Here’s a disclaimer: I get that what follows is a rant, pretty much like spitting into the wind. Still, I’m going to say it anyway and get it off my chest because I’m frustrated. What got me started on this (again) is that lately, within the last month or so, I’m seeing more crap in my inbox than ever before. That highly technical term “crap” is defined as unsolicited advertisement. I attribute this new surge to two separate, yet related causes. First is the sad, unethical move by LinkedIn. By now you know that they pulled the ultimate Facebook, clueless and stupid move of sharing our profile information with third party companies (read that advertisers) and did not warn us ahead of time in clear easy to understand ways that they were going to do so. Consequently, that information was shared before the alarm went out and we had the opportunity to go in and opt out of the program. I no longer trust LinkedIn, they have become evil by not being sensitive to their customers/clients. What makes me even angrier about this betrayal is that I pay for an upgraded account at LinkedIn. They get money out of me already AND they violated my privacy.

What makes this similar to the clueless folks who then took advantage of that situation and started “pushing” their stuff into my inbox is that both they and LinkedIn are desperate. LinkedIn because they are now public, have to kowtow to the quarterly earnings god and so need to make sure they swell the ranks of the advertisers. The advertisers are also desperate because the economy is showing distinct signs of slowing down again, consumers are still keeping their wallets shut and companies continue to sit on trillions of dollars and not spending much at all. Between them, they may have (personally I believe they have – might be wishful thinking though) shot themselves in the foot on this. The model has definitely changed – consumers pull information and do not pay attention to, appreciate or trust information pushed on them.

My unofficial survey of the business owners, executives, service providers and other consumers in my network shows that targeted advertising that is presented in venues they frequent is quite acceptable. That is, they are willing to trade off sharing information that allows providers to display advertisements to keep the free services and sites they use free. However, they do not appreciate the concept that the information about them is public and anyone who wants to can harvest it and sell it. They believe it’s their information and they should control how it is shared. Many opt to NOT get involved with social media because of that. However, many (maybe even “most”) have put their information on LinkedIn because it was a “professional” web site. That makes the LinkedIn decision to be sneaky and evil that much more disconcerting to them. Disappointment is the only polite emotion expressed, the rest were a lot stronger.

So what can we do about all this? Probably not much. Still, I’ve started the process of closing down my Facebook account in favor of Google+ because at least for now, Google seems to have figured out the “sharing” thing. They achieve a good balance of showing me targeted ads while, as far as I can tell, not giving my contact information to advertisers. I haven’t seen any clues of that happening yet. And like the others, I’m fine with seeing targeted ads on all my free Google stuff – GMail, Reader, Docs, Voice, Chrome, etc. I want to keep things free so I’m willing to see those “pull ads.” We can go as far as some of my colleagues by refusing to put any information on the internet – some are down right paranoid. That doesn’t work for me, it seems to work for them.

Another thing I do, although it takes some time, is I put any advertiser with whom I have no account and who sends me an unsolicited e-mail on a black list on my server so that nothing else gets through from that account and/or IP address. I also report them to the national blacklist services. I tend not to do this with newsletters that follow the rules on opt-in. I simply unsubscribe from any that use PHP List, Constant Contact or one of the main newsletter services. I do that because done correctly, newsletters are providing useful information, not pushy selling. I actually stay on some of the ones that show up because the authors “get” that they need to be providing useful information, not selling or advertising. If the newsletter has a “call to action” (buy my stuff) I immediately unsubscribe. It’s getting easier and faster to blacklist accounts and IPs so I am doing a lot more of that. I hope you will also take the time to learn how to blacklist advertisers and to actually do so. In the long run, you’ll be helping them to learn how to change their business model to one more appropriate to the new world – pull information.

