Selling Is Selling
The notion that there are fundamental differences between B2B and B2C selling is fake and silly. It is one business to say that you specialize in one type of sales rather than the other, but that in itself does not make a fantastic difference or a question of a fantastic divide. For example when people question me about the work I do, I say that I work with B2B sales teams to help them sell better. That’s not to say that I couldn’t help B2C reps increase, further, I would argue that the same techniques I lecture can be used by their B2B cousins.
To me the question is a lot like asking, who is more of an sportsperson, a hockey player or a football player? (it would be uncommon if I questioned baseball eh?). The reality is that both are accomplished, bring discipline and physical fitness, skill and methodology to their specific success. While they do things in a uncommon way, on uncommon playing fields, the business that makes each successful in their sport has more in common than being based on fantastic differences.
If in fact you buy into the fact that people buy from people, then it follows that that both B2C and B2B are centered around selling to people. People do not dramatically change between 9 to 5, only to reinvent their buying habits at 5:01 pm. (Although I once worked for someone who can best be described as a 9 to 5 Republican, becoming a Democrat the second the car left the lot, a lot of issues.) Whether you are in B2B or B2C, we often end up selling to individuals who can at the same time be consumers and/or a business buyer at the same time.
What makes them uncommon, and therefore requires sellers to change their approach, can be boiled down to three things:
1. How the sale is initiated and where it is executed – Most will argue that the difference is that since the in most cases the B2C experience is started when the consumer comes to you store or site, and is therefore initiated by the buyer, and is executed on the seller’s turf. While in B2B, the sales in most often started by the seller, usually executed on the buyer’s turf. Add to this the fact that in most instances in a B2C, there is the perception that the buyer self learned the need; while in B2B it is the seller. (Although, I am worried that one of the causes of Sales 2.0 is that it is giving some lesser and bone idle sellers the impression that B2B selling is also becoming self give).
But the above is not absolute, even consumers are prompted by publicity, and other messaging to learn a need before they take the drive to a store or web site. Just reckon of the effect of repeated ads on TV, web or other outlets. A excellent marketing campaign can make demand that would rival any fantastic B2B cold call. As an extreme example, just look at the drug ads during any of the major network’s evening news, encouraging self-diagnosis, and playing doctor in the process of making demand. While just the other day, I swear I saw my dog experience Restless Leg Syndrome, or maybe he was dreaming that he is chasing a rabbits, hard to tell, better take him to the doctor and get a free try out of pills, take sufficient of the freebies and you are a customer for life.
2. The nature of the buy – Again, here the perception is that B2B is all about buys that are “mission critical”, while B2C is seen as being more discretionary. Yet one of the greatest reasons B2B sales organizations have been challenged over the last couple of years is their failure to go their offering out of the “discretionary” camp. As companies cut back, the first business to go is “discretionary spend”, if reps and companies had done a excellent job in moving their offering into the “mission critical” reputation before 2008, they would not have been that terribly impacted. The fact that nearly 50% of reps failed to make quota, it would suggest that there is a lot of work to be done on that front, and therefore not that huge a difference between the realities of B2B and B2C.
3. Length of sale cycle – Yes, in general, I suppose that there is a much shorter cycle in B2C than in B2B. But I suspect that has to do with the size of the buy that a fantastic difference in the selling. When you look at huge ticket items, home, cars, appliances, the cycle stretches, the reason the rep may not see it that way is that they don’t see the entire cycle, just the part they are presented. If a buyer goes to five stores over five weekends their cycle is five weeks. This is why many B2C sales people work so hard not to let the buyer out cause they know they will not be there to represent their product or view at the next stage. At the same time many B2B sales that are transactional and have small (small) price tags, likely have as small a cycle as some B2C sales.
What does make the two more similar than not is the underlying process. The process we deliver to our B2B clients, EDGE – Engage – Discovery – Gain Commitment – Do, can easily be utilised in B2C sales as well. Regardless of the nature of the buy, the buyer has to be engaged, there needs to be a process of mutual discovery, a commitment gained that it is the right product, and then both sides have to do to make it work.
Framing things in the context of B2B vs. B2C makes for excellent headlines, but has small sensibleness in making for a mutually satisfying sale or buy. If you question me, B2C vs. B2B is just BS