I went to a conference this week with a number of speakers from Government and various quango’s and frankly I have to say their speaking skills did nothing to dispel the image of the grey bureaucrat!

Where shall I start? There was so much! But as an advocate of the less is more approach and the rule of three, here goes:~

Despite microphone support and not a vast auditorium I could barely hear some of the speakers. Their lack of volume made for very apologetic tones that lacked energy and authority. I don’t encourage people to shout at their audiences but on a scale of 1-10, where audible is at about 5-6 is most of these speakers were at 5. This is not where you want to be if you want to sound confident and authoritative. A presentation is not a conversation. To come across well, even with a microphone you need to project and fill the room with a pleasant, “easy listening sound”. It’s the only way to grab and retain audience engagement.

Text,text,text,text and more text . Typically people presented 10-15 slides for a 20 minute slot, of which 90% were text, of which over half had 90 or more words on the slide.  Power Point is NOT YOUR SCRIPT! In this multi media age surely people know this by now..? Which part of “VISUAL aid” are they not getting? FYI… slapping a logo in the corner does not count! And if you’re just going to write your script up on a slide, why not just send it to your audience to read and save all the time and effort of being there?

The guys from the DfE  (Department for Education) and DWP (Department of Works and Pensions) were on  mission to feed us facts. So many facts that a minute or two into their presentations I felt the “drinking from a fire hose “sensation, overwhelming me. I’m quite sure there must have been a costly Royal commission that took 3 years to deliver its report and cost £3 million that definitively proved the inverse relationship between facts and audience interest, i.e. the more you bombard people with facts the faster they lose the will to live!  A few, well chosen facts that are highly relevant to a cogent argument.. Great …  but slide after slide of impenetrable graphs that they didn’t have time or inclination to explain and you didn’t have time to work out, was indeed death by PowerPoint .

So if you don’t want to seem like the dullest of dull, grey, governmental speakers then at least avoid theses 3 presentation pitfalls!

Each year Miller Heiman, a global sales effectiveness consultancy carry out a worldwide survey of what the most effective sales and commercial organisations do and how that differs from what “The Rest” do!  

Three of the areas they cover are:

• Customer knowledge
• Flexibility
• Discipline

Customer Knowledge and Understanding

Successful selling is critical because customers don’t buy products or services, they buy what the products and services can do for them. They buy solutions to their problems or answers to their needs.  You don’t own a hammer because it’s an aesthetically pleasing, rather that it will enable you to fix and build things. Deep customer understanding is essential because then you’ll know their needs and work out which of your products / services you can use to solve their problems. You don’t know how to sell to your customers until you fully understand them.

Deep understanding enables you to anticipate customer needs and potentially gain competitive advantage. Henry Ford once said “If I had asked people what they wanted they would have said faster horses”.  Fortunately for us and the automotive industry Ford thought a bit more broadly about how he could satisfy his customer’s need for speed!

What do world class sales organisations do? Miller Heiman looks at a number of metrics on business results to determine who are the best performing sales organizations, like client retention, volume and profitability, growth. They then compare the answers that people from those organizations give to everyone else in the survey. So 97% of world class organisations know definitively why their customers buy from them vs. only 65% of the rest and 90% of the top organisations say their sales people have a solid understanding of customer vs. 46% of the rest. 

Understanding customer needs and framing your “pitch” around it is critical to success.

Flexibility

It’s not always easy to meet or exceed customer needs – you have to be prepared to be flexible. Not just sales people; potentially your whole organisation.

Customer expectations have grown and one size no longer fits all. You used to go to a coffee shop and your choice was black or white. In Starbucks now you can get whatever you personally want.  If you buy a computer from Dell you get to specify the machine, the RAM, ROM, processor speed, type of motherboard etc. Increasingly customers require this degree of tailoring.

Organisations which succeed in creating cost effective, flexible solutions for their customers are the ones that ensure all functions have a great focus on the customer. To achieve that usually requires some kind of cross functional, virtual account teams or great alignment.

What about the world class sales organisations? 90% of them say that their organisation structure allows them to easily adapt to customers’ needs compared with only 34% of the others.

