I help creative companies systematically grow in the digital channel

Learn more about me and my growth program

Join the Growth Hustler Movement

Receive growth resources to help you acquire more customers along with upcoming workshops in your city.

Why Your Next RFP Won’t Work

Also published in….

For many of us working in projects daily, life without request for proposals (RFPs) can be practically unfathomable. Although it would certainly be simpler, it would also remove what appears to be a crucial process in evaluating suppliers for projects.

As Adweek highlights, a study of brand executives found that 42 percent of respondents found the current agency search process to be time consuming, and 28 percent saying “you’re told so many things that you’re not sure what to believe.”

Let’s start with the reason why the RFP still exists – its main benefits and strengths.


The project process can be scary. It starts off with a vision, but the overwhelming possibilities and unseen obstacles cast fog on which solutions are most appropriate for you. This is where suppliers come in.

As you have to search for companies to bid on your project, you’ll naturally conduct much more research and set up criteria to evaluate each bid with. You’ll start to look into how each of them stack up against the others, and you will select according to the one that fits in best with your priorities and constraints. The information you acquire helps you decrease the risk a little bit.

RFPs practically force you to take such a detailed approach to evaluating potential collaborators. It helps you transform the previously murky and vague endeavor (set up a website) into a much more detailed set of objectives, needs, and deliverables.

Ideally, the meritocracy that RFPs appear to facilitate also leads to a more objective and transparent selection of suppliers. The development of criteria appears much more fair to participants.

Proposals also come with a perk: free information. Whether it’s potential feature sets and solutions, or just pricing information, suppliers share information with you that may have required external consultation or more company time. But exactly how accurate is this information?


Years ago, Google took its data from tens of thousands of job interviews to determine if interview scores correlated with job performance.

Google’s SVP of People Operations summarizes in an interview with The New York Times:

“It’s a complete random mess, except for one guy who was highly predictive because he only interviewed people for a very specialized area, where he happened to be the world’s leading expert.”

Most RFPs, as with most interviews, are hardly precise indicators for supplier performance. In fact, the time project teams spent on RFPs could have been spent actually getting to know potential suppliers more intimately. Digiday highlights some of the inefficiencies in RFPs in the media market.

shutterstock 135160319 730x276 Why your next request for proposal wont work

One of the RFPs strengths also become its greatest weakness: the goal of RFPs is to put every firm on an even level and compare them along the same metrics. They help you compare apples to apples.

But because RFPs benchmark each supplier next to the other, they commoditize the process. They overlook the creative solutions or potential innovation value that firms could have, which may be the fruit the project team had really wanted to sink their teeth into.

Because of the RFPs defensibility, it also acts as a layer that shrouds the true sticking point. While this project may be botched, if a company could figure out what went wrong then they could learn and remove that sticking point next time.

Unfortunately, the complexity the RFP introduces – while great for individual teams and project leads – also means that each party could shift responsibility to the others, such as procurement teams or subcontractors.

You don’t have to look farther than the relaunch of the Affordable Care Act website to understand the downfalls of the RFP. Not only did it disqualify smaller teams (including Obama’s very own – successful – technology team that helped him win the election), it also introduced a process so complex that the project went wrong at multiple points.

The President of Development Seed, the subcontractors who worked on the product, said in an interview with Slate: “The problem here is nobody knows what happened, and that’s not acceptable.”

The RFP process restricts your selection of suppliers to only those large enough that can hire proposal writers. That means a smaller, innovative shop would automatically be disqualified, despite its potential fit for your project.

The costs that are written into an RFP are not necessarily precise (to say the least). As you can imagine, many companies are spread thin – and likely are dedicating more resources to their current clients than to potential ones. As the information in the RFP is not earning them any money, they’re not going to dedicate too many resources to it.

That means the information provided isn’t necessarily of value and is based on guesswork and an extremely brief analysis into your industry, challenges, and company. The questionable validity of this information also jeopardizes the valuable objectivity that RFPs bring to the table.

Within the RFP, there are also politics and an informally acknowledged inside track (when certain suppliers are more likely to get the job than others through prior connections). As you can imagine, this also removes from the objectivity that is supposed to be an RFPs major strength.


The inertia of the RFP process naturally allows it to stay significant and relevant longer than it should have.

