Words That Don't Work

The language changes. Every language does. So it's always risky to go around saying which words are "good," and which ones are "bad." In a generation or two, those opinions might look pretty stupid.
However, the risk of looking stupid hasn't stopped me before, so here goes. In this message, I'm offering some observations on words that just don't work.

---

WORDS THAT DON'T WORK

Some years ago I came across a column written by a pundit who was criticizing the sloppy way people were using language. He was writing back in the '50's, but his points seemed pretty relevant. Then he started listing the newly minted words he thought were particularly obnoxious: supermarket, briefcase, freeway.

Uh, oh. Those sound pretty good to me. Back when they were new, they must have grated on his finely tuned ear, but the fact is they filled a need in our language and have stuck around.

Languages change in weird and unpredictable ways. One of the words that I personally think doesn't work is "impact" when used as a verb. For example:

The new equipment impacted our productivity.

To my brain, "impact" sounds like a noun and the only connection I can make to its use as a verb is when we are describing what happens to people's wisdom teeth or their colons. In neither case is the image particularly persuasive. I would rewrite the sentence to say "The new equipment improved [or affected] our productivity" or "The new equipment had an impact on our productivity."

But I have to admit that lots and lots of smart people are using "impact" as a verb without wincing, so maybe it has changed and I'm just out of touch.

It's still worth worrying about, though. Using words incorrectly can undercut our credibility when they appear in an important proposal, sales letter, or e-mail. And using words that the customer misunderstands can prolong our sales process and sometimes create other problems. In fact, we see lots of proposals that are damaged by the author's use of fancy words, or their use of internal jargon, or their misuse of ordinary words. (By the way, my examples will all be drawn from American English, but our readers who are using the Queen's version or who are doing business in another language entirely can probably attest that the same kinds of problems occur around them, too.)

Fancy words are the three- and four-syllable, Latinate beauties that people like to toss in just so you'll think they have an Ivy League education. (After all, isn't that what the ads on the radio promise?) For example, for some reason people love the word "parameters." They'll write something like "during the needs assessment phase of the project, we will examine all the parameters of the problem to determine timeline and cost."

Okay, but is that what they really mean? A "parameter" is a variable or a mathematical limit. They might literally mean that. But a lot of people seem to think "parameter" means something like "scope" or "dimensions." Maybe they're confusing it with the word "perimeter," which means the outer boundary of an area.

To me it would be clearer if they said, "we will examine the problem carefully to determine timeline and cost." Or, instead of "carefully," how about "thoroughly?" Or, "we will examine all aspects of the problem to determine timeline and cost."

As Thoreau said, simplify, simplify, simplify.

When people use their own jargon without thinking about it, they're making a natural human mistake, which is to assume that since they use this language every day at work, everybody else understands it, too. Of course, they often find that when they go home at the end of a busy day they struggle to explain what the heck they do for a living in terms their loved ones can understand.

For example, I remember seeing a proposal letter years ago written by an AT&T account executive, who told the customer that his new phone lines "will be terminated on June 15."

The account executive was surprised when the customer called up in a rage, complaining that AT&T was proposing to remove his lines before they had even been installed! It seems that "to terminate" in telecom jargon means the exact opposite of what it means to the rest of us. It means to bring the line in so that it can be connected to the phone set or switch. I guess that means that if The Terminator worked for a phone company, he would really be an installer, right?

You get the point. We just get so used to our own jargon we forget to make the little translations necessary for clarity.

Finally, I'll end my rant by mentioning some words that people use incorrectly. They don't ruin the document, they don't necessarily create a lot of confusion, but they do produce that little snort that makes us feel the author is just slightly dumber than we are. Most of us enjoy discovering that we're cleverer than another person, but the next reaction is to wonder if we want to choose this individual as our vendor.

AFFECT/EFFECT: Affect is a verb. Effect is a noun. There are very specialized cases where that rule changes, but they won't apply to you unless you're a psychiatrist or a corporate attorney. "His decision affected us." "The invention had an effect on our business plan."