Some suggestions for marketers and advertisers. Stop it already. You are killing yourself. Put your effort into being sure that when I want your product or service I can easily find you. Make sure you have useful information that informs me rather than tries to sell me. Be truthful about what you say. Cut the hype and stop the e-mail blasts. Don’t try and find me and sell me. I’m not buying. If you try and sell me, especially through push techniques, I will do everything I can to make sure I never knowingly do business with you. I’m also one of those people who send any prepaid envelopes included in unsolicited mail back to the sender with their own crap in it.

Things have gotten bad enough and desperate enough that I now get sniveling pleas to buy from some clueless folks using a form on my website (soon to be removed) meant for sending me information IF you want to have me contact you or set up a meeting. The same is happening on my blog were idiots from the fake drug and porn purveyors actually take the time to go through the “Captcha” in order to leave their links and elevator pitch in a comment – which of course is never approved so it’s a monumental waste of time for them.

To my way of thinking, there is an even bigger concern than the frustration of a good thing (e-mail, blogs, websites) being ruined by those who, as always, spoil things. The legitimate businesses behind these activities are demonstrating that they have yet to figure out that things have permanently changed and that their old tactics, business models, products and services must also change if they are to survive. What are you doing to change the way you serve your customers? Are you still pushing stuff on them? Are you still paying for print advertising? Are you still training your sales people to sell instead of build relationships? For a shrinking minority of products and services that are truly commodity and simple, some of the old tactics may still work. But even there, I don’t need you or your telemarketer trying to push me to buy. I’ll just go to Amazon and get what I need. So, you’d better be there and you’d better be very visible. Your website had better give me valid information if I need to do some research and you’d better show up in my Google search otherwise, you lose.

As we furthered the conversation, it seemed that we are actually seeing pretty much the same trends. Business in general (it’s certainly different for each business depending on size, industry, etc.) is sitting on a fair amount of cash that has been accumulating over the last several years. Lack of confidence in the economy means that folks would naturally save in order to be sure survival has maximum opportunity – cash is king! At some point, however, maintenance, improvements, capital equipment, new software and implementing business process improvements can no longer be deferred. What my colleague and I are seeing is that some folks are finally “pulling the trigger” on projects that improve productivity and reduces costs.

There was no discussion that business is picking up for his customer’s customers. That is, demand is not growing (or shrinking for that matter), but is holding steady. Yet to stay competitive, keep a reasonable margin, the whole supply chain is having to reduce costs and one way to do that is investing in infrastructure and improved business processes. Luckily, my colleague is in that very business, so he gains from this slow growing trend of putting in that investment.

Where are consumers in this picture? I think, on a small scale, they are doing exactly as small and medium sized business are doing. The consumer is fixing the things in their homes they need to fix. They are repairing cars rather than simply going out to purchase a new one. They are paying down debt. They are investing in a child’s education where they can afford to do so.

Where are you and/or your business in the supply chain? Do you know what your customer’s customer needs? What will you do to be ready if demand for your product or service is going to be at this low level for the foreseeable future? Or, if demand picks up, are your operations ready to handle the load? Did you let too many employees go to ramp up? Should you hire full time or part time employees? Are there new opportunities for you to fill a need? Assuming we continue to “bump along the bottom” in economic terms, how will you structure your business to survive and thrive?

Lots of questions and very few answers. But then, that’s part of what leadership is about. Knowing which questions to ask, developing a compelling vision for the future and enrolling others in that vision is what makes you a great leader. So how will you get from where we are right now to developing that new vision? Who will help you develop that vision and who will you enroll? This is definitely the right time to re-invent yourself and your company. It is a matter of survival for some!

It seems to me that we are heading down some rocky roads when it comes to advertising and how to “reach” the consumer.

