I don’t know about you, but that phrase and the combative attitude it represents concerns me.  Do buyers lie?  Sure, some of them do.  Do sellers lie?  Same story.

The sales profession has enough to overcome without a sales training industry leader conveying this negative, fatalistic view of selling.

Don’t get me wrong. I’m not attacking the Sandler organization or any of their franchisees.  ESR covers Sandler and we know they certainly have their share of satisfied, loyal customers in the markets they serve.

But many of us, including Howard Stevens and the University Sales Education Foundation, are working hard to elevate the profession of selling in the U.S. and other parts of the world.  With that in mind, it would certainly help this and future generations of sales professionals for us  to tone down the rhetoric and spend our creative energies helping salespeople better understand how to establish mutually beneficial, trusting relationships with their customers.  If someone doesn’t believe that can be accomplished, they should consider another profession.

ESR’s core buy-side service is our evaluation process for selecting sales training providers.  We are almost always called in by a senior sales executive from a client’s company.  Occasionally it’s the learning or sales ops organizations that contact us.  Every once in a while, we’re contacted by representatives from procurement or HR organizations, who believe ESR is a sales training company.  I’m not sure how they would think that unless they didn’t visit or read what’s on our website.

I had a good conversation with a savvy procurement guy from a big insurance company this week about what it takes to effectively evaluate sales training providers and the risks associated with making any of the most common mistakes.  I was encouraged by his intelligence, insight and openness to a different approach, but unfortunately his understanding of the challenges associated with sales trainer selection is rare among the procurement people we’ve dealt with.

If you’re a sales leader and are required to source a training provider through your corporation’s standard procurement process, the likelihood of you winding up with a company that will be a strategic partner and guide you through years of ever increasing sales effectiveness is minimal.  In literally every case in which we’ve been involved procurement didn’t have the knowledge or ability to get the job done with respect to sales training provider evaluation and selection.  Procurement does a good job in negotiating pricing, terms, and conditions, but of what use is a well-negotiated contract with a training provider whose capabilities don’t match the customer’s requirements?

What should you do?  At a minimum, manage the evaluation and selection process yourself.  If procurement needs to be involved, leverage their skills for final contract negotiations with your chosen provider.  Shortly ESR will publish an e-book on this subject with the key components of our 7-step approach.  Stay tuned.

Photo credit: Thailand Holiday Homes

Clients who are using Miller Heiman’s content have been saying they want to take their application of the Strategic Selling process to the next level.  The new tool provides content above and beyond what is typically offered in Miller Heiman’s programs.  Miller Heiman also payed special attention to how salespeople learn, and the fact that they typically access information when they have a challenge—for example, having a deal stuck in the funnel.

Miller Heiman decided on a push strategy, e-mailing modules in the learning series on a monthly basis.  Salespeople can also access the content on demand.  It’s presented visually, audibly, and in document format.

In addition to the content directed at sales reps, sales managers are provided coaching tools to assure that reps are availing themselves of the content and making the most use of it.  Miller Heiman suggests one-on-one or team meetings with reps.

The modules can be customized.  For example, a video or audio of a top sales rep discussing the topic of the month could be integrated into the Miller Heiman version making it more relevant to the audience.

Each module in the series consists of a video, an animated presentation, a “back of the napkin” exercise, and a white paper.  Most of the modules are five to eight minutes long.

Miller Heiman beta-tested Advanced Concepts with 7 clients, with 300 users in total.

Miller Heiman did the right thing in investing in this Advanced Concepts technology-enabled learning platform.  It provides many of the How-to’s delivered by Miller Heiman subject matter experts, whereas their programs often don’t get past the basic components—the What’s—of their approach.  That’s not a weakness.  It’s just the way curricula are developed for companies with limited time and budgets.

Competitively, this is an important step for Miller Heiman.  A fair number of sales training providers have strong virtual learning/reinforcement offerings.   Here are just a few: Richardson, The TAS Group, RevenueStorm, Mercuri International, Imparta, and The Brooks Group.  Some providers’ virtual offerings duplicate only what is provided in their ILT (Instructor-Led Training) programs.  Miller Heiman’s approach, taking the student further and deeper into the approach, strategy or concept, can be of real value, depending on how the customer implements the tool.

Here’s the bottom line:  What will really determine whether Advanced Concepts becomes a successful product for Miller Heiman is salesrep adoption.  If reps see that investing time their time learning from the modules will put money in their pockets, they’ll use it.  If they view it as yet another demand from management that takes time away from selling, they won’t.  Miller Heiman clients should strongly consider using the recommended implementation approach.