90% of the world class sales organisations say they are fully aligned with marketing and they are twice as likely to collaborate across departments as “the rest”

Discipline

Although it seems a contradiction in terms to talk about flexibility and discipline in the same breath, in successful sales organisations that’s not true.  Managing sales people can be like trying to herd cats, but often characteristics of good sales people are that they are independent, a bit feisty and entrepreneurial in their approach. Do you really want a sales person that would rather sit in the office than hit the road and go see a customer? 

But the environment in which most of us work and sell is increasingly a highly dynamic, sophisticated and complex environment and it is not effective to sell in those circumstances with “back of a fag packet” approach to planning.  You cannot co-ordinate effectively with cross functional colleagues if you don’t have a degree of structure in place.

So successful selling organisations need to have clearly defined processes and selling methodologies, that facilitate rigorous planning, co-ordination and disciplined execution of core business processes like new business development and account management.

This is not CRM. What sales organisations need is a clear definition of WHAT needs to be done. CRM represents the HOW. Many organisations seem to think that CRM software will improve their sales performance.

76% of World class sales organisations consistently use comprehensive prospecting plans compared to only 19% of the rest. 77% have a formal process for top (executive) selling compared to only 19% of the rest.

So are we taking a disciplined and rigorous approach to our core sales processes? And if not how can we achieve that?

If this best practice research is interesting to you, there’s a copy of the executive summary available to download on our website World Class Sales 2011

What lessons can we take from Jobs that can help you as a communicator and speaker?

Jobs had developed his own, very distinctive style that appeared cool, and laid back but at the same time highly polished. He knew how to create impact by keeping it simple. He had an amazing ability to speak with passion and make his ideas understandable and memorable through telling stories and demonstrations.

His Stanford commencement speech in 2005 was a classic and now very poignant example of how he did this.

Jobs Commencement speech

He was quite understated and his speech was simply based on three stories, personal stories from his life, with which he imparted some very powerful messages to the young people he was addressing and indeed to the wider world audience.

He kept it simple with his message and his graphics. He only focused on one idea at a time and did not muddle what he was saying by having busy PowerPoint slides behind him. His slides were simple and elegant .Jobs hardly ever used words on his slides; he let the image paint the picture and reinforced it with stories.

Jobs never let the fact that he was a techie and generally speaking to a tech audience turn his speeches stale with an overload of jargon and unnecessary complexity.  In an age of information overload he knew how to create a clear signal that cut straight through all the noise. He knew that he needed to connect on a human level and speak about what a normal person really wanted out of a product rather than just reciting lists of impressive specs and stats.

His stagecraft was also simple. He usually worked with quite a bare, empty stage, not a fancy corporate set. That way he ensured audience focus was fixed on him and his message. The way Jobs walked around the stage freely, comfortably and relaxed is a lesson that everyone should learn and follow. You never saw him stationary, or with a death grip on a lectern like so many other corporate presenters!

Finally, and this is a lesson everyone should follow, Jobs rehearsed his speeches. You may think looking and sounding relaxed may have come naturally for him but he put in days and hours into rehearsing for every major speech and product launch. Simplicity and clarity are a function of hard work, or as Mark Twain put it, “I would have written you a short letter but I didn’t have time”.

So while much of what history will write about Steve Jobs will focus on his technology innovation and business skills let’s not forget that a large part of his legacy is that of a great communicator from whom we can all learn.

In the miasma of modern communication, (email, instant messaging, text, skype, etc, etc.) how do you  make your message, your request, your requirement heard ? The answer apparently is repetition, repetition, repetition! Orators and public speakers have long known that subtle repetition of your key message is the way to be memorable and to influence your audience.  Advertisers too, know the value of repetition. Their statistics show that we typically need to see or hear an advert 8 times before we remember a brand name, much less what it is or does.

In business however I frequently hear managers saying in an exasperated voice,  ”I don’t understand why it hasn’t happened; I told them to do it”.  Many seem to think that telling people, issuing an instruction or request ought to be enough to get things done. “Why don’t people just do as they are asked, it’s so tiring and wasteful to have to repeat yourself all the time”.  Well perhaps it is, perhaps people should respond first time but the reality is, they don’t. People in business are drowning in data, information, demands, requests and instructions. The few I come across that are not working 60 + hour weeks and handling 100+ emails a day and constant phone calls are the lucky few, the exception to the rule. Most people I encounter are, to a greater or lesser extent, swamped. Against this backdrop it’s not really surprising that people often don’t respond to requests and instructions as well or as promptly as would be ideal.