• Google is giving its own sites priority in their search results (evil!)
• Facebook “inadvertently” (right) sent individual identities to advertisers
• Advertising companies are “screaming” at Microsoft for putting in “do not track” function in Internet Explorer 9 – which tells everyone they should have it
• The government is looking at regulating who can track what – that aught to be useful (NOT)
• Print companies are scrambling to figure out how to “monetize going digital”
• Advertising clients are moving budget dollars from traditional to digital advertising including e-books

My theory on this is that consumers are quite tired of having advertisements “pushed” on them. They know where to get what they are looking for and an Ad is not to be trusted any way. While I speak only for myself, I’m not convinced that I’m all that different than other consumers when I say that I don’t trust ads (I almost never click on the paid ads of a search), I’d rather find the information I want when I want it, and I don’t want it in my books, papers or articles. I will ignore most of what even looks like an ad and may even decide that the ad was intrusive and avoid the seller even if I am looking to purchase something.

I’ve concluded that most people (certainly not all people) do not like and will avoid information that is pushed on them. If that’s true, then all the frantic action by the retailers, marketers and advertisers to find new ways to generate ad dollars or sell products are going down the wrong path; it may well backfire. Instead, they might want to expend energy to make sure that the consumer of your product or service can find you quickly and easily.

Here’s the evidence I see for consumers “fighting back.”

• The success of the “do not call list” to stop the intrusions
• The liberal use of “fast forward” to get rid of the ads in recorded media
• The increased use of smart phones to scan product bar codes and download competitive pricing for your product
• Consumer pressure on Microsoft to go ahead with “Do Not Track” despite the crying advertisers who are predicting the usual doom and gloom. Do you trust them?
• Reliance on colleague testimonials rather than ads – and anger over employees acting like they are consumers providing testimonials

Slowly, I am moving away from the printed word. I no longer take a newspaper, instead I have my own digital news source that gives me what I want and ONLY what  want. I have started listening to the “Word for Word Audio Edition of the Economist”  instead of reading the paper version. My books are now on Kindle or Google e-readers more often than not (except for the occasional gift and the occasional publisher sending a new book for review). I even read books and news on my smart phone now (never thought I would).

So I get why those who pay for advertising and those who do the advertising are in a panic. I understand why they are feeling desperate. And, I think their responses are off the mark. What would life be without the advertising? Can’t imagine it? Nor can I. It won’t happen. What will happen is you won’t have to push the ad on me. You will have to instead work hard to make sure that I can find you and the solid, accurate and useful information you provide will be ad enough. You just have to make sure that your bar code is readily available so I can scan it and get the information I want about your product – otherwise I’ll purchase someone else’s product.

I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again: “No one likes to be sold. Most people do like to buy.” So the question is, how do you make it incredibly easy and rewarding for me to buy? Can I find you? Do you have good solid information or just a bunch of fluff? I don’t think things are all that much different between B2B and B2C these days. So what are you doing to make sure you’re staying out in front on this? There is no “new normal.” There never really has been a “normal.” Everything is changing, including the way we get our messages out to the folks who want to buy our products and services.

Do you know what it takes to be successful in sales in THIS market or are you going to build your success factors based on past experience. Now, I’m not talking about setting the measurable goals part of this process. You know how to determine what the top line, bottom line and profit margins need to be. I’m talking about what makes a salesperson successful in the present economy. And if you follow the Impact Hiring Solutions guidelines, how will a person demonstrate that they have achieved the success factors in other companies and in this market?

The new economy requires new sales skills.

Here’s what I’m thinking. There has been a significant shift in our economy. As I’ve stated several times elsewhere on this blog (Generosity and Authenticity), I think this shift is permanent for anything other than fully commodity products. If you have a “me too” product, you will still need to check many of the same boxes you had to check prior to the economic reset. In addition, you will have to learn some new tricks like advertising in the electronic media rather than the usual direct mail, etc. At least you will need to shift a significant portion of your advertising budget to the electronic media. Printed products may never go away completely, but they will be greatly diminished. You will have to work harder at building a brand that people trust with service that is irreproachable, even for the commodity product.