Disclosure: Miller Heiman is an ESR subscriber.

• ESR/Brief: Miller Heiman’s Sales Access Manager ($29.95)
• ESR/Report on Miller Heiman ($99.95), which is extracted from…
• ESR’s Sales Training Vendor Guide ($495.00).

Photo credit: Fotolia.com

I flew my plane up to Norwood, MA airport a while back to meet Braham face-to-face over lunch.  Fifteen-hour differences in time zones can make scheduling phone calls a challenge.  Plus any chance to fly my plane…  We had an excellent discussion.  As a result, I thought an interview with Braham would make for interesting reading.  He and I see things very similarly when it comes to managing an indirect sales channel in a B2B environment.

Here’s the interview:

Dave Stein: Even though indirect sales accounts for nearly 70 – 80% of all products sold, why is it that it does NOT get the same attention as direct selling?

Braham Shnider: The percentage may be even higher than 80% with the advent of the GFC (Global Financial Crisis) and the push to lower selling costs. We know many of our clients have increased their adoption of indirect channels in the last 18 months. However, many sales and senior executives have been promoted from a direct sales background and I think the simple cliché applies “people do what they know best, not what they don’t know” – so they promote and develop a direct sales culture and believe that indirect channels is easier to manage and therefore often plays second fiddle to high-touch direct customer selling.

Dave: What do you see as the trend going forward, will direct sales continue to get a disproportionate share of attention and why?

Braham: There is no question in my mind that direct sales gets far more attention than it should. In fact we estimate that 80% of sales training budgets are spent on direct sales training yet up to 80% of the revenue is coming from indirect sales channels. This inverse relationship makes no sense and is just bad business. There a few thought leaders who have recognized this and are doing something about it. They are investing in securing (internally and externally) quality channel sales people, developing specific channel management competencies and ensuring that senior channel managers who manage large and strategic channel partners are compensated and recognized at the same level as a successful direct sales person.

Dave: What is the major difference between the role of someone who sells direct and someone who manages indirect sales channels?

Braham: Someone who successfully sells directly often does so because of their ability to “control” events, manage risk and provide differentiation as opportunities progress down a sales pipeline. It is their ability to wrap their hands around a qualified opportunity and not lose control that makes them successful.

Channel managers need to understand how their company’s sales methodology works and are often involved in their channel partner’s sales opportunities. They need to be able to qualify and forecast opportunities in their channel partner’s sales pipeline. But they do NOT control their channel partners or their sales opportunities as their channel partners will do things for their own reasons not because they have been told to do so by a channel manager who works for another company.

Successful Channel Management is about influencing channel partners on how they develop, manage and optimize sales opportunities while also influencing and leading change initiatives and investments that drive indirect channel revenue.

Dave: So are you saying that managing indirect sales is more difficult that selling direct?

Braham: Yes!!  Because successful channel managers need to do be able to bridge both worlds—not only do they need to know what a direct sales person does that makes them successful in building and managing sales pipeline but they also need to be able to apply that knowledge to virtually manage a sales team and deliver on a sales forecast with a team of people that does not work for them.

Dave: So what distinguishes a very successful indirect channel manager?

Braham: We have identified five specific channel management competencies that differentiate the best channel managers. These are:

1. The ability to execute on a channel partner lifecycle management strategy to identify, recruit, enable, manage, and transition channel partners in their territory;
2. Understand the business model and investment criteria of channel partners and be able to have a business conversation about investment initiatives;
3. Articulate the key issues and business priorities that affect partners’ stakeholders and have the influencing skills to manage partners to change and invest as required;
4. Manage the channel partner relationship, engagement, and achievement of joint objectives through the partner planning process;
5. Lead and manage partners to identify and resolve their own barriers to success and to become independently able to generate indirect sales revenue.

Dave: What can companies do to get a competitive advantage through the way they manage their channel teams?

Braham: Hire, fire, grade, compensate, and develop to win!  What I mean here is that there are a few thought leaders who are investing in their channel teams by deploying a channel partner lifecycle management process, recruiting better quality channel sales people, developing specific channel management competencies and ensuring that a senior channel manager who manages a large and strategic channel partner is compensated and recognized at the same level as successful direst sales person—they are peers.

Dave: Channel Enablers mainly works in high tech.  Do you think the same principles apply to other industries and their indirect sales channels?

