Sales
Sales Assessment Results by Osagie Great Ayemere
41
Needs Improvement
10 questions
Maximum score: 100
Completed in
Let's cut to the chase: your performance in this test was underwhelming, averaging a score of 4.1. It's clear that you're struggling to effectively engage prospects and address their concerns. While you attempted to acknowledge objections, your responses often lacked structure, clarity, and depth. You’re missing the mark on demonstrating empathy and curiosity about the prospect's situation, which is crucial for building rapport and trust.
You did show some glimpses of potential—mentioning ROI and support during the sale is a start—but these moments were overshadowed by vague phrasing and unclear communication. You need to focus on asking better questions and tailoring your responses to truly understand your prospect's needs. Techniques like SPIN Selling and Consultative Selling could be game-changers for you. Study them, practice them, and learn how to engage in meaningful conversations that reveal the real pain points of your prospects.
Remember, this is a journey, not a sprint. The most memorable takeaway? Your ability to cultivate curiosity will set you apart. Dive deep into your prospects' worlds, and let that curiosity drive your conversations. If you can master this, you're on the path to transforming your sales game. Now, get to work!
Question Breakdown
1.
3
/ 10Question:
"We're currently evaluating multiple solutions and I'm concerned about how your pricing compares to others in the market."
Answer:
Fair concern. You’ll probably find cheaper options out there. But cheaper usally means I hand you a product and walk away. With us you’re paying for support, reliability, expertise.. if price is the only factor, i might not he your guy. But if you want something that actually works without headaches, let me show you what the differences looks on paper.
Feedback:
The response acknowledges the concern but lacks a structured approach to effectively handle the objection. It would benefit from exploring the prospect's specific needs and how the solution can address them, employing techniques like SPIN or Solution Selling. Additionally, the tone could be perceived as dismissive, which may alienate the prospect rather than build rapport. Instead, focusing on the value and differentiating features would enhance the response. Overall, it falls short of demonstrating empathy and curiosity about the prospect's situation.
2.
5
/ 10Question:
"Given our tight budget constraints, I'm not sure we can allocate the necessary funds for this purchase right now."
Answer:
If i can show you how this pays you back in 3 months after purchase, would price be a barrier. I can’t predict the future but i can show you exactly how through our case studies.
Feedback:
The response attempts to address the budget concern by offering a potential return on investment (ROI) in three months, which is a positive start. However, it lacks a structured approach to understanding the prospect's budget constraints in more detail. The question posed is somewhat leading and doesn't invite an open conversation about the prospect's financial situation. It would be beneficial to explore the implications of the tight budget, ask more specific questions about their funding process, and emphasize the long-term value of the investment. Additionally, while mentioning case studies is a good tactic, it could be strengthened by briefly summarizing relevant success stories that relate to the prospect's industry or situation. Overall, more curiosity and active listening would enhance this response.
3.
5
/ 10Question:
"I've got a full plate managing current projects; can we really handle the implementation of a new solution on top of that?"
Answer:
Our edge is that we hold your hand during the sale and after the sale. The long term value is that we grow with you, we also have a 24hr team behind us to ensure that implementation is smooth.
Feedback:
The response does attempt to address the prospect's concern about managing current projects by highlighting support during and after the sale. However, it lacks a deeper exploration of the specific challenges the prospect faces with their current workload. Utilizing a consultative approach would involve asking questions to understand their situation better and tailoring your support message accordingly. Additionally, while emphasizing a 24-hour support team is valuable, providing concrete examples or success stories related to similar clients could strengthen credibility. Overall, more curiosity about the prospect's current projects and how your solution can seamlessly integrate while alleviating their workload would enhance the effectiveness of the response.
4.
4
/ 10Question:
"Our team is used to our existing system, and there might be resistance to changing things up, even if your solution seems better."
Answer:
Yea, it sounds like stepping on toes. I’m happy to take the lead on that with every stakeholder, so we never never miss out the key problems this change might cause so we provide a solution.
Feedback:
The response acknowledges the concern about potential resistance to change, which is a positive start. However, the phrasing 'stepping on toes' could be interpreted as dismissive. Instead, it would be more effective to show empathy and understanding of the team's attachment to their current system. Additionally, the response could be strengthened by asking questions to uncover specific stakeholders' concerns and fears, and offer a structured plan for managing the transition, possibly by aligning the benefits of your solution with their pain points. Overall, incorporating a more consultative approach would enhance the response, making it more collaborative and reassuring.
5.
4
/ 10Question:
"How do we know your product will actually deliver the promised ROI, especially when previous implementations have been disappointing?"
Answer:
We have industry advisors who feed us changes in real time so we never miss a beat, proof of action from the past.. is there to mitigate the risk that comes with choosing us, so you a fully knowledgeable about what margin you want to trust us with.