When it comes to high end products and services, the game shifts all the way to the fourth rung on the ladder; trust-based selling. In my mind, that title is a misnomer because it isn’t really selling at all. The process is completely based on having the client’s best interests at heart, not just your own. To the topic at hand, your job as hiring manager looking to hire a “great salesperson” is to figure out how to build success factors that will attract the best and brightest trust-based salesperson. And one who can demonstrate that she/he has actually accomplished what you’re asking for in this market. And if they cannot so demonstrate, then the next best thing is to have them demonstrate that they have indeed mastered trust-based selling in the “old” market. You will have to extrapolate if that is the case.

Here’s what your sales team is up against today:

• Nobody wants to be sold – on anything. When ready, they’ll buy, but not be sold.
• Consumers and businesses are saving not spending
• Consumers and businesses are paying down debt, not adding debt
• “Normal” advertising is much less effective (gone electronic, not print for the most part)
• Salespeople are not necessary for many products – replaced by internet search, etc.
• Excellent logistics is expected and “entry level” to play in the market
• Excellent service is expected (or you’ll be trashed in the blog-o-sphere)

Okay, if you buy all that, then what are we supposed to do? In my opinion, we have to shift much more to the trust-based business model. That means long term relationships and that means making sure everyone in the organization has the client’s best interest at heart. Fundamentally, that is antithetical to the normal salesperson and to the usual commission based system we use to encourage sales. As long as any significant portion of my income is based on taking orders off the buyer’s desk, I will be focused on doing just that. Which means as a salesperson I will be focused on what is best for me and not what’s best for the customer/client. I will maximize short term gains rather than long term possibilities. There will be little or no trust.

I am convinced that business has changed permanently. If so, then what makes us think we can continue to use the same business model (including incentives, organizational structures, product development, etc.) even though the market has significantly changed? If we aren’t going to have the same goals, same incentive packages, same level of business, same customer/client expectations then what will the success factors look like for that “great salesperson”? Unless you have really done the hard work of rebuilding your business model and figuring out the new game, then hiring a “great salesperson” with skill for the old model is bound to fail.

The conclusion I draw is this: the folks at Impact Hiring Solutions are still correct in their process. What must change is our business models, our goals, our methods of achieving those goals and thus our success factors must also change. What is going to be very difficult is to find someone who can demonstrate that they have achieved the success factors with other companies while operating in this market – because this market is very likely what we will have for the foreseeable future. I am tempted to be a bit glib here and say, if you’re looking for a Great Salesperson, then you will fail. Consider hiring a Great Business Relationship person. Someone willing to work for the very long term, not simply the order on the buyer’s desk (if there even is an order on the desk). Find someone who wants the whole team to be successful, not someone who is a superstar, individual contributor. Then incentivize your whole team to be sure they are moving the organization forward: top line, bottom line, profit dollars, retained clients, new clients, productivity improvement, process improvement, etc.

Here’s what I think has happened and it turns out that Scott Fox (e-Riches 2.0) seems to agree. First, the internet has gotten very crowded with web sites and blogs. Second, we have an exponential increase in users who are searching. Third, the “big boys” have staked out their claim to the first page of organic results and will spend lots of money to stay there. Together, this means it is getting incredibly difficult to optimize sites and pages for common search words and/or phrases. Therefore, it is more expensive and more time consuming to try and optimize for organic search position. If you want marketing on the web to be free or cheap, you will be disappointed. It will at the very least, take significant time (which is money, of course) and done well, will likely have a direct financial cost as well. If you want real SEO, you will need to step up to the cost. You will also need to consider pay per view and pay per click options if you have a robust e-commerce site.

To make matter worse on the SEO front, today’s internet user is very impatient and will not likely look beyond page two of the search results. So to pay for SEO and not make at least the second page of the organic returns will be a waste of money. Lucky for us, we no longer have such an overriding need to have customers find us through search. Instead, we can build relationships with the customers through social media. That’s not to say we don’t need to pay attention to the basics of SEO and make sure our sites are configured properly for landing pages, key words and strong links back to the site. It’s just that for many small businesses, time and budget may well be better spent on establishing a brand presence on the social media sites, gathering e-mail addresses for e-mail newsletters and focusing on e-marketing campaigns. In other words, we will go to the customers instead of trying to drive the customers to our sites.