DATA IS/DATA ARE: Everybody who knows a smattering of Latin will argue that "data" is plural. "Datum" is the singular form. Therefore, "data are" seems correct. Well, no, not really. I guess if you're writing a proposal to the Pope in Latin, that's the way you should do it, but if you're writing in English, you need to be aware that we have what are called "collective nouns." These are words like "jury," "team," or "sales force," that represent a group of individuals but which almost always take a singular noun: "The jury is sequestered in the Brown Hotel." "The team is flying to Chicago for a weekend series." "The sales force is gathering in Orlando for training." The word "data" is that kind of noun. Therefore, correct usage in English calls for a singular verb form: "The data is stored in a relational database."

SERVE/SERVICE: I saw a proposal in which a systems integration company promised, "Every facet of our company is oriented to servicing you, the customer." Does that sound odd to you? I'm not sure I want to be "serviced," although I might try it once just to see if I like it.

SIMPLE/SIMPLISTIC: The word "simple" means uncomplicated. The word "simplistic" means, essentially, "stupid." (It really means something like oversimplifying to the point of distortion, but "stupid" is close enough.) Anyway, what kind of impression does a cover letter make when it proudly tells the customer, "We have carefully developed a simplistic solution to assure rapid deployment."

Okay, thanks for letting me complain. I feel better now. And if there are some usages that bug you, go ahead and send them to me. We'll commiserate about how the world is going you know where and people just don't know how to use the language any more!

What Matters the Most in Winning

If you want to improve a process, it helps to know which parts of the process matter the most. To improve our proposals process, we need to know which steps count the most toward winning.
That's what this message focuses on. Based on our research and interviews with hundreds of evaluators and decision makers, here's what really matters.

---

WHAT MATTERS THE MOST IN WINNING

Here's a painless little quiz. Glance through the following list of proposal attributes and put a mental check mark next to the three factors that you think will have the most impact on whether or not you win.

1. Accuracy of the content
2. Addressing the customer's needs and objectives
3. Addressing the requirements of the RFP
4. Case studies / success stories
5. Clarity of the writing
6. Completeness
7. Compliance
8. Conciseness
9. Cost justification / ROI / Life cycle cost analysis
10. Facilities section
11. Graphics
12. Management plan
13. Pricing
14. Prior experience
15. Project plan
16. References
17. Resumes
18. Technical innovation
19. Technical plan
20. Vendor's history / capabilities / experience

Yeah, yeah, yeah, I know. They're all important. And depending on the deal, what matters most may change. But based on 25 years in the proposal biz and based on interviews with dozens of people who make their living evaluating proposals, here are the three that seem to matter the most:

1. Addressing the customer's needs
2. Addressing the requirements of the RFP
3. Cost justification / ROI /Life cycle cost analysis

People want to know that they're getting what they need, that you're going to deliver it in a way that conforms to their expectations and technical requirements and that will offer good business value. The other stuff? Background support. Substantiation. Sometimes a reason to eliminate a vendor. But ultimately not as important.

Here's an anecdote that's related to this quiz. A few years ago a company that hauls garbage surveyed 400 sales reps, asking what the most important factor was in winning a deal. Overwhelmingly, the answer from the sales people was: Price.
Meanwhile, the company surveyed 400 customers and potential customers, asking the same question. The number one answer: Reliability. In fact, price appeared sixth on the list for customers.

The company's proposals, of course, were focusing primarily on price. And even though they had a great story to tell on the issue of reliability, with several differentiators that set them apart in the industry, it wasn't being emphasized.

It's tough not to feel that price is the primary factor in a competitive market. But sometimes we set ourselves up for that kind of pressure by not offering an alternative vision.

Where's the Content?

Remember the old ad for Wendy's hamburgers where Clara Peller would lift the bun, squint at what she saw, and then bellow, "Where's the beef?"

Great ad. Good question. It's one that senior executives often ask themselves when they see canned presentations or boilerplate proposals from sales people. But unlike Clara, they typically react by dismissing the sales person or tuning out of the presentation.

So here it is: A definition of the exact kind of content you need to provide to make a senior executive feel they're getting some substance.

---

WHERE'S THE CONTENT?