For example, the RFP has forced companies to invest resources into positions such as “Search consultants” (headhunters for vendors) and procurement departments (costcutters that often fail to consider project value). While the people in these roles certainly provide some value, their existence and the sales and marketing resources dedicated to spreading these messages exaggerate the need for the RFPs.


Instead of looking for free information through a proposal, offer these suppliers a brief paid engagement to do an in-depth exploration of the project. Much like how it’s not wise to rush the doctor’s diagnose and hurry on with the prescription, it’s also important to dedicate resources and time for experts to evaluate your challenges and your project.

While slightly more costly, these “discovery” engagements allow suppliers to really hone in on your problem and provide you with a detailed analysis. More importantly, you can slowly see whether the company’s communication, reliability, and expertise live up to your expectations or not.

You can gain more valid information on your end. While this is a bit of an investment up front, it will save you tens of thousands in the future.


checklist 730x280 Why your next request for proposal wont work

The main advantage of the discovery is in its effectiveness: by taking a little more time to get a better idea of the target, the end result is achieved more effectively and efficiently.

Typically, any one hour invested in discovery saves around two on the rollout or end of project. Similar to how a pair programming process saves overall time by producing 15 percent fewer bugs, discoveries appear to cost more time initially but allow the supplier to save time on fixing mistakes in the long-run. According to IAG Consulting’s Business Analysis Benchmark Study, a discovery process reduces time overruns by 87 percent and budget overruns by almost 75 percent.

There are various methods to approaching the discovery process. Ours is based on the world-class MoSCoW rating system, where suppliers elicit your Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) and scope a suggestion accordingly. Together, we prioritize goals and objectives according to this framework:

M is for Must Have

  • Mission critical
  • Necessary to be included in project delivery and scope

S is for Should Have

  • While not critical, these requirements are very important
  • Likely included wherever constraints allow

C is for Could Have

  • Less critical
  • Nice to haves
  • Lowest return on investment

W is for Won’t Have

  • Least critical
  • Not planned for current project but might be considered for a later phase

This method has proven to be 85 percent to 90 percent effective in controlling projects.


Think twice before using RFPs for your next project. You can free yourself from the RFP’s lack of correlation with supplier performance, the bureaucracy and inefficiency introduced, and the disqualification of innovative, smaller suppliers that don’t have the resources to respond to RFPs.

Instead, try a discovery engagement on a smaller project with certain suppliers – just to see how it goes. You may find yourself pleasantly surprised.

*Originally Published as a Climax Media Blue Paper

Stage Blood Is Not Enough

Screen Shot 2014-04-09 at 5.14.56 PMGuest post by Mark Nichols. Mark has been running MetaLab’s consulting division since 2011, leading a team that has worked with the likes of Apple, Google, Walmart, and Disney. You can follow him on Twitter here.

Can a consultancy support a sales team? 

About a year ago at MetaLab, everything was growing quickly. We’d just landed four massive projects, and had hired a dream team to execute on the creative side. After some discussion, we decided that business development needed to grow right alongside the rest of the consultancy. After all, a bigger design and development staff meant that more work needed to flow in, so the math seemed obvious. We went out, and we found a couple of tremendously talented people to start beefing up the sales team.

It was mere months later that we realized we’d never really asked ourselves why our sales process had been so trustworthy and — most importantly—successful. For years, we had been getting the big projects that we wanted, and the company was growing steadily. At this particular point in time, we were addicted to explosive growth.

The funny thing is, we’d already found the sales process that worked for us. We just hadn’t realized it yet.


For as long as we’d been around, we’d had trust in our sales process. We couldn’t say why. Sales was always done as anti-sales—no scripts, no stuffy meetings, always retaining the ability to walk away. Never aggressively pursuing sales, because the next great lead always seemed to be right around the corner. People were either talking to me or Andrew right off the bat, and we knew exactly which type of client we wanted to work with.

When we turned our focus to growing the sales team, we took inspiration from successful SaaS business models document collaboration software. The first thing we did was hire excellent salespeople. They were great: intelligent, motivated, fans of the company. You know, though, SaaS makes extensible sales look easy—and it is: if revenues keep up, SaaS sales can be expanded infinitely while following a simple onboarding process—since they present a particular value proposition, a clear pricing model, and copy that clearly communicates the what and the why. All that’s left for the SaaS salesperson to do is the perfunctory answering of a few lingering questions and a gentle neck massage.