According to Mr. Fox, “the future of marketing is more about e-mail than it is about SEO.” He goes on to say that “In fact, now is the time to be focusing on developing your publishing skills because SEO may be out of your reach.” When I did a quick study of what it takes for initial and ongoing optimization, the cost is already well beyond my own marketing budget. So I have determined to keep the basics of SEO up (meta tags, fresh content – read that blogs, strong links back to the site, careful key word selection for landing pages, etc.) while focusing most of my time on building a robust social media marketing brand. So far, it seems to be working.

This is good news for those who have started new businesses or perhaps had to cut back on the existing marketing budget. We can get in on the very effective growth of niche customer marketing through social media and let the “big guys” blow wads of money on SEO. This is not going to be free though. It will require someone to spend a significant amount of time on blogging, keeping Facebook current, commenting on other blogs that are “on topic” for you and watching the internet for how others are speaking about you and/or your company.

Here are the questions: are you finding that SEO is “out of reach” budget wise? How are you incorporating social media into your branding effort? Are you employing e-mail marketing for your products or services? How good is your website at gathering e-mail addresses from those who find your site and visit you?

After reading the content, I decided it was worth passing along. I got a quick response from one of the people on my mailing list stating that the author was “99% hype and 1% content.” My colleague apparently knows this person and stated that the author “had never lead a sales team but was good at speaking and selling books.” Although he didn’t say so, I assume that he therefore discounted the content in that particular article. Perhaps not, I haven’t yet inquired. Still, I was a bit surprised at the response.

The response got me to thinking, and that’s always dangerous. The premise of the article was that buyers had changed because of this recession. The author also indicated that things were not going to “go back to the way they were.” Since the buyer has significantly changed habits, then so must the salesperson. This all makes sense, agrees with much of what I’ve been concluding and matches what we’ve been discussing on this subject for a long time now. So why was my colleague “dismissive” of the article? Apparently because he deemed the source less than credible based on his own evaluation of the gentleman’s experience – or rather, lack thereof. I know I do the same thing, even though I try and guard against it. I think we all succumb to being judgmental from time-to-time. Our view of the world sometimes keeps us from seeing other possibilities.

What I’m wondering is how much we truly miss about what’s going on around us because we have made judgments about people and/or situations. I’m concerned about how much information we dismiss because it doesn’t fit what we believe – “I believe it therefore I see it!” And the reverse is also true, if I don’t believe it, I’m likely not to see it, or at least I won’t acknowledge it. And we know what happens when people are in that state of mind: the government regulators did not see the problem with Madoff despite being shown the problem by an astute whistleblower. Same thing with Enron and same issue with the rating agencies – no one wanted to believe the worst so they simply did not see it until it all collapsed like a house of cards. Yes, things were complicated, but let’s face it, people just did not want the hear the bad news – until it was too late.

How many of us are still not wanting to hear or see and so are actually not hearing or seeing what we need to hear and see? I don’t mean simply the bad news, but also the good news or news that we have to change and reconsider what it is we do and how our business model works. I believe it was General Eric Shinseki who said: “If you don’t like change, you’re going to like irrelevance even less.” So what is keeping us from changing, from seeing the need to change? Maybe it’s preconceived notions, or firmly held value judgments, or simply not wanting to move outside our “comfort zone.”  Here is a quotation from this month’s HBR:

Companies, not surprisingly, don’t all follow the same strategies during a recession. That could be because of differences in executives’ cognitive orientation during a crisis. According to Tory Higgins, a Columbia University psychologist, human beings are hedonistic—we avoid pain and seek pleasure—but they differ in how they try to achieve those aims. There are two basic modes of self-regulation. Some people are driven most by goals, such as achievement, advancement and growth. These promotion-focused individuals are motivated by ideals and aspirations that provide pleasure if realized and disappointment if not. Other people are prevention-focused—concerned mainly with safety, security and responsibility. They strive to avoid bad outcomes, experiencing relief if they succeed and pain if they fail. Situations have a potent influence on cognitive orientation: A recession, for example, can trigger a response that overrides a person’s usual orientation.

