guide an explicit cycle for 
          improvement and support a more fact-based approach to management. 
        Time  
        SAD Focuses On: Techniques to create quick close (see Figure 
        Seven).  
        
        Figure Seven. SAD vs. Process Thinking: Dimension of Time
        
          
        
        Typical Recommendation: Verbal tricks, such as "Get the 
        prospect to say YES seven times, and they'll say YES to your offer." 
        How Limits Profitability: Customers buying something they are not 
        satisfied with may later return the purchase and/or refuse to make or 
        defer making similar purchases in the future. 
        Ignores: Psychological principle that the consequences following 
        an individual's action govern the probability that their behavior will 
        occur again in the future. (10) 
  
        
          By contrast, sales quality thinking shows up in the action of 
          legendary retailer Nordstrom, whose salespeople will go to just about 
          any lengths to make sure customers are treated like honored friends 
          and family before, during, and after they purchase an item. 
          "Top associates don't look for the one spectacular sale that will make 
          their day. Instead, they are committed to planting the seed for an 
          ongoing business relationship and doing what's necessary to nurture 
          that seed. … Joe Dover finds he 'hooks' the customer when he calls him 
          back a few days later to ask how the shoes are working out. 'Ninety 
          percent of the time, they're so stunned that you called, they remember 
          you,' Dover attest(s)." The customers of Nordstrom are delighted; no 
          doubt Nordstrom is too, with the huge value of free publicity it 
          receives as a result! (11) Where product quality between competitors 
          is at parity, good service after the sale is critical. 
        Quality  
        SAD Focuses On: Sales personnel best practices (see Figure 
        Eight).  
        
        Figure Eight. SAD vs. Process Thinking: Dimension of Quality
        
          
        
        Typical Recommendation: "Watch your best reps in action, ask 
        them why they're successful, and teach what they do to the rest." 
        How Limits Profitability: Spending money to train all reps to 
        follow "best practices" may actually decrease profits if the reps' 
        behavior is not the main reason sales are lower than desired. 
        Ignores: Process principle that a company's ability to generate 
        revenue is limited by its greatest constraint, which may not have 
        anything to do with the sales reps themselves. (12) 
  
        
          By contrast, sales quality thinking may lead companies to bypass their 
          reps entirely. This type of creative thinking led Vaughan's Seed 
          Company (a division of Swiss giant Novartis) to give their biggest 
          customers computers, modems, and the ability to directly place their 
          own orders through Vaughan's on-line catalog. Millions of dollars of 
          orders now flow in untouched by the traditional sales rep. (13) Of 
          course, this is the same technique that Dell Computer uses in their 
          hugely successful internet-based PC catalog. Yet another example comes 
          from Arby's and MacDonald's restaurant chains, which are testing the 
          use of self-serve ordering devices. The advantages to customers are 
          many: the devices can be made multi-lingual, can be stationed in play 
          areas so that parents supervising their children don't have to leave 
          them to place and order, and may provide a more pleasant ordering 
          experience. To the business manager, hard to find staff becomes less 
          of an issue, errors in making change are reduced, and, interestingly 
          enough, some tests showed that the average order size actually 
          increased! (14) 
        Variability  
        SAD Focuses On: The sales reps' responsibility in meeting 
        their "plan" or quota (see Figure Nine).  
        
        Figure Nine. SAD vs. Process Thinking: Dimension of Variability
        
          
        
        Traditional Recommendation: "If you aren't meeting your 
        numbers, you better have a darn good reason." 
        How Limits Profitability: By confusing common and special causes 
        of, extra resources are spent in unnecessary troubleshooting; overall 
        variability is actually increased; and, personnel are stressed, which 
        increases costs due to unwarranted turnover. 
        Ignores: Quality engineering principle that, as long as the 
        process is operating in a state of statistical control, failure to meet 
        specifications is almost certainly the result of management's design of 
        the process itself or the nature of the inputs it receives, and not due 
        to "operator error." 
  
