Highlights from "Web 2.0 and Sales Process Management"

By Dennis McDonald, Ph.D.

Click the above image to download a free copy of the report.Every sales person I know wants better leads. Because of this the benefits of applying Web 2.0 techniques to prospecting and qualifying would seem to be a no-brainer. But what about using Web 2.0 techniques to support other sales processes?

I explored this question in a recent “white paper” for Social Media Today LLC and Oracle Software. The report (click here to download a .pdf version) includes discussion, analysis, and reports of an online survey and a series of sales manager interviews that looked at all stages of the sales process, not just the front end.

Here is a portion of the report’s Introduction:

This report discusses how “web 2.0” systems and applications can support management of sales processes. Instead of focusing on specific technologies such as social networking, blogs, wikis, or other technologies, it focuses on business processes and addresses the following questions:

1. How satisfied are sales managers with the different processes currently involved in locating, managing, and closing sales?

2. What can this tell us about where Web 2.0 applications would provide the most benefit to the overall sales process?

Input to this report was provided by a special online survey and by telephone interviews with sales managers. 

The project’s findings include the following:

1. The most immediate perceived benefits of applying Web 2.0 techniques to sales are provided by improving the outcomes of prospecting and customer qualification.

2. When addressing Web 2.0 support for sales-related communication and collaboration, it’ important to distinguish whether participants or processes being considered are internal or external to the sales team’s organization.  For example, while involvement with the social and professional communities surrounding business prospects may improve market intelligence about business prospects, such communications are not as controllable as traditional one-to-one communications between buyer and sellers. Internally, collaboration that cuts across organizational boundaries might be impacted by existing organizational rivalries.

3. Some within-sales-force collaboration may be resisted by sales people if this raises fears of reduced competitiveness or shared commissions. To promote such collaboration it may be necessary to modify compensation plans to reward certain types of collaboration.

4. Sales process maturity may strongly influence adoption of Web 2.0 techniques. Well-defined and formalized processes, such as those that occur closer to the end of the sales cycle, benefit differently than activities that are less structured or performed independently by members of the sales team.

5. The lengthier and more complex the sales process, the more participants will be involved as the process evolves. Making information gathered at one stage available to other participants “downstream” will help ensure a smooth transition from sales to delivery and servicing of the customer. Organizational or departmental barriers that restrict collaboration across groups should not be allowed to disrupt the sales process and satisfaction of the customer.

To download a .pdf version of the final version of the report, click here.

To see a follow on post to the above titled “More Thoughts on ‘Web 2.0 and Sales Process Management’” click here.

Copyright (c) 2009 by Dennis D. McDonald, Ph.D.

Comments

[Stan Melton]

Terrific information, and certainly helpful in tempering expectations about the "magic" of "Sales 2.0", where necessary. The two roadblocks I see you dealing with are old ones, but ones we all need to face in this new economy:
1) Change - You can't do things the same old way and expect to succeed
2) Collaborate - This is a shared economy, meaning the more I know the more I can help you, and vice versa.

It can be tough if you are not comfortable with either, AND if management doesn't negotiate compensation to reflect and respect collaborative efforts.

It's great information to reflect on, and to repeat constantly...I appreciate you making it available!

[Dennis D. McDonald]

Thank you Stan. You nailed the main issues and they are certainly not technology specific.
-Dennis

[Tom Canning]

Dennis,

Great paper and thanks for making this available as a download! Sales is certainly changing - The term "Sales 2.0" now marks this transition point. I agree with the conclusions - sales people need to start realizing the benefits of collaborating both internally and externally - as generally all information at some point becomes public and available. Open collaboration is an evolution that needs to take place. We've successfully (for the most part) accomplished this with sales channel/alliances programs - which clearly created a divide between sale people who were channel friendly (aka "I want to work with you") and others that were solo flyers. I believe over time we will see collaboration across direct and channel sales - if we can over come the fear and paranoia that some sales people unfortunately still possess. Management needs to be supportive of this change and encourage and reward collaborative behavior. There is definitely a measurable ROI attached.

Very good paper and data presentation!

-Tom

[Dennis D. McDonald]

Thank you Tom for your comments which should also be addressed to SMT and Oracle for supporting this.

I well understand the benefits of the sales process being viewed as an opportunity for collaboration throughout the organization. Heaven help the employee who says "that's not my job" when approached by Sales for support moving a sales opportunity forward!

[Ellen Feaheny]

Part of the challenge is lack of central or integrated systems to collaborate information (leads or feature/support requests resulting in product additions or enhancements).

With integrated data, these frustrations are reduced immensely, which is also a key point of Enterprise 2.0 tech - integrate data and collaborate together - don't work in silos, or play the silo "not my job" excuse.

Our company creates a Salesforce.com to Atlassian JIRA plugin, allowing shared case data with a JIRA record, and back and forth commenting. To me, this is a solid start to Sales 2.0. (http://www.customware.net/repository/x/e4C5AQ )

[Dennis D. McDonald]

Ellen-
I would not start with the technology.
- Dennis

[John Golden]

Thanks for the white paper, Dennis, the world is changing for the sales rep and the balance of knowledge between the buyer and seller is now levelling out during the sales process due to the buyers being able to find out pretty much anything they want to about the seller and their company by doing the same research the seller is doing about them. This means sellers need to cast their net wider in search of value creating information that may be held by colleagues in sales or across the broader organization - being able to unlock such tribal knowledge is a challenge for sales reps for all reasons you outline but the ones who figure out how to leverage internal and external networks and filter the results to extract real value in a sales cycle win!

[Dennis D. McDonald]

John, thank you for the comments. Some markets will be more receptive than others -- check this out for example which focuses on the Federal government: "Justifying Collaboration in Complex Programs such as Federal Acquisitions" http://www.ddmcd.com/complex.html . Some markets are a lot more opaque than others and may require a different set of skills (and tools).

[John Tropea]

Hey Dennis, it's been a while since I visited, but found this most interesting as I've always wondered how sales people, eg. real estate agents, would swallow a move from a competitive to collaborative organisation. I posted about this very thing a while ago when I reviewed an article how 2 law firms. The firm that was compensated based on the output of the whole was much more collaborative, as it was in their interest..due to the reward structure in place. Here's that post http://libraryclips.blogsome.com/2008/05/12/is-knowledge-hoarding-all-about-your-pay-cheque/
I followed it up here
http://libraryclips.blogsome.com/2009/11/12/i-dont-want-to-share-thats-counter-to-meeting-my-objectivesand-reward/

My post on competitive vs collaborative
http://libraryclips.blogsome.com/2009/11/02/sensemaking-km-and-cops-just-in-time-vs-just-in-case-engaging-and-embedded-km-and-a-competitive-vs-collaborative-culture/

Other points related to compensation is: do I get measured on how well I source the network to help me on my task, and help I do for other people's tasks
http://libraryclips.blogsome.com/2009/12/17/the-roi-of-time-spent-helping-others-and-performance-reviews/

Along with middle management control and disintermediation fear, I think these are huge roadblocks that require a revamp to management 2.0

[Dennis D. McDonald]

John, thanks for the VERY useful links. One of the most frustrating things about traditional sales incentive programs is that salespeople interpret them (correctly in many cases) as discouraging collaboration and sharing. It's also difficult to overcome WIIFM-induced resistance to sharing when you move to a reward system designed to discourage knowledge fiefdoms. Another reality is that busy salespeople (and their managers) may also resist learning new tools. Think how hard it can be to get accurate reporting from a large dispersed sales force; adding use of "social" tools without appropriate support can be a mistake.