By applying this perspective to our empirical research, we were able to classify companies and their approaches to managing during a recession into four types:

• Prevention-focused companies, which make primarily defensive moves and are more concerned than their rivals with avoiding losses and minimizing downside risks.
• Promotion-focused companies, which invest more in offensive moves that provide upside benefits than their peers do.
• Pragmatic companies, which combine defensive and offensive moves.
• Progressive companies, which deploy the optimal combination of defense and offense.

The question is, of course, what is the best combination of moves? If you have a subscription to HBR, you will be able to read the full article (link above). According to the authors of this piece, the odds that a company will significantly outperform their competition (by 10% or more) on both top and bottom line growth after the recession were: Prevention focused, 21%; Promotion focused, 26%; Pragmatic focused, 29% and Progressive focused, 37%. Here is the summary of how the best moves “shake out”:

Source: Harvard Business Review

Companies that simultaneously focus on increasing operational efficiency, developing new markets and expanding their asset base outperform, on average, in sales and EBITDA after the recession.  So what are our preconceived notions keeping us from doing? Are we fighting the change we know is necessary? Are we leading our companies in the right manner to exit this recession in the strongest possible manner? Have we changed our business model so that we are part of the strong performers? Or are we letting preconceived notions, fixed world views and rigid judgments about how we want things to be keep us from thriving?

Forecasting the future is a fool’s game we all find ourselves having to play if our business is of any reasonable size. How else will we plan for the business? If we don’t forecast, we are likely not to be able to serve our customers. On the other hand, when we do forecast and it is wrong to any significant degree, we may needlessly tie up working capital in inventory and/or capital equipment. To make matters worse, our customers are no better at forecasting than we are. At this point, I’m almost convinced that the weathermen are better at forecasting the weather than we are at forecasting business.

So given that forecasting is a guessing game, although we hope it is an informed guess, then how do we build a culture that will help us hold people accountable for an accurate forecast of our business needs while at the same time making sure we aren’t blind to the reality of just how much the final results may well be outside of our control? This is not an easy question to answer, yet I believe it is a significant issue for many companies.

Like so many organizational issues, this one requires many people to step up and own part of the challenge. As an example, let’s talk about the revenue forecast many companies require of the sales team. The sales team knows that they will be measured at least in part on reaching revenue goals. So the tendency is for the sales team to be conservative in the first go-around on revenue forecasts. That way, they will receive a “low quota” to reach. On the other hand, management will look at the headcount in sales and realize that if the forecast is too low, executives will insist on reducing the headcount to match the revenue. This is a well known, “ancient,” game. And from a pure sales point of view, it all makes sense. However, from an organizational point of view, perhaps there are other issues that need to be considered.

What about inventory, for example? If I forecast low in order to make earning my commissions and bonuses easier for me, I will not have the inventory on hand to serve my customers. After all, the product line will be loaded and inventory will be built based on the expected customer needs. So a low forecast may well result in poor customer service. If sales management “wins” and they keep the forecast high in order to justify headcount (and T&E expense accounts, etc.), then we may well wind up with inventory that won’t be sold and thus needlessly tie up working capital.

It is my opinion that we should seriously look at making sure everyone in the order fulfillment process be held accountable for, measured on and rewarded for customer service, inventory, revenue and profitability. It is the executive’s and manager’s job to make sure that the goals for each are shared reasonably by all (perhaps not the same goals for each department of course) and that the reasons for the goals are clearly communicated. Rather than set revenue numbers from the top down, the forecast should build from the bottom up. The consequences for the forecast should be very clear, and the tension between all parties should be allowed to create the compromise needed to finalize the budget. Only by having everyone focused on all the various parts of running a world class order fulfillment process, and owning the consequences of the decisions, can we have continuous improvement in both forecasting and customer service.