SO, if you want to be effective you need to work with this reality rather than fight it or rail against it not being “right”.  Some interesting research has recently shown that often managers who work with a virtual team, i.e. with people who don’t actually report to them but work in some form of matrix structure  are frequently more effective than line managers at getting things done. The reason? because whereas line managers have an expectation that when they ask for something it will be done by their subordinates, managers working in a matrix structure don’t have these expectations and hence they make a much greater effort when it comes to communication. They proactively plan to communicate a message several times in several different ways. They recognise that to get things done it’s not just about clarity of message but also about making your presence felt. They know that one request won’t be enough so typically they might send an email and follow it up by a call or meeting and then follow it up again. Although line managers, especially senior managers can command more attention from their subordinates, the truth is that even they need to “over communicate”. The research suggests that this multiple communication approach is the way to be effective in 21^st century business.

So how do you communicate for maximum effectiveness?

You might not like it, it might seem counter intuitive but the research suggests you need to expect to have to communicate one message / communication several times using different channels and different media if you want to guarantee an effective response.

For further insights, click here to read an article from Harvard Business Review.

What do you think are the seven deadly sins of salespeople? Here’s my list, in order of least to most severe.

Ego centricity. Sales people are often too focused on themselves, their bonus, their company, and their products. True success in sales is actually about deep knowledge of the customer, their company, their products their issue sand opportunities. Customer centricity. When you really know that, then it’s about finding a good fit between what you have to offer and what the customer needs.

Chattering. Salespeople talk too much. They do this for a variety of reasons. Some are nervous chatterers who just can’t keep their mouths shut. Others think they know more than the customer so they lecture the customer to death. Many salespeople feel compelled to recite their canned pitch regardless of the customer’s actual interest. Successful selling is more about listening than talking.

Shortsightedness. Salespeople must be short-term thinkers and long-term planners. A short-sighted sales person neglects the future and does not spend time on activities that build his future pipeline. Short sightedness is not to be confused with laziness. Many hardworking salespeople are completely focused on the here and now. Unfortunately, they forget about next quarter and next year. Other salespeople never really think about what will happen if their big deal collapses. They have been lulled into a state of inactivity and could be jolted into reality at any moment.

Tunnel Vision. Many salespeople don’t take the time to understand how customers wider business and business structure. I am continually amazed at the narrow approach many salespeople have about understanding the organisational structure of the companies they call on. When they are asked what a person’s title is, they will answer, “manager,” or something equally nebulous, when they should answer, “manager of application security who reports to the director of application development, who, in turn, reports to the CIO.”

Shallowness. Salespeople who don’t know their product or their market well enough to build customer credibility cannot be expected to drive account strategy. How can you determine your next course of action if you don’t understand the customer’s needs and questions? Worse, in this situation you are completely at the mercy of someone else because another member of your company has to explain how your product works.

Presumptuousness. Assuming information you really don’t know is one of the worst sins for a salesperson. Salespeople who are not certain but make their best guess about who the ultimate and final decision maker is within an account are more than halfway to losing the deal. In the style of Donald Rumsfeld, known unknowns are a good thing! The best people always work on fact and where they don’t know they make hypothesis and verify them.

Ignorance. In sales, ignorance is not bliss. It is the deadliest sin. It’s challenging to be deeply knowledgeable if you’re on the outside looking in. To be truly expert you need a “coach” You need a contact within an account who is telling you what is happening in closed-door meetings, defending you when you are not around, and disseminating propaganda on your behalf. Without this you will most certainly lose.

Your success is your responsibility. The salesperson who avoids committing these seven deadly sins is well on his or her way to becoming a truly great salesperson.

Patricia Seabright consults and teaches on sales effectiveness for clients across the world. Her success is based on her successful 20 year track record in sales and selling.  She is a Miller Heiman consultant.