By moving these sales principles into our consultancy, we were trying to put a round peg in a square hole. And we weren’t giving ourselves enough credit.

Before we started experimenting, sales always worked well for us because of our intuitive understanding of what we were selling.We weren’t selling a product, we weren’t selling a subscription. We were selling MetaLab: our origin stories, our rationales, our experiences, and the scars to prove that we’d been there and slogged through it all. Good clients—the ones that you should be working with exclusively—don’t care about a sales pitch. If you’re a consultancy, they want to buy into you and your company, not your ‘product’.

What you’re really selling is the path to the final product, and using your experience to assure them that this isn’t your first rodeo. And it’s only those people on your team who have walked through the fire that can sell this with compassion, interest, and the ability to execute. It’s that simple.

Your consultancy’s salesforce cannot be comprised of people who got a crash course in why your company is great and successful: it needs to be people who understand this intuitively. A line from “Kyoko’s House” by Yukio Mishima comes to mind: “Stage blood is not enough.”

Realizing this, it began to dawn on me that in many ways, we were dooming our new and talented sales team by ignoring the successful and gratifying sales process of earlier times. Within months, both of these salespeople ended up leaving the company, and when this happened, we decided not to experiment further with business development expansion. Looking at it one way, we were denying ourselves an opportunity for limitless revenues; looking at it another way, we were diluting our services by offering them up to people as nothing more than a product detached from our passion, expertise, and experience.

Our business development team did great work and even landed large projects. So yes, we were getting work, but we couldn’t shake the feeling that we were getting it the wrong way. Now we’re back to where we started, and what we’ve lost in potential revenue we are gaining in quality work, and quality work comes from selling that doesn’t require a pitch. Things never felt as right as they did when Brandon, Jason, Andrew, and I were driving sales.

So here is the lesson, as I’ve extracted it from our story: leave the selling to the people who know your consultancy best, even if it feels like a lateral move. In our case, that’s our department head, our founder, and our directors—the senior people whose once fresh faces are now ravaged by MetaLab battle scars. Nothing contributes to buying resistance from clients more than the feeling that you won’t be able to guide their project through the hard times: the brick walls, the tense meetings, the endless revisions, the uncertainties. Everything else is just sales.

*Originally published on Medium

Business Development Partnerships

There are essentially 3 ways to make more money:

  1. More New Customers
  2. More Business from Existing Customers
  3. Charge More Money

Pete Forde reminded me of this business truth recently, which made me reassess the fundamental importance of strategic partnerships, across all 3 of these growth trajectories. The defined responsibilities of business development vs. sales can be contentious at times, however what seems to be arguably the universal core value of business development consists of leveraging assets, existing or distressed, to help drive business growth.

If we put on our growth glasses and look through the lens of this 3-point framework above, we can see how key account management and strategic executive direction has the ability to influence points 2 and 3 respectively. However, what I’d like to zoom in on for the rest of this post is the first point, in order to discuss how we can start to acquire more new customers by leveraging external 3rd party assets in the form of strategic alliances.


Back in 2009, Marketo created a fantastic study, which outlines their lead to opportunity conversion rates over a 12-month time period.

PRO TIP:  A large percentage (64.5% in Marketo’s case) of new business lead sources will be generated through word of mouth or inbound sources. This is great, however the challenge with these lead sources is that you cannot always accurately identify what caused the prospect to seek you out in the first place. Other lead sources are much better at identifying the direct lead source, such as Partner and Employee Referral.

When trying to determine what business development lead generation activities are worthy of your time and energy, you may want to consider this mix, which I’ve borrowed from my friend and fellow business development consultant, Ted Mercer.


You’ll notice that this biz dev mix is fairly representative of Marketo’s study. Within each of these 5 strategies is their own unique funnel or radar, tactics, tools and metrics. Let’s place partnerships under the microscope and take a look at how you can start leveraging these assets to help you generate measurable new business activity.


Over the past few years we have witnessed the decoupling of the Agency Of Record (AOR) relationship within the client-agency marketing landscape. Similarly in web technology, we are witnessing the unbundling of the social network, with specialists becoming more predominant.

