Windows
Sales Assessment Results
51
Needs Improvement
10 questions
Maximum score: 100
Completed in
Let's get real here—you scored an average of 5.1. This is a solid wake-up call. You’ve shown glimpses of understanding with techniques like active listening and acknowledging concerns, but it’s clear you’re not consistently hitting the mark. Your attempts at addressing objections are commendable, yet they often lack depth and specific engagement. You need to shake things up and dig deeper into your prospects' needs. You’ve got potential, but right now it’s like watching a player with talent not quite playing to their capabilities.
You’ve demonstrated some decent use of social proof and initial problem acknowledgment, but your responses frequently miss the chance to fully explore the value you offer. You need to embrace open-ended questions more aggressively to truly understand your prospects. Remember, it’s about them, not just the product. You could benefit significantly from diving into SPIN Selling and Consultative Selling techniques. These will help you structure your conversations and engage your prospects on a deeper level.
Here’s the takeaway: Don’t just communicate; connect. Build a collaborative dialogue that reassures your prospects and explores their needs thoroughly. Rethink your approach to closing with urgency and clarity. Every conversation is a chance to not just sell, but to make an impact. Step it up, and let’s turn that potential into performance!
Question Breakdown
1.
4
/ 10Question:
"I'm concerned about the cost versus the long-term benefits of these windows."
Answer:
Many people looking for windows feel the same way what most of our customer felt that initially until they found that with the energy saving at 40% the windows actually end up paying for themselves over time
Feedback:
The salesperson's response attempts to address the concern about cost by mentioning energy savings, which is a good start. However, it lacks clear communication and could benefit from a more structured approach. For example, they could have used the SPIN Selling technique to explore the customer's specific situation and concerns further. Additionally, the response doesn't include a closing technique or follow-up questions to better engage the prospect. Overall, while the response touches on a benefit, it misses the mark in effectively exploring value and fostering a collaborative dialogue.
Suggestions for improvement:
1. Ask open-ended questions to understand the customer's specific concerns about cost and benefits.
2. Provide a clearer explanation of how the energy savings translate into long-term benefits and potentially include testimonials or case studies for credibility.
3. Use a closing technique to guide the conversation toward a decision.
2.
5
/ 10Question:
"How will these windows integrate with our existing systems and processes?"
Answer:
Great questions, the windows will actually fit into the existing structure but increase the enegery saving benefits by 40% on average plus giving your house a nice face lift!
Feedback:
The response addresses the concern about integration by mentioning that the windows will fit into the existing structure, which is a good start. However, it lacks detail on how the integration will work with current systems and processes. The focus on energy savings and aesthetics is valuable, but it could benefit from more clarity and specific examples of how the integration will occur. Additionally, there is a minor typo in 'enegery' that should be corrected to maintain professionalism. Overall, the response shows enthusiasm but falls short in providing a comprehensive solution to the objection.
3.
5
/ 10Question:
"We currently have a vendor relationship that’s been stable; why should we switch?"
Answer:
Im not sure that you should switch, our product is not for everyone. If you value energy saving and lifetime warranty though I think we can show you how our product could out perform what you have currently does that interest you?
Feedback:
The response demonstrates an understanding that not every potential customer will benefit from the product, which is a positive approach. However, the salesperson could have been more effective by directly acknowledging the stability of the current vendor relationship and exploring the prospect's specific needs in more detail. Asking follow-up questions about what aspects of their current vendor they value most could have shown curiosity and active listening. The closing technique could be improved by creating a sense of urgency or emphasizing the unique value of the offering more clearly. Overall, the response is somewhat effective but lacks depth in engagement and exploration of the customer's situation.
4.
4
/ 10Question:
"Can you assure us that these windows meet all the necessary compliance standards?"
Answer:
I understand how compliance standards would be at the top of your list, our manufacture is the largest window and inside manufacture in the United States and performance is their number one strong suit. I’ll show you the slideshow how the energy efficiency is going to 4x what you currently have in your home while saving you 40% on your utilices.
Feedback:
The response addresses the objection by mentioning the manufacturer's prominence and focus on performance, which is a good start. However, it lacks direct assurance regarding compliance with relevant standards. Instead of transitioning to a slideshow about energy efficiency, it would be more effective to first address compliance directly, perhaps by mentioning specific certifications or testing that the windows have undergone. The communication could also be clearer and more professional. While the mention of energy savings is valuable, it should be tied back to compliance to ensure the prospect feels their concern is fully addressed before moving on. Overall, the response could benefit from a stronger focus on compliance, clearer communication, and a better transition to the benefits of the product.
Score: 4/10 for not directly addressing compliance and for slightly veering off-topic too soon without enough assurance or evidence.
5.
5
/ 10Question:
"I'm not sure if the quality of these windows justifies the price; what makes them stand out?"
Answer:
I am with you, what makes these windows stand out from other products? Is the lifetime warranty in the guarantee Workmans ship. I’ll show you a couple comparisons of how they lineup with some of the largest brands available and will show you what you get with all three in the differences and what separates ours from the rest.