Braham: It is our experience that the fundamentals of good channel management are the same across all industries, the only exception being industry specific nuances, business practices and naming conventions.

Dave: What are you going to be discussing in your upcoming webinars?

Braham: We have just completed our global and regional Channel Management Benchmark Study for Channel Sales Success. We will be discussing what have we learned as an industry, what skills and practices set the benchmark for channel sales success, and how well do vendors drive their adoption? In which high priority areas is current execution performance low and how should channel managers be measured, graded, compensated and developed.  The first webinar will be held June 21.  (Here is a link to the registration and information page.)

Photo credit: © Stephen Coburn – Fotolia.com

The question that comes up in every sales performance improvement provider evaluation we are involved with is this:  How will the sales training provider enable their methodology, processes, and approach be integrated with the client’s CRM system?  Out of the box CRM will not get the job done in the cases we’ve seen.  In fact, it tends to automate the chaos that exists in many sales organizations and demeans the salesperson by forcing them to comply with onerous activities that have no direct value for them.

A sales methodology and the associated processes must be built first and the technology solution customized, tailored or modified to support the salesperson’s use of that sales process.  Or, even better, the vendor provides a software application that sits in front of the CRM system that gives salesperson the tools they need to effectively and efficiently manage sales opportunities or key accounts.

There are four alternatives that a sales training provider has with respect to providing support for their methodology in the client’s choice of CRM systems:

1. Ignore the issue, leaving it up to the customer to figure out.
2. Develop and maintain the software themselves.
3. Join the Dealmaker Partner Network and avail themselves of The TAS Group’s solution, such as InfoMentis, Huthwaite, and Think, Inc. have done, among others.
4. Engage with White Springs, a software company that provides CRM front-end solutions to more than a dozen sales training providers, as well as directly to end-user companies.

Right now, the clients ESR is working with in active evaluations are all looking at sales training providers that use the White Springs solution.  So, I reached out to Chris Hens, COO of White Springs.  The result was this interview.

Dave Stein: More than a dozen leading sales training providers use White Springs as the foundation for their technology-enabled selling solution. What is it that your company does for them?

Chris Hens: Simply put, we enable our partners to easily integrate their training content into any CRM/SFA platform. Our compelling value is that our partners don’t have to invest a lot of money in the technology and dedicate themselves to a limited choice of CRM/SFA platforms. We build their applications one time and then integrate them into whatever platforms their customers have implemented. This model allows our partners to quickly deliver integrated solutions and actually start making money within weeks or months rather than years.

DS: You’ve got a long history in the sales effectiveness business, Chris.  How did you wind up as a principal at White Springs?

CH: Well, I don’t know about the “long” part, but certainly I’ve seen a lot. Interestingly, we are now doing with White Springs what we wanted to do as far back as 1999.

I was with a sales training firm called OnTarget when we were acquired by Siebel. The premise of that deal was that sales training/methodology content should be embedded into sales force automation so customers could drive the greatest effectiveness from both the technology and the training content. So, we were right in the middle of trying to make these two things work together 10 years ago.

The problem was that there was little flexibility in either model. As a result, our solutions were less than compelling for the user and really didn’t end up selling very well. After several years of engaging with our top clients trying to make things work, it became apparent to a lot of folks that there needed to be a better way. That’s when I ran into Gary White (founder of White Springs). He showed me a better model and allowed me to be a part of his company.

DS: In addition to the sales training providers, White Springs has end-user companies using their technology as well. Can you share with us some details of an implementation?

Actually, all of our technology ends up with end-users. Currently, our sole route to market is through our partnerships. We do, however, have many customers who have asked us to augment the original applications (White Springs likes to call them applets) by integrating the customer’s own home-grown or even other third-party tools or content.

The typical implementation for us involves our partner first engaging with the customer to position the integrated solution. White Springs provides pre-sales support to help guide the opportunity to closure. Once it’s closed, we take over and integrate the applets into the customer’s CRM system and provide ongoing technical support. The average SaaS (On Demand) implementation takes less than 24 hours to embed in the customer’s environment.

DS: Where do you see all this going? What should sales leaders be looking for on the horizon?

CH: Embedded learning. That’s the buzz-phrase for me. We know that a great deal of learning is retained when it is done in context. So, we need to bring learning into the sales person’s daily cadence, making it relevant and useful in real-life scenarios and interactions. This type of “just-in-time, in-context learning” is where I believe we will see a lot of focus in the next few years.

