10 Years, 15 Years, 20 Years . . . Who Cares

I have never been a fan of “experience.”  It has always driven recruiters crazy.   When I’m building a job description, I refuse to put in number of years experience.   I think experience is a hollow metric too many people lean too heavily on.   Experience suggests someone is good because they have spent years doing something over and over.   The fact that experience “suggests” is exactly what bothers me about it.  If someone can show me they know what they are doing, experience doesn’t need to be part of the equation.   I think too much is equated to experience.  Just because someone spends 10, 15, 20 years doing something doesn’t actually mean they are good at it.  I’ve seen my share of people who spend years doing the same thing in a never ending loop of repetition, never getting any better, never growing, never giving back.   Experience incorporates too many assumptions of capability where demonstration is what is needed.

Show me!

I want to see you know what your talking about. I want to hear HOW you do things.  I want to know WHY you make the decisions you make.  I want to know WHAT you focus on.  I want to you to explain to me how you sell, why you sell and what you use to sell.   I don’t like to make assumptions where I can get actual data.

I want data that shows me how a candidate prospects.  Show me a prospecting process you’ve developed.  Share your prospecting philosophy.  I want data that shows me how you engage customers or how you manage an account.  Show me a governance plan you created.  Give me a work flow document.  Show me something that says you know what your doing and that it is deliberate.

Too many people hide behind experience.  Unions have mastered this.  The “Hey, she’s awesome. She’s has 15 years experience doing blah, blah” doesn’t cut it for me.  What I want to get is the “She’s awesome, she does blah, blah, leverages blah, blah, blah and knows how to blah, blah, blah”

Using experience to express qualification is like slight of hand.  The magician says, hey look over here at these years of experience, as he quietly hides the lack of impressive know how and ability with the other hand.

When we use experience as a criteria for qualification we are applying our own assumptions.   We say to ourselves; 10 years of experience equals X, 15 equals Y, etc.   We apply some assumed level of capability or qualification to the years of experience.   This is a flawed approach.  Why use assumptions when we can get proof.

I want proof.  Call me a control freak, but experience is too hollow.

Do you sell proof or your experience?

Keenan

Comments

  1. So – how does one determine artificial scarcity from actual scarcity?

    I’m talking more about the sales perspective of things rather than the car-buying sorts of things…

    If you have a target margin to hit on your deal, is it simply a game of chicken? Basically you are betting the buyer on the other side of the table will cave and take the deal as you have structured it? Or are there ways figuring it out – other than letting a deal slip?

    I have often thought that good solution selling helps find common ground and drive a solid value-based negotiation – but lately I have seen even the best of those types of deals get submarined by undercutting in this market… is that artificial or actual?

    Or are you saying that the scarcity game should be played at a higher level? Meaning – every deal should be treated as a scarce deal, artificial or not – our job in sales is really to create LOTs of deals. If we have LOTS to work with we win the game through closing a smaller percentage of higher margin deals…

    That however brings us full circle – getting beat by lower price, more aggressive product placement, etc. on a frequent basis will eventually jeopardize one’s ability to hold the line and we are back in the game of chicken again. After all – we do have to make our numbers at some point…

    So how do you break the cycle – particularly in a hyper competitive market such as we are seeing today?

    • Craig, It’s not about making deals, or not making sacrifices and negotiating. It’s about making sound decisions based on value, and need not on the idea that if you don’t get the deal then you will fail.

      Your point about creating more deals is spot on. Having more deals in the pipeline, having more customers who buy at your price, and get value from what you sell will offset the urge to create artificial scarcity. Artificial scarcity is when you and your team believe they can’t lose the deal because there are no other deals. Actual scarcity is when there truly isn’t other deals.

      Margin is impacted by many things. Market conditions, industry price pressures, competition etc. If no one is getting the margins you are seeking, then that is real scarcity.

      The key is to determine what is actual scarcity, based on data, vs. fear based compromise, or artificial scarcity.

Comments are closed.