        
          By contrast, sales process thinking shows up in the actions of 
          progressive companies such as Hewlett-Packard. Throughout the '80's HP 
          began to understand, that, if their reps have their quota raised 
          and nothing else changed, a steep price would be paid in human 
          terms. HP realized that lost sleep and broken marriages do not make 
          for increased productivity in the long run. It embarked on a series of 
          management initiated actions (such as increasing emphasis on company 
          sponsored customer education seminars), structural changes (such as 
          adding a tech support group to assist the sales reps), and process 
          improvements (such as defining their sales process in the first 
          place(!)). The net effect was that the average size of sale increased 
          from approximately $100,000 in 1986 to $750,000 by 1995. (15) 
        Personal Evidence of Effectiveness
        
          For a quality practitioner, perhaps the most compelling reason to use 
          a new approach is whether it works when used first hand. The best 
          personal evidence I can offer for these techniques is that companies 
          I've worked for used them, and they work. In one sales training 
          project for 10,000 route salespeople at Frito-Lay, the team mapped out 
          the company's route sales process. We then listed and fleshed out the 
          cause and effect relationships between every failure mode the team 
          could think of, developing response plans for each. The training 
          department then rolled out the training program. Their national chief 
          competitor, a well-funded company with a strong product, left the 
          market completely. As a sales trainer and one of the developers of GE 
          Capital's "Sales Green Belt" training program, I can vouch for the 
          fact that it incorporates quality thinking throughout, based on Jack 
          Welch's initiative to aim for Six Sigma levels of quality throughout 
          the corporation. GE Capital's stellar performance over the past few 
          years is a matter of public record. These techniques work so well that 
          we use them in our own company. In human terms, their objective nature 
          helps us manage by facts, drive out fear, and communicate better. They 
          have provided hundreds of thousands of dollars of benefits in cost 
          savings, in revenue growth, and in the long-term satisfaction of our 
          current clients. Though worthy of contemplation, admiration, and 
          respect, sales quality thinking is a tool for better decision 
          making and action that works very well indeed when applied on a 
          practical day-to-day basis. 
        CONCLUSION: GREAT OPPORTUNITIES AWAIT NEW EXPLORERS
        
          For now we know of no school that grants diplomas in quality thinking 
          as applied to sales and marketing. Many of the implications of the 
          principles cited above, and their application to selling process 
          improvement and customer behavior, are unexplored. Rather than deter 
          us in our quest to learn more, it should excite us about the prospects 
          to come. As Bill Latzko recently observed, "Sales process improvement 
          is the great opportunity for quality in the 21st century" 
          (personal conversation with author, December 1998). One author has 
          attempted to quantify this opportunity, suggesting that in financial 
          terms it "exceeds the [current] profit margin of many businesses." 
          (16) 
        
          Prior to their first flight at Kitty Hawk, the Wright Brothers had a 
          choice. They could continue to strap on wings fashioned according to 
          the latest goofy fad and jump off tall buildings with fingers crossed. 
          They didn't choose that path. Undaunted by the amount of study 
          required, they systematically surfaced, tested, and applied the 
          fundamental aeronautic principles. The rest, as they say, is history 
          (see Note 3). 
        
          Sales and marketing professionals today are faced with a similar 
          choice. Quality thinking connects its practitioners to a huge body of 
          knowledge, proven concepts, and time-tested tools for improving any 
          process. Instead of a disconnected set of ideas that jump up 
          unexpectedly in the form of fad upon fad, quality thinking offers a 
          view that can launch sales and marketing into a new era of systematic, 
          long-term improvement. Since the quality revolution in sales and 
          marketing is still in its infancy, early pioneers are guaranteed a big 
          head start. Those who harness the power of quality thinking while the 
          field is still young should enjoy competitive advantages for years to 
          come.
         