This thought process applies to more business processes than simply the order fulfillment process. It applies to all the major business processes and can lead to very inventive ways of compensating employees. What gets measured and rewarded gets done. Make sure everyone is headed toward the same goal. How does your company manage the order fulfillment and forecasting process? Are the sales people measured on inventory turns, RMA procedures, customer service as well as profitability and revenue goals? What keeps you from having the Marketing People also share in the same goals with a different weight on things more directly in their control? Are you willing to be held accountable for any forecasts you might be asked to provide? Are you willing to be held accountable for the consequences of those forecasts?

Well, I’m not sure how much stock to put in that logic. Most business people I know are quite used to planning around “forecasts.” Forecasts, by definition, are uncertain. Business leaders use forecasts all the time and they know that predicting the future isn’t easy, is uncertain and many times fails miserably. As far as I can tell, all this economic uncertainty is just one more reason to perhaps slow down investing in some areas – which many business owners were going to do anyway!

The banks, for example, are finding that the demand for loans isn’t all that robust. “We” are yelling at them to lend, but “we” don’t want to borrow; “we” are leveraged enough. Some pundits have it that retailers don’t know what to do because the consumer is fickle – they spent in December but now the wallets seem to be shut again. Well, the retailers I know seem to have a solid plan in place and that’s to reduce inventory. That’s what they’ve done and it seems to have worked just fine in the short run. The uncertainty around state taxes and federal taxes that we can’t predict may also put off some immediate plans. Taxes may go up because the state needs revenue and they may go down because the state knows the tax burdens on business is making the state uncompetitive. So I may hold back on investing until I know a bit more, just as I do in the stock market. But I will invest eventually.

But the main thing many of us are in business to do is to find innovative and creative ways to provide a product or service that people will buy. Given that such a new product is found, most of the business people I know will find ways around the other roadblocks and get that product to market. They will find the money or find someone who can help them find the investors.

Businesses have lived with uncertainty since businesses began to form. Sure some things may sometimes seem to be a “safe bet,” but most of the time we are not at all sure what the business outcomes will be for a new product or service. So I think the exact opposite is the problem. The problem is that there is certainty that the level of activity in our economy has slowed down and has changed. There is the certainty that the way we do business must change. There is also the certainty that our government will do something because they believe they must – and that has always lead to unintended consequences (good for some bad for others). This economy is not moving quickly because of those certainties and the fact that a wise investor will make sure s/he knows as much as possible about the market before investing.

Just as always, before this economic recession, we have the uncertainty about the return on investment for an innovative product or service. Just as always, we will have to find investors or make our own investment to get that innovation to market. Just as always, some days it is easier to get the required investment together than other days. Just as always, the leaders who insist on looking for those opportunities will be the ones who survive because they realize that there is always uncertainty. And just as always those who are intimidated by the changes and uncertainty will either miss out on the opportunities or, worse yet, will fulfill their own prophecy of failure.

So as a business leader, what are you doing to create a corporate culture that embraces change and uncertainty? How will you shape a corporate culture that avoids economic analysis paralysis and instead find new products or services? If you are one of the presently unemployed, what are you doing to remake yourself into an employee who will thrive in a culture of change, creativity, innovation and . . . yes, uncertainty? How are you changing your own life to account for slow growth and lots of change?

I think there are many reasons why we’re moving away from the old “product/feature” or “needs/benefits” selling for all except the most commodity types of products. The internet is replacing salespeople and telemarketers in many of these cases. I believe we are and will be spending most of our time in “consultative/relationship” selling and migrating even more to “trust based” selling for our key customers and clients. A few of the reasons for this reframing of the sales process seems to be (a) less consumerism (for common commodities) thus a more sophisticated level of sales is left, (b) on-line purchasing is minimizing interaction with salespeople for commodity purchases and research, ( c) the economy is limiting what people and companies are spending so each purchase made is scrutinized and (d) social networking is training us to give value in our relationships – without expectation of quid-pro-quo.