A study conducted by the University of North Carolina's Kenan-Flagler School of Business interviewed hundreds of CEOs, Presidents, and General Managers to find out what it takes for them to give a sales person a hearing.

The most common answer: "Demonstrate an in-depth knowledge of my business."

This matches well with the advice Mack Hanan gave to professional sales people more than a decade ago. Hanan, one of the earliest proponents of selling solutions instead of products, said that to gain your customer's trust, their long-term loyalty, and a willingness on their part to pay you a higher margin than your competitors ask for, you must demonstrate three kinds of knowledge:

First, you have to know all about your own stuff. You need to come across as an expert in the things you're selling. That makes sense, of course. People don't want to listen to somebody who's unprepared or ill informed.

Second, you have to know a lot about the customer's business, what they make or provide, how they operate, what their goals and objectives are, what they value, how they are approaching the market, and anything else you can uncover. That matches up pretty well with what UNC's survey revealed.

The third thing you need to know? How your customer interacts with their customers. The relationship between your customer and their customers is the nexus of value. That's where profits are generated. If you can pinpoint ways to improve that interaction, you're delivering content that can translate directly to the bottom line.

So that's what content is all about. It's not enough to just provide information about your products and services. You really have to leverage that information into "working knowledge"--insight that creates value.

Selling Fast in a Slow Economy

The economy has slowed down. There's no question about that.

But you need to keep selling, right? So what's the secret?

I think we can learn an important lesson from one of the pioneers of human psychology, Abraham Maslow.

---

SELLING FAST IN A SLOW ECONOMY

When the economy slows down, selling becomes more difficult. People feel vulnerable and they become reluctant to spend money or allocate resources to anything new. From a psychological standpoint, they are moving down Maslow's hierarchy of needs toward the basics-the survival issues.

Maslow believed that when any two needs were demanding satisfaction at the same time, it will be the more "prepotent" (to use Maslow's jargon), the more biologically urgent, that will take priority. Needs that are less prepotent are pushed into the background, delayed, or ignored. A person who is dying of hunger forgets about food when he or she is deprived of oxygen, for example.

So what does this mean regarding our customers? It means that because they feel threatened in a declining economy, they will tend to hoard what they have. They will pull back from completing mere "transactions." They will be reluctant to exchange the organizational equivalent of oxygen-money-for any product or service that doesn't meet their basic needs. As a result, when you try to sell a product or service for a particular price, the customer may perceive doing business with you as purely transactional. And they want to minimize the number of transactions they complete in order to hold on to scarce resources.

There is some good news, though. In a down economy, decision makers are eager to find solutions. They want to do those things that will help them cope with changing circumstances, that will meet their basic business needs for revenue and stability.

Selling solutions is consultative, not transactional. Selling solutions requires:

• a broad business perspective
• alignment with the customer's objectives
• an ability to demonstrate value that matters to the customer

If you ask most sales people, they will tell you that they are writing proposals and delivering presentations that are solution oriented. But in reality they are not. The customer perceives their offers as transactional and pulls back from making a decision to buy.

Why do many solution-oriented proposals and presentations fail to communicate themselves that way to the customer? They fail because they are NOT client centered, value based, or decision oriented.

Often, sales people resort to "clone and go" proposals. They think that it is enough to provide a boilerplate, "checkbox" proposal, one that focuses mainly on their products or their company. But to be seen as a solution-oriented proposal, the document must focus on the customer's needs-the most "prepotent" ones, to use Maslow's term-and link whatever is being recommended to meeting those needs.

Similarly, many proposals do not contain any value proposition. They present a price, but they don't contain any calculation of return on investment, of reductions in operating costs, in reduced cost of ownership, or any other measure that will is linked to survival and coping in a tough economy.

Finally, many proposals are not organized to help the customer make a decision. They tend to be information dumps, and they fail to differentiate the offer from alternatives and fail to provide grounds for moving forward with the decision.

To sell faster in a slow economy, we need to make sure we focus on what matters to the customer, spell out the concrete benefit they obtain from doing what we recommend, and present our recommendations using a structural pattern that leads logically to a decision.