DS: Any advice to sales leaders who don’t know which end is up from a technology perspective? How can they leverage technology for increased sales performance?

CH: This may sound a little strange coming from a software company, but I often say to prospective customers, “Please, PUHLEEAASE, don’t get hung up features and functions in a ‘cool tool.’” The key is to stay focused on the reasons you invested in sales training to start with. Technology should be the means to that end. It should be simple, enable the users to engage the content effectively and ensure that customers can manage the learning process.

It’s funny, though… even when we try to focus prospects on those tenets, they invariably want us to show the whiz-bang features or discuss “wouldn’t-it-be-cool-if-it-could-do-this” futures…sadly, the sizzle still sells.

Photo credit: © Steve Mann – Fotolia.com

I asked tough questions during the briefing, but I got answers that made sense.  Every one of them.

They suggested that I log onto the new Dealmaker Genius customized opportunity management process application.  A few days later I did.

Here’s how it works:  Based upon the industry you’re selling into, how your customers buy, and certain characteristics regarding your sales approach, products and services, the application poses a series of questions about what it takes to successfully manage a sales opportunity.  It proposes a very comprehensive list of qualification criteria, allowing you to accept, change, or delete.  You can add criteria as well.  When your list is complete, it then cycles back and asks for the importance, or weighting factor, for each criterion.

The end result is a documented sales process, replete with metrics—for example, how much potential business must be in each stage for a rep to achieve their targets.

The results of this process documentation exercise can be incorporated into The TAS Group’s Dealmaker sales performance automation application. But here’s the thing…  The output from the 15-minute exercise can be used as a stand-alone tool as well, or as the foundation for customizing their existing CRM application.

Powerful.

Here’s my quote from the press release:  “For the experienced sales leader, this is better than sliced bread.  Rather than spending time and money on tips and tricks with little sustained impact, being able to create a customized sales process for their own business can set them on the path to lasting, measurable sales performance improvement.”

This is another big step by The TAS Group in providing sales professionals with appropriate technology that will enable them to be more effective and efficient.

I’d be hard-pressed to accept any excuses from process-averse sales leaders as to why they wouldn’t avail themselves of this tool and the benefits that it will bring.

Photo: © Albert Lozano-Nieto – Fotolia.com

That sole trainer (or two- to three-person firm) won’t be rolling out simultaneous live instructor-led training classes in 20 countries.  Nor will they be getting in front of every one of 3,000 reps in the North American operation of a large client during a rapid 6-month deployment.

But we have seen one- to three-person sales consulting and training firms be very effective in:

• Filling a gap in a company’s existing sales methodology in their unique area of expertise.  We’ve recommended domain experts in selling outsourcing, gaining and leveraging business acumen, demonstrating software effectively, and understanding and selling into specific industries, as just four examples.  These experts contributed significantly to their clients’ overall sales effectiveness;
• Adding unique or custom-developed content to that company’s existing sales training curriculum, which is then delivered through a train-the-trainer approach;
• Coaching sales managers and individual sales reps toward closer compliance with the company’s sales methodology.  Two common examples are “deal management sessions,” and objective pipeline reviews.  We know a number of consultants who do a terrific job in these areas for some very large companies;
• Extending the value of a company’s investment with a larger sales training provider who might do a great job of providing the “what to do,” but not the “how to do it.”  That’s a common compliant among sales training buyers we speak with;
• Consulting with and/or delivering special learning content to a small, diverse division or business unit of a large global player.  That’s one explanation for seeing names of some very big companies on the website of some very small trainers;
• Developing and delivering virtual content that can be translated where required and rolled out globally.

There are many situations where an individual trainer just can’t get the job done for a big company.  But there are plenty of times where they not only can, but they’re the best alternative.

Would you let me know by email if you’ve had a high-value experience working with an individual trainer or small firm?

© photo-dave – Fotolia.com

When I tell them that’s not a question I can easily answer, many offer to pay me just for providing them with “just one name.”