After months of vitriolic criticism and speculation Andrea Hill, the former chief executive of Suffolk County Council, left her job in July. She was forced out after she was accused of various expenses scandals, misuse of public money and anonymous accusations of bullying. And yet when investigated by the council’s Dismissals and Appeals Committee she was completely exonerated, they said “there was no dishonesty in the claims made and that allegations of bullying and misuse of expenses were unfounded.” Why then was she forced from her job?

The bile that has surrounded the reporting of this case has been extraordinary and is hence an interesting study in communication and use of language

The press disliked Ms Hill, they didn’t warm to her and they blamed her for the unpopular cost saving / outsourcing policy know in Suffolk as “New Strategic Direction”. The antipathy the press whipped up towards Ms Hill was founded on a fundamental inaccuracy. She was a council officer, whose role was not to set policy but to execute the policy given to her by the politicians of the Tory led council. Why was the leader of the council and his cabinet not getting the same or more tirades of abuse? She became a convenient scapegoat for both the politicians and the media. Perhaps because she clearly has a forceful personality and a striking appearance she was a media-useful “whipping boy.” She was proven to have done no wrong yet was essentially forced out of her job for carrying out the politician’s instructions on an unpopular policy.

The media reporting made Ms Hill into a “bogeyman” that was a convenient vehicle for them to purvey the scandal and outrage that sells papers. Let’s just look at a few examples of skilful use of language was used to do that:~ 

“Gagging order”

Ms Hill was accused of presiding over a record level of council, “gagging orders”. This is the term used by the Daily Mail to refer to compromise agreements. As anyone with any business knowledge at all knows, these are totally standard documents, used by almost every HR department, that are part of any severance arrangement and they essentially represent and agreement, by both sides to the terms of the severance / redundancy. All councils have to make cuts and make redundancies so a rise in compromise agreements is inevitable and probably reflected in many other councils if not all.

The use of the term “gagging order” is an inflammatory phrase that was used to imply something unusual and untoward without having to prove or justify that accusation.

  “A grotesquely over-rewarded…repulsive woman”.

This was the phrase used by Janet Street-Porter to describe Ms Hill. Where were the facts?  Repulsive? Ms Hill said in a statement she has never met Street-Porter so how can she make that judgement? Over-rewarded? Ms Hill was at least responsible for running a multi-million pound enterprise. Street-Porter, (who has homes in London, Yorkshire and Kent but not Suffolk!)  has become rich on the basis of little more than being a “personality” with an unusual accent and a line in opinionated statements. No facts here, just pure attention seeking, headline grabbing inaccuracy.

“Smiling and posing around”

In 2009 (not 2010 or 2011) a photographer was engaged to take pictures of Ms Hill and all the senior managers at the council, for PR and media use, in what is a totally standard practice for virtually all businesses. Check out any business/ council website for evidence of that.

The Telegraph positioned this story thus:~  “At a time when libraries are being closed and school lollipop crossings scrapped, Andrea Hill, the chief executive of Suffolk county council, hired a photographer to take a series of flattering images of her. The pictures, taken by Robert Johns, a freelance photographer, show Mrs Hill, 46, smiling and posing around the council’s headquarters in Ipswich. “

The phrase “smiling and posing around” tacitly implies that MS Hill was behaving like a self obsessed celebrity. What did the Telegraph expect, a picture of the chief executive scowling?! The wording also implied that it was some kind of unusual, personal project driven by narcissism instead of it being totally standard part of any communication department’s requirements of senior managers.  In that paragraph of 57 words, the use of 6 carefully calculated words created a totally biased and inaccurate message.

Whistle blower

Ms Hill was initially suspended “after an anonymous whistle blowing complaint, believed to include allegations of her “domineering management style”, according to the Guardian.

The phrase “whistle blower” is an interesting one. The meaning of the phrase is a brave individual who stands up to corrupt authority to expose wrong doing. Therefore by using the term “Whistle Blower”, it implies very strongly that there has been wrong doing.  Whatever happened to” innocent until proven guilty”? How different would it have sounded if the Guardian article had been strictly factual and said, “Ms Hill was being investigated following anonymous allegations on a number of topics”. As it transpired the allegations were dismissed as unfounded and far from being the work of a courageous crusader, were probably the output of a cowardly anonymous individual with a personal grudge.

