|
What's the difference between
a good interview and a bad interview? When Sam Donaldson asks pointed questions
that make people squirm, is that a good interview? Or when Barbara Walters makes
people feel so comfortable, so trusting that they completely confide in her and
express their deep, true emotions, is that a good interview? You could debate the
journalistic merits of Donaldson’s blatantly agenda-driven interrogations and
Walters’ subtle persuasion, but my point is this: Who would you want to
interview you? The person who knows what he wants you to say and backs you into
a corner until you say it, or the person who helps you reveal your “real”
self? Because of his style,
Donaldson's interviews feel adversarial and combative, even though he often
produces a good story. Meanwhile, Walters gets to work with the créme de la
créme and earns slots on prime time with her specials. Salespeople who fire
questions like a machine gun and cleverly turn conversations to their advantage
get a certain grade of client, while those with a more humane approach work with
a higher caliber. Donaldson’s approach is
like the old-school sales techniques. He has pre-determined his outcome and
knows exactly what he wants the interviewee to say; therefore, he tries to
formulate the perfect question to elicit the answer he’s looking for so he can
get the story (“make the sale”). This is just like the salesperson who asks
"disturbing" questions about paying too much tax, outliving your money
in retirement, losing buying power to inflation, becoming disabled, or dying
prematurely. The purpose is to create discomfort so you can manipulate people's
behavior. Walters, on the other hand, is more like the Trusted Advisor. She
formulates her questions with one prime objective: to draw out her subjects and
hear their story. She usually gets a great interview because she creates a
positive emotional connection, builds trust, and people reveal themselves
because they want to. For a Trusted Advisor, the
Donaldson approach is out. The purpose of an interview is to establish trust and
connection and determine if there is a fit — not to do whatever it takes to
make the sale. When there is no fit Trusted Advisors disengage, even if they
could make a sale. One Trusted Advisor, David
Bach with Dean Witter, recently told me that he had a client in his office with
a $1.2 million rollover from Exxon. “It was so funny,” he said. “I knew
there wasn’t a match, but I knew exactly what to say to get the sale. I really
had to be conscious to make sure I didn’t say it.” A
salesperson would never have let the commission on $1.2 million walk out the
door. That is so contrary to how
most salespeople live their lives. How many times have we
"interviewed" prospects, all the while trying to figure out what we
have to say to make the sale? Figuring that out was the holy grail of selling. Instead of constantly
thinking about what you should say to make the sale, be a Trusted Advisor and
focus on the kind of person and professional you are. Jim Rohn has said, that
success is not something you pursue but something you attract by the person you
become. Isn’t this the great
paradox of sales? Your job is to attract people to buy what you are selling, but
the mere fact that you are selling repels people. All your methods are responses
to the reality that who you are causes people to avoid you. When you tell people
you’re a salesperson, you are almost always pigeonholed and subsequently put
off as someone who wants to sell something; therefore, you have to “handle
objections” and be a good "closer." The whole terminology of selling
— “I have to close the deal,” “I have to handle objections,” — is
the result of salespeople having to chase potential customers who would rather
avoid them. It’s a vicious cycle for
salespeople: They’re repellent; therefore, they have to manipulate; therefore,
they’re repellent; therefore, they have to manipulate. The result is that
nobody wants to be around them. Even their friends cringe when the subject of
their profession comes up. Remember the depressing play,
Death of a Salesman? I think Arthur Miller had it all wrong: He should have
killed off the sales career instead of the salesman. What if the aging Mr. Loman
had been recruited to an organization where he was trained in the ways of the
Trusted Advisor? Pardon me for messing with a classic, but perhaps he could have
become a valued resource for clients and his company instead of an aging hack
put out to pasture. A happy ending or, depending on how you look at it,
beginning. When you show up in the world as a salesperson, people avoid you. When you show up in the world as a Trusted Advisor, people seek you out. Remember, salespeople pursue; Trusted Advisors attract. Don’t be a salesperson, be a Trusted Advisor. |