        Notes 
        1. For simplicity, this article treats the terms "process" and "system" 
        as synonyms. 
        2. This principle presents an interesting opposite side of the coin to 
        the quality principle that the cost of owning a product over its 
        lifetime is usually more than the initial price of purchase. 
        3. Ironically, in 1901 Wilbur Wright felt he would not succeed at flight 
        during his lifetime, declaring that, "Not within a thousand years would 
        man ever fly!" Though discouraged that "most of the supposedly 
        scientific information available was worthless," the Wright Brothers 
        doggedly pioneered their own research into the fundamental principles. 
        On December 17, 1903, just two years after expressing his deep 
        frustration, the Wright brothers flew at Kitty Hawk.   
        References 
         
        1. Frederick F. Reichheld and W. Earl Sasser, "Zero defections: Quality 
        comes to customer service," Harvard Business Review, 
        September/October 1990, pp. 105-111. 
        2. Paul Selden, Sales Process Engineering: A Personal Workshop 
        (Milwaukee, WI: ASQ Quality Press, 1997). 
        3. George A. Smith, Jr., Sales Quality Audit (Milwaukee, WI: ASQ 
        Quality Press, 1995). 
        4. Cas Welch and Pete Geissler, Applying Total Quality to Sales 
        (Milwaukee, WI: ASQ Quality Press, 1995). 
        5. W. Edwards Deming, Out of the Crisis (Cambridge, MA: MIT 
        Center for Advanced Engineering Study, 1986). 
        6. John F. Welch, "A Learning Company and Its Quest for Six Sigma" 
        (Presented at the General Electric Company 1997 Annual Meeting, 
        Charlotte, NC, April 23, 1997). 
        7. Victor Hunter. 1999. "Critical Measures That Drive Success." 
        Presentation at the Customer Relationship Management Conference, 23 
        February, Chicago Illinois. 
        8. Don Peppers and Martha Rogers, The One to One Future: Building 
        Customer Relationships One Customer at a Time (New York: Doubleday, 
        1993). 
        9. Dan Sewell and Paul B. Brown, Customers For Life (New York: 
        Pocket Books, 1991 and 1998). 
        10. B.F. Skinner, Science and Human Behavior (New York: The 
        Macmillan Company, 1953). 
        11. Robert Spector and Patrick McCarthy, The Nordstrom Way: Inside 
        America's #1 Customer Service Company (New York: John Wiley & Sons, 
        Inc., 1995. 
        12. Eliyahu Goldratt, It's Not Luck (Great Barrington, MA: North 
        River Press, 1994). 
        13. Frank Smith. 1996. "How Will We Know It's Working?" Presentation at 
        the Sales Automation Association 6th Annual User's Conference, 13 June, 
        Chicago, Illinois. 
        14. Richard Gibson. 1999. "Machine Takes Orders In Test By McDonald's," 
        Wall Street Journal, 11 August, B1. 
        15. Barry Trailer and Joseph Vavricka. 1999. "Bringing It All Together: 
        OMS, Process, Metrics and Training." Presentation at the Customer 
        Relationship Management Conference, 26 February, Chicago Illinois. 
        16. Paul Selden, "Sales Process Engineering: An Emerging Quality 
        Discipline," Quality Progress, December 1998, pp. 59-63.
          
        About the Author
        Paul Selden (paulselden@paulselden.com) 
        is chairman of the international training and consulting firm, 
        Performance Management, Inc., a four-time recipient of Ford Motor 
        Company's Marketing Excellence award for professional services, and 
        president of The Paul Selden Companies, a firm specializing in sales 
        process analysis, improvement, and training. Selden was recently named 
        one of the "10 Most Influential People in Customer Relationship 
        Management" by Sales & Marketing Automation magazine. He holds a 
        Ph.D. in behavioral psychology from Western Michigan University and is 
        an ASQ certified quality engineer. 
         
         
        Return to Articles Table of Contents.
  |