Expansion joints
Sales Assessment Results
33
Needs Improvement
10 questions
Maximum score: 100
Completed in
Let's get real here. Your performance on this test was underwhelming, to say the least. With an average score of 3.3, you’ve got some serious work to do. You repeatedly missed the mark on engaging with prospects and understanding their concerns. Your responses were often shallow, lacking the depth needed to build trust and showcase your product's unique value. You seem to struggle with active listening and curiosity, which are crucial in sales. When prospects express concerns, it's your job to dive deeper, ask questions, and tailor your responses to address their specific needs.
You did show some awareness of benefits in a couple of responses, but without concrete examples or data to back them up, it all falls flat. You need to work on a solution-focused approach that emphasizes collaboration and understanding. Consider studying consultative selling and solution-focused selling techniques. These will help you engage more effectively with prospects and build the relationships necessary for closing deals.
Here’s your coaching moment: remember, sales is not about pushing a product; it’s about solving problems and making connections. Next time, don’t just respond—engage. Ask questions, listen actively, and then respond thoughtfully. Make every interaction a chance to learn and connect. It’s time to step up your game.
Question Breakdown
1.
3
/ 10Question:
"We currently have a vendor we trust for our expansion joint needs; how do you differentiate from them?"
Answer:
We have done 50,000 lft and have never had a call back.
Feedback:
The response lacks depth and fails to address the prospect's concern about trust and differentiation. Simply stating a metric (50,000 lft with no callbacks) does not convey a strong value proposition or establish a connection with the prospect. Instead, it would be more effective to explore the reasons behind the trust in their current vendor and then highlight specific advantages or unique offerings your company provides. A more consultative approach, perhaps asking about their current satisfaction or any pain points with their existing vendor, could foster a better dialogue. Overall, the response could benefit from a solution-focused approach and more active listening to acknowledge the prospect's loyalty to their vendor.
Score: 3
2.
5
/ 10Question:
"Given our strict budget for this fiscal year, can you justify the cost of your solution against our expected return?"
Answer:
Yes absolutely, we on average can double the life of concrete, by simply sealing the expansion joints.
Feedback:
The response does provide a benefit related to the product, which is good. However, it could greatly improve by addressing the budget concern more directly and providing a detailed justification of the cost versus the expected return. The salesperson could have asked follow-up questions to understand more about the prospect's specific budget limitations and needs. Additionally, including examples or data points to back up the claim about doubling the life of concrete would strengthen the argument. Overall, it lacks depth in exploring the value and implications of the investment, and it didn't demonstrate a collaborative approach to explore the prospect's needs further.
3.
3
/ 10Question:
"We’ve had issues with previous installations; how can you guarantee a smooth implementation this time?"
Answer:
We have zero issues executing our service. And can guarantee same day installs.
Feedback:
The response lacks depth and fails to address the prospect's specific concern about previous installation issues. Simply stating 'zero issues' is not substantiated and may come off as dismissive. A more effective approach would include asking questions to understand the past issues better, demonstrating empathy, and providing a tailored solution that reassures the prospect about the implementation process. Additionally, it would be beneficial to include a closing technique that invites further discussion or questions. Overall, the response does not effectively communicate value or engage the prospect.
4.
5
/ 10Question:
"Our team is already overwhelmed with ongoing projects; how would you ensure that transitioning to your solution won't distract from our priorities?"
Answer:
We are a seamless option. We facilitate the labor and materials and manage the project to ensure you are able to take care of your priorities.
Feedback:
The response addresses the objection by emphasizing a seamless transition and project management support, which is good. However, it lacks depth in exploring the prospect's specific concerns and doesn't ask any follow-up questions to clarify or show curiosity about their current projects. The tone is somewhat bland and could be more engaging. Including concrete examples or case studies could demonstrate value more effectively. Overall, while it touches on a solution-focused approach, it misses an opportunity for active listening and collaboration.
5.
3
/ 10Question:
"Can you provide specific examples of how your expansion joints comply with the new industry regulations?"
Answer:
We use an industry leading proprietary silicone that last 50 years.