If they press me for an answer I take a deep breath and say…

I first need you to tell me just a bit about the company seeking the best sales training firm:”

• What do they sell?
• How do they sell it?
• How well do they sell it?
• Why do they win?
• Why do they lose?
• How long is their sales cycle?
• Is it a complex or transactional sale?
• Do they sell to committees or individual buyers?
• What resources are required to support a rep?
• How do their buyers buy?
• Who are their competitors?
• What’s their go-to-market strategy?
• How are leads generated?
• Where percent of market share do they own?
• What are their business goals and objectives for the coming quarter, year and three years out?
• How well is the sales team performing? What percentage of sales reps are at or above quota?
• What processes and tools do they currently have in place?
• What geographic territories do they cover? In what languages? With what local cultural requirements?
• How is the company structured?
• What about their sales channels?
• What compensation and incentive approach do they employ?
• How well do the first line managers manage?
• What gaps exist in management skills and capabilities?
• Do they coach effectively to a process?
• What analytic and measurement systems are in place?
• How well is sales integrated with other functions within the company especially marketing and service?
• What is their propensity to change?
• Are the corporate leaders ready for a business transformation?
• How much time, resources, and money are they willing to invest in it?
• Which vendors have already been engaged with this company?
• What learning mechanisms and tools are in place?
• How diverse are individuals within the sales team with respect to experience, skill, effectiveness, business savvy, age, learning preferences, etc.?
• What are the company’s annual revenues?
• How much are they willing to invest in a sales effectiveness initiative?
• What technology, if any, is currently supporting the sales function?
• Are they thinking about training strategically or tactically?
• Who is currently providing training?
• What do they think their biggest sales challenge is?
• What special skills, if any, are required for sales effectiveness?  This question alone requires discussions with many diverse stakeholders and is a critical component of ESR’s discovery process.

Do you get my point? No single sales performance improvement provider is right for every company’s requirements.  If you’re looking for the best one for your business, you’ve got to start with requirements. Skip that step and you just become another statistic.

Photo source: www.Jeopardy.com

Huthwaite and IACCM have a set forth a 5-phase Negotiation Maturity Model along with the percentages of respondent companies at each phase.  If you haven’t seen studies on this topic, the results will be sobering:  80% of the companies surveyed have no formal negotiation process.  The project team looked at companies’ negotiation processes, cross-organizational collaboration, data collection and analysis, preparation and planning, approval and escalation systems, training, success measurement, and other factors.  If you’re getting dizzy right about now, you should probably consider yourself among the 80%.

It’s my job to be skeptical when vendors publish research reports covering areas where they have something to sell.  However, during the past 10 years, ESR has seen procurement, sourcing and buyer departments get considerably more strategic when it comes to negotiating with suppliers.  Selling organizations are being overpowered, out-strategized, and often just plain beat up by their customers.  Not enough selling organizations are doing much about it.  At least not in any way that has significant, measurable impact.

ESR has done sales effectiveness audits and assessments for companies that have taken a strategic approach to negotiation on the sell-side.  There is no question in our mind that many of these companies are not giving up millions, or in many cases tens of millions and more per year in revenues and costs.

If you’ve just slammed your hand down on the desk and said, “I’ve had enough.  We’re going forward with a strategic approach to negotiation, starting tomorrow,” hold on a second.  I appreciate your intent, but it’s not so simple.

The best implementations of strategic negotiation ESR has seen is when it is integrated with the company’s sales methodology.  If you don’t have a sales methodology, build that first.

Note: ESR has not formally evaluated Huthwaite’s negotiation approach, content, or delivery.  At this point we’re only recommending you get your hands on the study from Huthwaite International’s website.

Photo credit: © Pat Lalli – Fotolia.com

On top of the research we perform on Imparta as a component of our vendor coverage, ESR had an opportunity to see Imparta in action twice:  First, we were an active participant, along with about 15 other people, in a half-day seminar on coaching salespeople.  In addition, as a task related to our work with a large client where we were guiding them through a sales training vendor evaluation, we sat in on a presentation in response to the client’s RFP.  We were able to view their learning and reinforcement technologies first-hand.  In both instances we were impressed.

I thought that it would be interesting for you hear what Richard Barkey, Imparta’s CEO, thinks about a number of subjects related to sales effectiveness.

Dave Stein: What buying trends are your clients experiencing with their customers as we slowly escape from the recent global recession?

Richard Barkey: For most of our clients, this recession was very different from the last downturn in 2001.  Business customers were more careful in the way they cut costs, ring-fencing areas where clear value was being delivered, and then working to increase that value as far as possible.  This focus on value has continued as the economy has started to pick up, but we have started to see a slight relaxation in the way it’s measured.  During 2009 we were often helping clients to quantify the benefits of their offerings for buyers wanting a 3-6 month payback period, and that is beginning to return to a more normal timeframe.

