Science Based

Today many progressive sales organization around the world have recognized and measured the costly consequences of sales call reluctance. They have already put programs in place to aggressively counter call reluctance and have adopted diagnostic procedures to identify the risk before they experience a shutdown.

An effective intervention program always begins with an accurate diagnosis. Typically, our modern diagnoses originate from sophisticated, computer scored call reluctance test. Sales training departments find the added diagnostic precision provided by these assessments to be invaluable aid.

Within our methods, we strive to clarify and explain to managers and to other decision makers not to over value buzz words like ego or dominance. Instead, by using our assessment tools and at later stage behavioral change programs we help decision makers to get the answers on: How Much? How Soon? What Cost?

How much money is this individual likely to make for company?

How long is this individual likely to take to produce at that level?

What is it going to cost company to get that production within that time frame, in terms of additional management time, effort and money? 

What can you do? 

The best way to verify scientific claims is not with reams of paper, columns of data, or request of validity. As sales management professionals you have a better solution available. You can test out reasonable sales development programs by purchasing a few and trying them out in pilot studies before signing your name or committing your company to long-term purchases. We will welcome opportunities to demonstrate the utility of our programs in your company. When a program works, it earns more money for your company than it cost. You should continue using it, expanding its use throughout your organization. If it doesn’t, trash it. Ignore scientific credibility, academic degrees, or pretenders groveling at your feet. Junk it! That’s how we think business decisions should be made. Science can play a role, but pious appeals to scientific credibility alone should never be the deciding factor.

>