This whole case illustrates the way language is used to manipulate public opinion and politics. (Note also how James Murdoch at the parliamentary committee refused to use the phrase phone hacking but “illegal phone message interception” instead, in the hope that it sounded less damning!)

For sure the outsourcing policies in Suffolk were unpopular and public opinion wanted it reversed but it could be argued that media witch hunt of Ms Hill that forced her from her job was wrong and indeed threatens cherished British principles of accuracy, fairness and innocence until proven guilty. While it might be standard media practice, this scale of victimisation not an edifying spectacle for our democracy. As a keen observer of communication and language it’s an interesting case of the power of words to influence and shape opinion, one which we would all do well to learn from.

I began to wonder why suddenly there has been a move by many of my clients toward this global coherence and the simple answer lies in the fact that their customers have been demanding it and have been pushing their suppliers to work with them in a globally co-ordinated way. What has driven the end customers to demand this? I believe it’s the twin effects of rapidly accelerating globalisation and the effects of the global economic crisis that has caused businesses to look at efficiencies that they can achieve around the world by working in an holistic way. Customers have been saying to their suppliers, “I don’t want to have to deal with multiple different contacts around the world and to have to do different things to achieve the same effect in different geographies.” 

 The challenge for my clients and I suspect many other businesses has been, to truly operate on a globally cohesive basis is a lot easier said than done. What I’ve seen happen is that businesses will look at their organisation chart and start re-adjusting structures. They will change reporting lines and alter a few people’s titles to Global Vice president of XYZ and consider the job done.

Then gradually comes the realisation that this isn’t enough. To make a global organisation work in practice, rather than on paper requires so much more than tinkering with the structures.

The real challenge of global organisations is how to communicate and co-ordinate to overcome the issues created by different languages, different time zones, different cultures, and different priorities. When I was working for a British Insurance company on a cross divisional project on establishing consistent sales methodology, it proved to be more than that particular organisation could handle just to try and achieve common language in that group .How much harder is it to achieve a common and consistent approach than facilitates co-operation, teamwork and synergy in multinational groups?

I believe the key is realising (or perhaps accepting?) that that change takes time and resource .Changing some lines on an org chart and sending out an email or two is not enough to create effective change and cohesive global organisations. It takes clear vision, robust, clear and common process, high calibre skills and masses of iterative communication.

Strategy is dead!

So think some within the corporate world who see the scope of change as vast and the pace of change as exponential and believe therefore long term planning is no longer relevant, but is it true?

In today’s world, “Shift Happens”, ( check out the video on You Tube) Rapid change is endemic. Undergraduates studying technology degrees find their first year studies out of date by the time they graduate, companies rise from start-ups to global leviathan’s in the space of 10 years and the top 10 demanded jobs in 2011 , did not exist in 2004.

 I’ve heard it argued that against this background, that building strategy is anachronistic, a thing of the past that doesn’t reflect the realities of the current business situation. Things change too quickly, making planning, let alone planning strategically, redundant.

But is it really a lost art alongside blacksmithing and making barrels? 

Maybe the statement itself betrays a lack of understanding of what strategy really is and maybe if we understood what strategy really means then maybe we’d be less keen to write its obituary.I’m not sure that the dictionary definition really helps us understand much better;

Strategy; Noun

1. A plan of action or policy designed to achieve a major or overall aim.

2. The art of planning and directing overall military operations and movements in a war or battle

 I was recently talking to a gifted strategy consultant who gave me a much more helpful definition of what strategy really means, certainly as it applied to the commercial world (rather than the battlefield!)

Strategy is about defining what you mean to your customer.

Now that is something constant, something immutable while the world churns around you.

 It’s not about what or how you specifically deliver that at any point in time, it’s not tied to a particular product, technology or service. Neither is it a business plan or action plan. Getting these muddled up is what creates the fog around the concept of strategy.  Strategy once properly arrived at should stand the test of time over 3 years or more.  A good strategy sets direction, plots out a course across the vast, changeable and turbulent ocean. It is a rudder on the corporate ship that enables a business to steer so that the ship arrives at the right destination (or the very least, the right continent!)

