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.
|