Don’t believe me?  Take a look at Facebook, who are the perfect case study of an unbundled social network service. Specialists in photos (Instagram), instant messaging (WhatsApp) and disposable web (SnapChat) services have been massively successful at achieving critical mass land grab with their narrowly defined expertise, resulting in a global mobile user base that is keeping Facebook at the edge of their seat.

What we’re witnessing is that the most successful digital product companies or digital agencies today, all have one thing in common.

They do one thing and do it better than anyone else.

Along with the digital products/services above, you can also take note of these globally respected digital service firms, who all have defined specialties including:

There’s been much documented about the benefits of specialization, however what seems to be overlooked is the economic benefits of comparative advantage for these specialist firms. Discovering and building partnerships with firms who are more efficient from a value and cost perspective, can be extremely beneficial for achieving a more holistic customer acquisition game plan.


The czar of strategic alliances, Peter Simoons, has a definition of strategic alliances, which is one of the best out there:

“A strategic alliance is a strategic cooperation between two or more organizations, with the aim to achieve a result one of the parties cannot (easily) achieve alone.”

When deciding to pursue partnerships, there are many types of strategic partnerships or alliances that you can establish. Peter has created the strategic alliance spectrum that allows you to visualize the types of partnerships based on the amount collaboration and complexity involved. The breakdown of each can be found in his post The Alliance Spectrum, or by downloading his e-book on Successful Partnerships & Strategic Alliances.

Strategic Alliance Spectrum

Aside from the degree of complexity and collaboration, firms should also take into consideration the motivation for both parties involved.  Questions you might want to ask yourself include:

  • Are we looking to optimize and reach economies of scale?
  • How will we reduce risk and uncertainty?
  • Should we focus on acquisition of resources or key activities?

If you’re interested in digging into some examples of partnerships, a few of personal favorites include Nike integrating Apple into a line of running shoes and Nespresso teaming up with coffee machine manufactures to create an entirely new “single portion espresso” industry.

We’ve entered an era where the most powerful business models no longer live in isolation. Being able to understand business model network effects and connecting these different models is mission critical to making your partnerships sustainable and successful.

Business Development Growth Flywheel

What’s the DNA of a growth strategy?

When Jeff Bezos first started Amazon he drew what’s now known as Amazon’s Growth Flywheel on a napkin.

Amazon Growth FlywheelSimilar to how nature has patterns that repeat or reproduce, businesses do as well. Whether firms realize it or not, these underlying forces have the ability to create momentum that can either drive success or failure.


Customer Experience (CX) is at the core of Amazon’s flywheel. They believe that if they provide remarkable CX, the result will be an increase in traffic to their website. Creating CX should be the main driver of growth for any business, regardless of whether you operate on or offline. The question then becomes, what IS customer experience? Forrester’s definition is probably one of the best:

“How customers perceive their interactions with your company.”

At the heart of this definition is providing something useful and interactive for your customers or potential customers. Where this leaves many firms is creating content (text, image, video etc), with an emphasis placed on digital content. The oversight is thinking that if you create it they will come. That is, the content companies create will be discovered and consumed by their target audience. In this, lies the great challenge.


Every business is in the transportation business. If you’re creating content you need to distribute that content.

As with traditional transportation, which consists of moving goods from one location to another and is essential for the development of civilization; the content you create is essential for the development of new business. Everybody knows, content creation has crushed cold calling.

Most companies understand and are creating digital content for a target audience, however at the same time, seem to struggle with the appropriate channels necessary to get it in front of their audience click for source.

Before you go out and start leveraging different channels to generate traffic, you need to take into consideration 2 fundamentally important sales metrics.

1. CAC: Customer Acquisition Cost, in it’s simplest terms, is all the money you spend on marketing and sales to acquire a customer.

2. LTV: Life Time Value, is both the tangible and intangible value you receive from your customer.

Which then leads us to the equation that will ultimately determine your success for sustainable biz dev growth:


Explained in words: The value you receive from the customer should be greater than what you paid to acquire them. One way to improve this equation is by lowering your CAC. There are many different ways to accomplish this task such as focusing on inbound marketing, strategic partnerships, customer satisfaction, etc. The one aspect I would like to focus on here, to help reduce your CAC, is a leveraging earned online channels.