Feedback:
The response attempts to address the prospect's concern about ROI by mentioning industry advisors and past proof of action, which is a good start. However, it lacks clarity and structure, making it difficult for the prospect to grasp the key points. It would benefit from a more straightforward explanation of how the product has delivered ROI in past implementations, potentially including specific metrics or case studies. Additionally, the question posed at the end is unclear and seems to shift focus away from the prospect's original concern. A more consultative approach that explores the prospect's past experiences with disappointing implementations would also enhance the response. Overall, clarity, structure, and a focus on the prospect's needs are necessary improvements.
6.
5
/ 10Question:
"With the current economic climate, would it be wise to invest in this right now when we might face budget cuts?"
Answer:
Good question. What’s the one thing your team will be looking out for the most? And I will work you through the number.. as this is the most proven way to show you what you this pays what was put into it long term.
Feedback:
The response opens with a good question, which invites dialogue and shows curiosity about the prospect's priorities. However, it lacks a clear and structured answer addressing the concern about the economic climate and potential budget cuts. Instead of only asking about their main focus, it would be more effective to acknowledge the economic challenges, provide a rationale for why investing now could be beneficial (e.g., cost savings, competitive advantage), and possibly share relevant case studies or evidence of ROI during tough economic times. Additionally, the phrasing is somewhat unclear, particularly the phrase "what you this pays what was put into it long term," which could confuse the prospect. Overall, while the intention to engage is good, clarity and a stronger focus on the economic objection are needed.
7.
5
/ 10Question:
"We've had issues with vendor support in the past; what guarantees do you offer for ongoing assistance?"
Answer:
What was your past experience and has it been resolved? However i will currently be showing you a demo that we have improved on our customer service, i will reach out to them right here they are faster and more efficient than they were previously. Is that okay?
Feedback:
The response begins with a question about the prospect's past experience, which shows some curiosity but lacks depth in exploring the specifics of their previous vendor support issues. The mention of a demo is a positive move, as it illustrates the improvements made in customer service. However, the response would benefit from directly addressing the guarantee of ongoing assistance and how your support model differs from past experiences. Providing specific details about response times, support channels, and success metrics would enhance credibility. Additionally, the phrasing is somewhat unclear, particularly the transition from discussing past experiences to the demo, which could confuse the prospect. Overall, a more structured and focused reply that combines inquiry and reassurance would create a stronger response.
8.
4
/ 10Question:
"Can you explain how your solution complies with our industry regulations without requiring extensive changes to our existing processes?"
Answer:
We have industry advisors on reatiners with this industries, who feed us regualtory changes so we never miss your update. However that, have you heard something that question our business compliance?
Feedback:
The response attempts to address the prospect's concern by mentioning industry advisors and their role in keeping up with regulatory changes, which is a positive start. However, the phrasing is unclear and contains typographical errors that undermine credibility. It would be more effective to clearly explain how your solution aligns with specific regulations and minimizes changes to existing processes. Additionally, the follow-up question about the prospect's awareness of compliance issues is a bit vague and may not encourage an open discussion. Instead, asking more targeted questions about their specific compliance requirements could foster a better dialogue. Overall, clarity, precision, and focus on the prospect's needs are needed to enhance this response.
9.
3
/ 10Question:
"What kind of training services do you provide to ensure our team can effectively use your platform from day one?"
Answer:
We demostrate our trust in our platform, which is contagious from day one and that has been a proven method towards ensuring teams besides us can use it.. and then we have detailed up to date facilities for their lectures. We also ask questions..to gauge their understanding.
Feedback:
The response attempts to address the prospect's inquiry about training services but lacks clarity and coherence. Phrasing such as "demonstrate our trust in our platform, which is contagious" is vague and does not directly answer the question regarding specific training services. It is essential to clearly outline what training methods are available (e.g., in-person training, online resources, live workshops) and emphasize the structured support offered, such as ongoing assessments to ensure understanding. Additionally, the reference to gauging understanding could be enhanced by describing how feedback is integrated into the training process. Overall, a more structured and focused answer that explicitly details the training offerings would improve this response.
10.
3
/ 10Question:
"How quickly can we expect to see a measurable impact on our operational efficiency after implementing your solution?"
Answer:
We protect our users from bad suprises..we have tested a process that has been tested a number of times.. none has reported unefficient according to our numbers.. but if somethinf unexpected pops up, we have a rapid response team ready.
Feedback:
The response addresses the concern about measurable impact to some extent but lacks clarity and specificity. Phrases like "protect our users from bad surprises" are vague and do not directly answer the question regarding the timeline for seeing operational efficiency improvements. It would be more effective to provide concrete metrics or examples that illustrate how quickly previous clients have seen results after implementation. Additionally, the mention of a "rapid response team" is a positive element but needs to be connected more explicitly to the potential impact on operational efficiency. Overall, clarity, structure, and more relevant details would enhance this response significantly.