In particular, strong companies see significant opportunities as the world staggers away from recession, so they are looking at longer-term investments again, but risk management is still very much the order of the day.  What does this mean for business developers?  The good news is that they can start rebuilding their longer-term pipelines if they focus on companies with a strong forward-planning culture, but they will have to be ready to demonstrate tangible value, and bring professional risk-alleviation skills to the table.

DS: Imparta has proven capabilities in a number of areas that ESR sees as critical for sales performance improvement going into 2010.  Those include technology-enabled learning, and coaching.  Can you take me through them one at a time with respect to your philosophy and an example of how you’ve helped a client?

RB: First of all, technology certainly plays a major part in our vision for performance improvement (and I’m glad you call it that rather than training!).  In fact, it’s a critical enabler of the whole process.

• At the needs analysis stage, we use online 180 degree assessments and a comprehensive sales competency model to identify where the skill gaps are, and provide a benchmark against which to measure improvement;
• At the learning stage, we use animated pre-work so that we can focus the classroom time on experiential learning.  We’re also a leader in computer-based sales simulations, which provide that experiential learning around the strategic elements of a sale.  (I’m still a believer in good old role-plays, but they’re best used to “simulate” a single interaction);
• Back in the field, e-learning is used for reinforcement and – critically – as-needed task support. We’ve also developed a new e-learning approach called Sales-Enabled Product Training (SEPT™) that allows rapid development of… well, what it says!
• In the application space, you’ve reported on a number of companies who have made progress during 2009 in integrating their tools into a range of CRM systems.  This is an important development, and we will be releasing our own CRM-integrated tools during 2010;
• Technology is also critical at the measurement stage.  We use our i-Coach tool to deliver learning, but also to capture and process a wide range of information across all four Kirkpatrick levels, from coaching activities and results, to competency assessments, business impact assessments, and actual salesperson performance. It sits at the heart of our Sales Performance System™, and includes a very powerful reporting system that helps to keep the whole process on track.

Second, coaching.  It’s pretty well documented that the quality of sales coaching will make or break any sales performance initiative.  As a result, we probably spend as much time getting sales leaders and managers to understand how to coach consultative selling, as we do working with the salespeople and account managers themselves.

To take Telefonica O2 as an example, we train sales managers how to coach, of course, but we also provide them with coaching toolkits, and assign them an Academy Coach who offers “coach the coach” sessions.  These involve watching the manager coach a team member, assessing them against a coaching competency framework, and then providing coaching to improve their coaching.  Confusing, but it works!

We’ve also found during the recession that we have been asked far more to get involved in direct coaching of deal or account teams.  These “deal clinics” are incredibly effective as a way of opening up accounts or putting together winning pitches, and we’re willing to run them a success fee basis.

DS: I know Imparta has a presence in the U.S.  How are your expansion plans progressing?

RB: Yes, I’m delighted that we have a strong U.S. client base, including GE, HP, the WPP Group and Intelsat.  I lived here for a few years and have an MBA from Harvard, so I have a great deal of interest in the U.S. and spend quite a bit of my time here (as you talk to me I’m actually in Washington DC).  We have been steadily growing our presence in this market despite the difficult economy, and we have significant plans for expansion in 2010/11 – as indeed we have across the world.  I have appointed a senior executive to oversee our expansion plans, and while in some countries we will be seeking partnerships to drive our presence, in the US we are more likely to continue expanding our existing Imparta account management and delivery team.  We are also looking at possible acquisitions here to help accelerate our growth.  Despite 2009 being a difficult year for many sales training companies, I see this as an exciting market, and one to which we are culturally much aligned.

DS: I understand you’ve just acquired a company in the field of service excellence.  How does that fit with your strategy?

RB: The Procter Consultancy has a great reputation for delivering service improvement, and the acquisition is designed to reinforce Imparta’s ability to add value to the whole of our clients’ customer-facing organizations.

There are plenty of sales training companies around, but very few who combine Sales and Marketing as we do.  A big part of our work with our sales clients already involves getting Marketing lined up behind the sales initiatives – for example, producing product training that doesn’t just explain what a product does, but also how to sell it.

Once you add in the service element, you can really start to align all the customer-facing elements of a company, ensuring that the product delivery reinforces the brand and the sales philosophy, and provides a strong input to the “team sell.”

We think this breadth of coverage is fairly unique, and it’s especially important now, because customers are increasingly unforgiving, and quick to share their experiences online. For private and public sector organizations alike, it is critical to ensure that the customer experience delivers on the promises made by sales and marketing.

DS: Thanks, Richard.