Your social channels can only do so much.

Syndicating your content across Twitter, Facebook, LinkedIn, G+, etc are effective, however, that’s not enough. What you need to start considering is both your pull and push strategies to set you up for distribution and traffic success.

Pull strategies will seduce your customer to come to you while push strategies force them to come to you. Both are important in channel distribution. However, since pushing is often associated with interrupting your consumer and cost money (raising your CAC), I prefer focusing on pull strategies.

Your Homework: I’ve done the dirty work for you here, by providing a VERY HIGH LEVEL checklist of pull strategy examples and resources that you MUST start using today to help you generate new business activity. I’m sure there’s many good ones that are not included so please add any I’ve omitted in the comments below.


STEP 1: Print this post out

STEP 2: Sit down with your team responsible for customer acquisition (Sales, Marketing, PR, etc)

STEP 3: Check off which activities you’re actively participating in

STEP 4: Gather any data or metrics you have around these activities

STEP 5: Highlight which activities you should start focusing on

STEP 6: Make a list of companies you respect and look at the activities they focus on

STEP 7: Report back on your results in either the comments below or send me a tweet

Best of luck!


Discovery Sites
[ ] HackerNews            [ ] Inbound.org     [ ] GrowthHackers     [ ] Medium
[ ] #USVconversation  [ ] Quibb                [ ] Svbtle                     [ ] ShareBloc

[ ] Guest Blogging     [ ] Interviews
[ ] Q&A (Quora)        [ ] SEO (MOZ)

[ ] Guest Podcasting     [ ] Sponsorship Outreach     [ ] SoundCloud generic viagra

E-Books, Guides, Whitepapers
[ ] Gated Downloads     [ ] Build Email List
[ ] Guest Features          [ ] Interviews

[ ] Guest Presenter/Interview     [ ] YouTube Channel     [ ] SlideShare

Offline Events/Presentations
[ ] Audio/Visual Assets     [ ] SlideShare     [ ] Instagram
[ ] Vine                               [ ] Twitter           [ ] Facebook

[ ] Give-a-ways     [ ] Social Media Awareness

Complementary Audiences
[ ] Meetup     [ ] Eventbrite     [ ] Uniiverse

Email Newsletter
[ ] Monthly Updates     [ ] Other People’s Newsletters (OPN)

[ ] HARO

Hashtag Holiday Card

Hello world!

Sales Radar vs. Sales Funnel

Suffering from funnel vision? You know, the linear path of awareness, interest and intent that your prospect is expected to follow in order to make a purchase?

Marketing and sales have both developed strategies around this model which was certainly more effective in a world of information asymmetry. Where sellers had more information than buyers and could systematically control the customer journey. This is no longer true in the digital landscape we live in today.

Over the past year, I’ve been struggling to find a visual model to represent how this buying path plays out in a sales and BD context today. A way where you can monitor, manage and measure how a cold lead turns into an opportunity. The Sales Radar, a tool developed by Tom Martin is a great start.



Sales and marketing have always considered a “mix” effective, however in the past, the data to support your outcome was more covert. Traditionally you would buy awareness and trust that the eyeball count was accurate and equally engaged. Today you can create owned or earned awareness through content and use analytic tools as basic as Google Analytics or as advanced (or creepy) as <a href="http://www software collaboration tools.genius.com/”>Genius to measure your results, in real time. When used holistically and accurately assessed, these vanity metrics are a great jumping off point to begin a sales process.

The benefit of the Sales Radar is that it allows you to focus your time on prospects that are most engaged with your firm. By identifying trigger points in your lead source mix, you now position yourself nicely to design dynamic experiences that create meaningful outcomes for both your firm and the prospect.

I’ve been using a slightly modified version with my clients based on their uniquely positioned new business lead sources. If you’re interested in learning how to implement a similar version of this tool or are in the process of working on a similar strategy in your organization, please send me a tweet or drop me a quick note. Would love to hear your thoughts and I’d also be happy to personally share some stories.

The Anatomy Of A Sales Pitch

Allow me to cut this open on a very macro level. Over the past year, I’ve been involved in many new business deals. Both for my own consultancy and also riding along side new business deals with my clients Business Development Directors and their Executive team. Here’s a quick synopsis of what I’ve seen fail and what I’ve seen work during the pursuit of new business opportunities.