Feedback:
The response does not directly address the specific request for examples of compliance with industry regulations. Instead, it focuses on the durability of the silicone used in the expansion joints, which, while relevant, does not provide the requested information. There is a lack of clarity in communication as it does not connect the product feature to regulatory compliance. Additionally, there was no attempt to ask follow-up questions to explore the prospect's concerns further or to build rapport. This response misses an opportunity to showcase how the product meets regulatory standards, which is crucial for the prospect's decision-making process. Overall, it demonstrates a lack of solution-focused approach and curiosity about the prospect’s needs.
Score: 3
6.
2
/ 10Question:
"I’m not entirely convinced we need to change our current solution; what data do you have to support the need for this upgrade?"
Answer:
Your current solution cost the same and last 48 years less than our method.
Feedback:
The response fails to effectively address the prospect's concern by not providing a well-rounded explanation or supporting data. Simply stating that their current solution lasts less time doesn't clarify why an upgrade is beneficial, nor does it include any supportive data or real value exploration that the prospect is seeking. Moreover, it lacks curiosity and doesn't engage the prospect in a way that builds rapport or invites further conversation. A more effective approach would have included questions to understand their specific needs or pain points better, while also presenting compelling evidence or case studies that illustrate the value of the upgrade. Overall, the communication is unclear and doesn't foster a collaborative discussion.
Score: 2/10 for minimal acknowledgment of the objection but lacking depth and clarity in the response.
7.
2
/ 10Question:
"What kind of training and support will you provide post-purchase, especially during the implementation phase?"
Answer:
Our product requires zero maintenance. This no need for eduction post purchase.
Feedback:
The response fails to adequately address the prospect's concern about training and support post-purchase. Simply stating that the product requires zero maintenance does not acknowledge the importance of customer support during implementation. The salesperson could have provided reassurance by outlining any available resources, such as manuals, online tutorials, or customer service support. There is also a lack of engagement and curiosity towards the prospect's needs, which undermines the collaborative approach. Overall, this response lacks effectiveness and clarity, leading to a poor impression of customer care.
Score: 2
8.
3
/ 10Question:
"I’m concerned about how your product integrates with our existing systems; can you elaborate on the technical compatibility?"
Answer:
It’s will outlast and look better than your existing system. Our silicone is capable of stretching more than %600.
Feedback:
The response lacks depth in addressing the customer's specific concern about technical compatibility. While mentioning durability and appearance is relevant, it does not directly answer the question about integration with existing systems. A more effective approach would involve explaining how the product can integrate, perhaps by asking follow-up questions to gauge their current systems or providing technical documentation that supports the claim. Additionally, the response could benefit from a collaborative tone, inviting the prospect to discuss their existing setup to tailor the answer further. Overall, it misses the opportunity for curiosity and discovery, which is crucial in this context.
9.
4
/ 10Question:
"How do you handle customization requests, especially if our application requires unique specifications?"
Answer:
We handle unique situations just fine. From custom colors to rock inlays.
Feedback:
The response is quite brief and lacks detail. While it acknowledges the ability to accommodate customization requests, it doesn't effectively address how those requests are handled or the processes involved. A more effective response would include examples of past customization projects, a discussion of collaboration with the client to understand their needs, and assurance of quality control. Additionally, the tone could be more engaging to instill confidence in the prospect. Overall, the response lacks depth and does not fully explore the value of the customization process.
Consider incorporating a collaborative approach by asking the prospect more about their specific requirements to demonstrate active listening and curiosity.
Overall score: 4.
10.
3
/ 10Question:
"With the current economic climate, how can we be sure that your company will remain stable and support our long-term needs?"
Answer:
We have been in business for 10 years, we have multiple services and multiple locations to service you no matter what.
Feedback:
The response provided lacks depth and fails to directly address the concern about long-term stability in the current economic climate. While stating the company has been in business for 10 years is a good starting point, it does not sufficiently reassure the prospect regarding future stability. The mention of multiple services and locations is vague and does not provide concrete examples or evidence of financial health or reliability. A more effective approach would include discussing financial stability, contingency plans, or how the company has navigated past economic challenges. Additionally, the response could benefit from asking the prospect about their specific concerns or needs, which would demonstrate active listening and a collaborative approach. Overall, the response could be improved significantly.
Score: 3