Feedback:
The response effectively acknowledges the prospect's concern about the quality versus price, which demonstrates active listening. However, it could be improved by clearly outlining the unique selling points of the windows first, rather than deferring the question back to the prospect. Suggesting a comparison is a good approach, but the response lacks a structured explanation of how those features translate into value for the customer. It would benefit from a more confident tone and a clearer articulation of the lifetime warranty and its implications. Asking for comparisons may come off as evasive instead of proactive. Overall, the response shows a collaborative approach but misses an opportunity to directly address the value exploration needed in this situation.
6.
6
/ 10Question:
"What support do you offer post-purchase to ensure we aren't left in the lurch?"
Answer:
All of our technicians have between 12 and 15 years of experience, if you take a look at our Google reviews, we have five star reviews over the course of eight years. I’d be happy to show you and go through some of those with you and you can rest assured I’ll be your point of contact, moving forward I’ll share my information as well.
Feedback:
The response addresses the concern about post-purchase support by highlighting the experience of technicians and positive customer feedback. However, it lacks a clear explanation of the specific support services offered after the purchase, such as warranties, maintenance, or customer service availability. While the offer to share reviews and being a point of contact is helpful, it doesn't fully reassure the prospect about ongoing support. Additionally, a more proactive approach could include asking the prospect if they have specific support needs or concerns that could be addressed. Overall, the response is effective but could be improved with more detail about support options and a more solution-focused approach.
7.
6
/ 10Question:
"Given our tight timeline, how quickly can we expect delivery and installation?"
Answer:
Most of the customers that we work with are on some type of a timeline that’s why we allow three weeks notice before your windows get installed to make sure the timing works exactly for you.
Feedback:
The response addresses the timeline concern by providing a clear timeframe of three weeks for delivery and installation, which is a good start. However, it could be more effective by asking questions to further explore the prospect's specific timeline needs, showing a deeper understanding of their urgency. Additionally, the tone could be more reassuring to build trust and confidence. A collaborative approach would enhance the engagement by confirming if this timeline aligns with their expectations. Overall, it communicates the process but lacks a proactive stance in addressing potential concerns.
Consider incorporating a closing technique, such as asking if they would like to discuss how to expedite the process further or if there are specific deadlines they are working against. This would demonstrate a solution-focused mindset and curiosity about their needs.
8.
5
/ 10Question:
"I need to discuss this with my team; can you provide more detailed specs to help make the case?"
Answer:
it sounds like there’s some information that you needed that I wasn’t able to answer for you. Just curious what information would you need to run by your team? Do you feel that your team trust or judgment?
Feedback:
The response does well in acknowledging the prospect's request for more information, which shows active listening. However, it lacks a clear solution-focused approach, as it doesn't offer any immediate value or address the objection directly. The tone is a bit ambiguous and could be more professional, especially in the context of discussing specifications for a product like windows. Additionally, it misses an opportunity to summarize the benefits of the product or suggest a follow-up to keep the conversation moving forward. Asking about trust and judgment within the team is a bit off-target and may come off as confrontational rather than collaborative. Overall, the response could be improved by providing specific information or a follow-up proposal.
Score: 5
9.
6
/ 10Question:
"We've had bad experiences with similar products in the past; how can you reassure us this will be different?"
Answer:
Based on our eight year history of five star reviews you can see my name specifically on some of these Google reviews so you can rest assure that you’re gonna be in good hands, we also have systems in place to make sure if anything were to arise that it gets handled quickly through our operations team. We also offer guarantee workmanship here in your agreement, so there really is zero risk on your side.
Feedback:
The response does a decent job of leveraging social proof by mentioning the eight-year history and five-star reviews, which adds credibility. However, it could be improved by asking more open-ended questions to explore the specific bad experiences the prospect had, which would demonstrate active listening and curiosity. This approach would help in tailoring the reassurance more effectively. The mention of the operations team and guarantee is good, but it could benefit from a more personal touch to engage the prospect further. Overall, the tone is appropriate for the industry, but there's a missed opportunity for deeper engagement and exploration of the prospect's concerns.
To improve, consider asking the prospect about their past experiences to understand their concerns better and address them directly, which would align more with a consultative selling approach.
10.
5
/ 10Question:
"With so many alternatives available, what makes your solution the best choice for our needs?"
Answer:
I agree there’s a lot of alternatives. What separates our product from similar products is going to be the warranty in the price. What we offer is the least expensive high-quality product. They’re definitely cheaper products out there, but you strike me as the type of individual who values quality over quantity. If we compare our product to a renewable by Andersons window you will see ours outperforms there highest quality window plus beats then in the price by about 30%
Feedback:
The response does acknowledge the objection about alternatives, which is good, but it lacks depth in addressing the customer's specific needs and concerns. The mention of warranty and pricing is a start, but it could have benefited from a more comprehensive value exploration. The comparison to Anderson's window is relevant, but it would have been more effective to ask the prospect about their specific needs or criteria for choosing windows, showcasing a consultative approach. The tone is somewhat presumptive when stating the prospect values quality over quantity; a better approach would have been to ask questions to understand their priorities. Overall, the response lacks curiosity, discovery, and a collaborative tone.
Score: 5