When firms pitch for new business or look to “move” their prospects towards making a purchase, the typical sales pitch tends to follow a linear path as shown below:


One reason for this is because people don’t invest in businesses they invest in stories about businesses. The challenge with this sequential pattern of mini stories, beside the fact that business development is not linear, is that the expected outcome is premature at the 20-minute deck stage. Before I tell you why, here’s some more background.

Linear Pitch Flow:

High Concept Pitch

This is usually a one-sentence or one-word introduction. It describes the company’s vision in a single work or phrase. The HCP is the beginning of the conversation, not the end. It’s meant to capture some attention in order to tell the rest of your story.


YouTube = Flickr for Video

Elevator Pitch

David Cowan from Bessemer (investors in Skype) has a great quote: “The elevator pitch forms everyone’s first impression of your venture. It needn’t be a single sentence, but the delivery ought to be measured in seconds, not minutes — like any good TV or radio commercial.”

The elevator pitch (again on a macro level) usually follows a Why, How, What in very Sinek-ian fashion.

Example:  Apple

Why:  Everything we do, we believe in challenging the status quo, we believe in thinking differently

How: The way we challenge the status quo is by making our products beautifully designed, simple to use and user friendly

What: We just happen to make good computers, want to buy one?

20-Minute Deck

This is essentially a presentation that provides more details about your business.


Reid Hoffman recently posted LinkedIn’s Series B Pitch Deck to Greylock. For more, check out Pitchenvy for a database of real life startup pitch decks.



The problem I’ve seen is that most clients expect to see a final outcome after they have systematically guided the prospect through this path. Proposals are sent over, briefs are completed, or evaluation plans are presented. Even if you have managed to get a group of stakeholders into a boardroom for a 20-minute deck presentation (congratulations by the way, this is no small feat to overlook), you still haven’t managed to “move” your prospects towards buying something they need. You’re merely exchanging a generalized idealistic vision for a premature outcome.

The real sales process begins after you’ve built up a sufficient level of credibility and value. This now allows you to engage in a candid, collaborative, strategic conversation necessary to help solve your prospects deep symptom level problems. I’m not saying you need to give your thinking away for free, what I’m talking about is helping to bring higher value insights to your prospects explicit needs, based on your expertise in solving similar problems.

This takes collaboration from a large number of players. Not only players from the prospects team but also players from your team, to validate that you have the right team to deliver on your vision.

Side Thought: This is hard work for one solo BD hustler.

Here’s how it looks

salespitchanatomyThe goal of this “moving” phase is for both parties to make the necessary concessions through win/win negotiations in order to achieve a viable, desirable, feasible and sustainable solution for everyone click this link now. This will most likely take up a large percentage of your time during the sales cycle. So understanding how to navigate this landscape will be essential to increasing your new business opportunity to win ratio.

Business Development Is Not Sales

What’s the difference between sales and business development?

Andrew Dumont does an amazing job breaking down these roles and also deconstructs this misconception in a visual that I really like.

This is a great start, however when it comes to biz dev, what I’ve often seen is that the fundamentals of this role comes down to doing 2 things:

  1. Getting someone to give up something
  2. Getting someone to get something new

I would argue that today, most prospects or partners already have a version of what you are trying to sell them. So getting someone to give up something, in exchange for what you’re offering may be a more common scenario in today’s economic landscape.

So how can you get someone to give up something they already have and start using what you’re offering? You need to move them. Not sell. These are slightly different traits that may exist in sales but will most likely be more predominant, or effective in biz dev. Check out the expanded diagram below for more why not look here.

We’re currently moving away from a world where information asymmetry was king and moving towards a new paradigm called information parity. The result is a level playing field where persuading, convincing and influencing takes precedence over selling. We still have a need for sales, which are products/services people are sold that typically follow a flow of dials, demos and dollars.

However since buyers now come to the table more informed than ever before, we need to create products/services for people to buy, which is more of a marketing exercise that includes content, connecting and communication

On the moving scale we have “Super Movers” and “Movers” which represent the different skills or styles associated with these movers.

If you’re interested in learning more, Daniel Pink has conducted a study with 9057 respondents world-wide called, “What Do You Do At Work” which helps illustrate the importance moving along with new rules that govern caveat venditor.