Business plans and action plans need to be dynamic and constantly changing and reacting to the rapidly changing scenario’s , just  like  a boat having to tack backwards and forwards inevitably getting blown off course and having to react to the weather.

Having a strategy that creates this clarity about what we mean to our customers and building flexible, mutable action plans around that is absolutely necessary. It represents competitive advantage. ”  To slightly (!) plagiarise Rudyard Kipling, “If you can keep you head while everybody else about you is losing theirs.. then you’ll sell more”. So many commercial people and their leaders are operating in a constant fire fight mode, where all they can manage is that days crises. Their attention span is minimal and is constantly broken by text messages, IMs, phone calls and ever-present emails.

 Necessarily then the quality of their thinking is not, and cannot be that high. The result is a reactive, knee jerk approach that leaves the organisation like a corporate version of Alice in Wonderland, “if you don’t know where you are going, any road will get you there” and it will probably lead you round in circles and down rabbit holes.

Woolworths in the UK, went out of business because it could not find or maintain a clear strategy. What did it mean to its customers? a music store ? a sweet shop? a home wear store, a clothes shop? If you’re not clear what you’re all about as a business, how can you expect to create a successful identity with your customers?

Contrast this with someone who has a clear vision of what they mean to their customers and organises their time and resources to focus proactively around that. Imagine the power and clarity that can bring.

Apple are about delivering elegant design and the ultimate user experience. That doesn’t change whether they’re providing you with a phone, a music player, a PC or a music library.

Google are about organising the world‘s information and make it universally accessible and useful. They do search engines, you tube, ad words analytics, maps, navigation, calendars … I could go on. Their broad strategy remains the same no matter what the particular area.

John Lewis (the UK retailer, founded as a partnership in 1929) talks about its strategy as “Our purpose is ‘the happiness of all our members, through their worthwhile, satisfying employment in a successful business’… With this in mind, our strategy is based on three interdependent objectives Partners, customers and profit” They focus on this whether they are selling food (via Waitrose) or furniture and home wear (via the department stores) or insurance (via Greebee). This clarity of strategy has enabled them to grow and thrive throughout the last 82 years of seismic change in retailing.

So here’s the message;~

At least once every few years STOP, get off the reactive merry go round and spend quality time thinking about your strategy, get clarity, get direction then use that to inform the tactical decisions you need to make on a daily basis.

 Whether it’s strategy for an account, a department or an entire business; strategy is still relevant and more critical than ever.

If, in the world of the blind, the one eyed man is king, maybe in the world of “too pushed to plan, too tired to think” the people and organisations that make time to create robust strategy  and action plans are the winners in the global game of business.

When I work with clients to help them hone the effectiveness of their sales operations, there’s usually a good deal of focus on the importance of understanding customer needs, about being customer centric and finding ways to add value to your customers.

Having just got back from a business trip to Düsseldorf with the lovely Ryan Air, lets evaluate how they did. Did they meet my needs? Did they put my requirements at the heart of their operation? Did they add value to me ? 

Did they heck as like ( as they say up north) or Categorically Not ( as they say down south)

Firstly did they understand and meet my needs?
I wanted to go to Düsseldorf, Germany. The airport that Ryan Air label as Düsseldorf is in fact an hour away from Düsseldorf, it is virtually in Holland and it costs c 100 euro in a taxi to get to the aforementioned German city. Why are these people are not thoroughly sued under the trades description act?! They certainly deserve to be!

Secondly, were they customer centric in how they operate? Last night they began loading passengers before the plane touched down. This meant that we all had tickets checked and were led out on to the tarmac, there  to wait for 15 minutes, in the rain, while they stopped the plane and unloaded the previous passengers so that they can maximise their plane usage. All about their requirements while the fare paying passengers are herded around and treated like cattle.