This last reason is what I’m thinking most about these days. In face-to-face networking, whether you’re in transition or in search of business clients, you are likely finding that you MUST first provide value to those you meet rather than “ask for the order.” This concept, not an new one, hit the Wall Street Journal This Morning podcast recently, and it is sure good to have some validation in what I’ve been proposing to those I mentor and coach in the business community. The point is that from Social Networking sites where the protocol is to deliver value and NOT sell or self-promote, to the WSJ advocating the same generous approach to networking for your career we are being taught that unless someone has our best interest at heart, we should avoid “doing business” with them. How do we know if someone “has our best interest at heart?” Clearly, it is that they are focused on us and how they can help us rather than being focused on themselves and asking us to help them or buy from them. Think about this for a minute. If I am focused on telling you about wonderful me or focused on getting you to place the order with me, then how can I possibly have your best interest at heart? This concept is put succinctly in the saying “People don’t care how much you know until they know how much you care.”

I am beginning to think that one of the more powerful catalysts for changing how we interact with each other (in person or remotely through the media) is being shaped by the etiquette we are taught in our Social Networking interactions. In their excellent book on Social Media Marketing, Friends with Benefits, Darren Barefoot and Julie Szabo make it clear that marketers and those blogging or posting on others’ blogs or interacting with bloggers have to add value before they have the right to request assistance with their marketing program. What comes through clear (at least in my mind) is that “selling” is taboo in almost all cases.

So what are you seeing as the major reason for the move to trust based selling? Do you agree there is a general and pronounced aversion to the “old” selling models? How do you feel when someone posts a “solicitation” in a comment on your blog? How do you feel when you are constantly “sold” on a blog? Does this translate to how you interact with colleagues and professionals in your business life?

Jaynie L. Smith, in her book Creating Competitive Advantage, states that she has “offered to sell her consulting services based on performance – charge nothing up front but agree to a percent of new revenues generated as a result” of her work. I see more and more of that kind of arrangement as well as the usual fixed fee for services instead of a percent of revenues raised or 100% satisfaction guarantees from service providers. Innovation is alive and well in the service sector.

What’s NOT working is the same old tired, “I know how to increase your revenues by 15% or more. All you have to do is pay me and I’ll help you do it.” Or, “this product will revolutionize your company and all it will take is three easy payments of . . . ” Not any more! The BS walks. Even if it isn’t BS if the seller of products and/or services isn’t willing to put some skin in the game, the purchaser asks him or her to “take a walk” anyway. They do that politely, to be sure, but the result is the same.

What’s interesting is that the above has really always been true – if you aren’t willing to stand behind your product or service, it has always been very difficult to expand your business. Either you explicitly state that you will stand behind your work or demonstrate by deferred payments that you have faith that you will deliver and/or your reputation in the market place makes it clear that you stand behind your product and guarantee the results. So why is it so important now? Simply because nobody has cash to throw around or experiment with during these times. And that can be an advantage for you.

If you’re one of the many executives in transition, how can you position yourself to guarantee your ability to help the leadership team at a prospective employer? There are many ideas for you to think about at my colleagues over at Impact Hiring Solution. Key among them is to demonstrate that you have in fact done what they need done as defined by success factors for the position in question. If you’re a service provider, you can differentiate yourself by standing behind your work – offer to defer some or all of the payment until you generate the cash that will pay you. If you deliver a product, make sure you make it very clear that you will take the product back, no questions and no hassles, if the buyer is not 100% satisfied.

What are some of the innovative ways that you are finding to make clients/customers comfortable betting on your product or service? How are you putting “skin in the game?” What new things are your clients/customers in need of that they haven’t voiced to you yet? What do your customer’s customers need and how can you help satisfy those needs with a guarantee of success? More importantly, what are the excuses you are using to keep yourself from putting skin in the game?