Continuous Business Relevance (or is that irrelevance?) in a sales context?

I was catching up on old times over the weekend with a colleague and friend from Ultracomp (now Fox IT), Conrad Lidgett, who is now a Service Management (ITIL etc) guru at Serco.

Both being process nuts, we were talking about benchmarking processes against ‘best practice’.  Conrad was talking about the importance of processes being relevant to the business they support and serve, and how he is not a fan of the phrase ‘continuous improvement’, as it suggests change for changes sake, regardless of relevance or importance.

Consequently, he has coined the phrase ‘Continuous Business Relevance’, which I have to say I like a lot.  I have suggested to him that as ‘alignment’ is trendy at present he may want to consider ‘Continuous Business Alignment (CBA)’, but whichever you prefer; he has a very good point.

In the context of sales this concept is hugely relevant.  We have worked with, or observed, many businesses that seek to move up the value chain, moving away from transactional / product sales to a solution / services sale but crucially fail to develop and adopt relevant sales processes and procedures.  Rapid growth can also make existing processes and procedures irrelevant or limiting.

For example, how many software suppliers or hardware resellers selling ‘boxed’ products have systems and processes built around a short sales cycle based on price (“What have you sold today / this week / this month?”), whereas in their new world they will encounter a longer sales cycle and the need to sell value, which demands a whole new mindset and supporting systems and processes?

A classic example can be found in the area of bids and proposals, and the need to respond to formal procurement processes. In the ‘old transactional world’ a written quote or a quick email was acceptable.  In the ‘new solutions world’, Request for Proposal and Invitations to Tender prevail as the preferred method of procurement.  If the supplier fails to recognise this need to change they will suffer hugely, and sales people will leave in droves.

In summary, if the requirement to ensure that sales systems, processes and procedures (and management expectations!) maintain Continuous Business Relevance is ignored, the supplier will wither on the vine.

The reader can be assured that CBR or even CBA will become part of SalesMAP™ and BidMAP™ on an ongoing basis to ensure they maintain continuous business relevance!

Comments

[Kevin Eley]

I entirely agree with the comments and this is especially relevant to enterprise software suppliers. But, CBR will only be successfuly adopted systematically in a supplier if there is an environment or culture of sharing and learning. These cultural attributes have to be instilled top down. I believe clients will spot the individuals and teams that embrace CBR and, in a crowded solution and software marketplace; make buying decisions based on their interactions with these suppliers.