In the meantime, if you’re a biz dev hustler today, I’m curious to know:  How are you moving your prospects?

Sales Methodologies: BANTE vs PUCCKA

In my <a href="http://coreyeastman group collaboration software.com/introducing-the-pse-tool-for-new-business-growth/”>previous post, I outlined the PSE Tool and it’s role in evaluating new business opportunities.  If you haven’t read that post, I suggest you check it out HERE before diving into this article.

Most sales opportunities you come across will begin with a customer stating an explicit need. For example:

  • “I need a new website”
  • “I need a mobile app”
  • “I need a tool to help me accomplish A, B and C”

This is a great starting point for a new business opportunity, however the problem is we are missing lots of other important information that is best acquired by listening, questioning and hard fucking work.


Hustler, Talk vs Work

If you were tracking this deal in your pipeline, using a CRM, this should be identified as a deal with approximately 20% potential of closing. This is because it’s missing 4 out of the 5 important elements you’ll need to uncover during the length of your sales cycle.



Enter BANTE, a sales acronym that will help you qualify this deal, and bring it closer to a high percentage win, which stands for:

B = Budget

A = Authority

N = Need

T = Timeline

E = Evaluation criteria

BUDGET:  Does the prospect have a set budget or allocation of funds put aside to solve this problem?

AUTHORITY:  Who is the final decision maker for this need? Who are the other stakeholders involved in this opportunity? In every deal you will usually encounter 6 different stakeholders; economic buyer, decision maker, influencer, sponsor, end user, deal blocker.

NEED: What is the pain the prospect is looking to solve? Why should they buy anything at all?

TIMELINE: When is the prospect looking to make a decision? Is there a compelling event that is causing them to stick to this timeline (i.e conference, acquisition, internal targets that need to be met).

EVALUATION CRITERIA: What are the success metrics they are using to evaluate if this need has been successfully fulfilled? What other firms will they be evaluating to help solve this need?

Mark Suster developed a similar sales methodology called PUCCKA, which is:

P = Pain

U = Unique selling proposition

C = Compelling event

C = Champion

K = Key players

A = Aligned purchasing process

The goal for each methodology is to gather as much information as possible to ensure you are well positioned for success during the lifecycle of the sale.

In an ideal world, you should be able to collect these data points on the first conversation (read: phone call) you have with the prospect. Once you’ve gathered this information you can start to creep up the PSE Tool into the “symptom” box. We’ll get into identifying and capitalizing on customer symptoms in the next post however, for now it’s important to realize that once you’ve moved up the pyramid you’re now set up nicely to deliver more value in the customer/firm relationship.



Sometimes you won’t be able to move up to the “symptom” box, for various reasons, some of which include:

  • Commoditized product offering
  • Price sensitive customer
  • Procurement department opportunity
  • No trust
  • Talking to the wrong customer
  • Lack of sales etiquette

It’s ok if you can’t move up and have to stay within the explicit needs section. If this happens what you need to acknowledge is that you’re most likely going to have to compete against price, and not value. This is because you have failed to deliver an ROI strategy, which beyond sexy numbers, is based on:

  • Establishing trust
  • Building consensus amongst the 6 different stakeholders
  • Communicating the value your solution delivers in respect to the customers problem



As mentioned there are similarities between both BANTE and PUCCKA. To help you uncover the most salient points in your next new business opportunity here’s a quick snapshot of both methodologies side by side.

If you end up designing a new formula, with new elements that work for you then please drop me a note, I would love to hear about it.

John Wick: Chapter 2(2017)

John Wick: Chapter 2(2017)

Quality : HD
Title : John Wick: Chapter 2
Director : Chad Stahelski.
Writer :
Release : 2017-02-08
Language : English.
Runtime : 122 min.
Genre : Thriller, Action, Crime.

Synopsis :
Movie ‘John Wick: Chapter 2’ was released in February 8, 2017 in genre Thriller. Chad Stahelski was directed this movie and starring by Keanu Reeves. This movie tell story about John Wick is forced out of retirement by a former associate looking to seize control of a shadowy international assassins’ guild. Bound by a blood oath to aid him, Wick travels to Rome and does battle against some of the world’s most dangerous killers.

John Wick: Chapter 2(2017)