Thirdly did they add value to me ?
It was 9pm after a long 2 days. I was cold, wet and not best pleased. I just wanted to relax and get home. Relax? On a Ryan Air flight? You must be joking! Every few minutes you are bombarded with loud, cheesy and generally over the top advertising messages, starting from almost the minute you get on board, with the advert for Ryan Air in association with J2O inviting you to order a drink and “Chill-ax”!!  P.Leeeeze ! Other adverts for “delicious” snacks and sandwiches, scratch cards, duty free, train tickets and hire cars followed.  The grand finale was the unbelievably annoying, “diddly-de-de -da” fanfare that announced “yet another on time arrival” (only achieved because they schedule 2 hours for a flight that takes one …!!)

I personally am now such a strong anti-sponsor of Ryan Air that I will quite happily drive 3 times as far and pay twice as much, almost anything to avoid that truly , madly, hideously awful experience that is Ryan Air.

The lost generation

This was a recent headline reporting the news that youth unemployment has hit record levels, with 1 in 5 young people 16-24 years old, now unemployed. What does this mean to the sales and marketing industry?

What can the sales and marketing industry do to help ensure that they can find suitable recruits? And what can they do to help cultivate core skills in young people that can help their fitness for work?

Face it; we are no longer an industrial or manufacturing economy. As a nation the UK doesn’t make much anymore but we do consume a lot and in order to satisfy the needs of those consumer we have to sell and market products and services. So the good news is that sales and marketing is a core industry of the 21^st century. So what are young people doing to take advantage of this and to equip themselves for the 21^st century work landscape? Sadly the answer is not a lot.

Did you know that every year there are more people training to be hairdressers in the UK than there are actual working hairdressers? Did you know that there are about 370,000 student doing theatre studies which actually is more than the total number of people employed in the whole of the UK entertainment industry, including the actors, staff of cinemas, radio and TV companies and computer games manufacturers!  One college principle in Yorkshire said of courses in her college, “beauty is full to bursting, construction is full to bursting but the areas where there are jobs, in business, sales and marketing, IT and logistics, there still plenty of capacity there”

Why then are young people selecting education that is very unlikely to help them secure their future financial well being? Why do they seem stuck in a gender stereo-typical time warp that says boys do construction and girls, hair and beauty? Why are they not seeking out education that equips them for the realities of the 21^st century job landscape, education that gives them more pragmatic and commercial skills?

The CBI and employers organisations complain regularly about the lack of core commercial awareness , business skills and poor communication skills in young people, this is often seen as major contributor to the worrying high levels of youth unemployment and the rise of a structural levels of so called NEET (not in employment, training, education or training) young people  . Training and experience in sales and marketing offers young people a skill set that is almost universally applicable to all industries from retail through to real estate from software to shipping. Its universality means it’s a gateway to a huge range of jobs, at many different levels and even self employment options.

So again we need to ask why young people are not flooding into sales and marketing as a career of choice.

Can we attribute it to the young people themselves, or could it also be a failing of the sales and marketing industry to market itself as an attractive career choice?

So what do young people think of when you ask them about sales? Many years ago I got a very clear indication of what many graduates thought of a career in sales. I remember being a new recruit for Procter and Gamble and manning a stand at several milk round type recruitment fairs at various universities and watching as my colleagues on the marketing stand were mobbed while I felt like “Norma-no-mates” on the sales stand! Clearly sales were perceived by graduates as un-cool. Perhaps too many stereo types of Del boys and second hand car salesmen, created a very negative perception of sales. The reality of much of today’s sales operations, (sophisticated national and global account management, business management, category and trade marketing management) may be a million miles from the stereo types but yet they persist and effect young people’s thinking. Has the sales industry done anything to address that perception?

If we look at another group of young people those who are NEET (not in employment education or training) what are their perceptions of a career in sales?  One of many issues for that group is lack of awareness of any role or industry that is outside the limited sphere of their immediate experience. Often from challenged family backgrounds this means that they’ve not had much opportunity to experience life beyond their town or their borough. What can be done to help raise the awareness of these young people that careers and opportunities exist for them in sales and marketing? Raising awareness and aspirations for this group might be enough to help them make more practical choices of college courses and qualifications.

Physician, heal thyself! Could it be that we in the sales and marketing industry need to market our profession better? Could it be that we are doing a poor job at selling the benefits of the industry to young people?

Could it be that we need better PR and we need to evangelise the profession much more than we are doing currently?