Health insurance
Sales Assessment Results
44
Needs Improvement
10 questions
Maximum score: 100
Completed in
Let’s get straight to it: your performance here is a mixed bag, and the average score of 4.4 shows you're not quite hitting the mark. You’ve got the intent to collaborate, but your responses often lack the substance needed to truly engage your prospects. This is a critical area for improvement. You’re using some good techniques, like acknowledging concerns and attempting to build rapport, but you need to dig deeper. You often jump to solutions without fully understanding the customer’s situation, which is a recipe for missed opportunities.
Your strongest areas seem to be in acknowledging economic concerns and showing a willingness to collaborate. However, you consistently miss the mark on exploring customer needs in depth. You need to stop glossing over those budget implications and ROI questions; they’re the heart of the matter.
Focus on honing your skills in SPIN Selling and Consultative Selling. These techniques will empower you to ask the right questions and uncover the implications of your prospects' concerns, moving beyond surface-level engagement.
Here’s your coaching moment: remember, sales is not just about your solution; it’s about the customer’s journey. Spend more time listening and uncovering their needs before trying to sell them something. That shift in mindset could be the key to unlocking your potential. Now, take this feedback and turn it into action.
Question Breakdown
1.
4
/ 10Question:
"We need to ensure that all stakeholders agree before we can move forward, but I’m worried about differing opinions on budget allocation."
Answer:
That’s a simple fix, let’s brainstorm the best way to allocate budget.
Feedback:
While your response indicates a willingness to collaborate, it lacks depth in addressing the concern about differing opinions on budget allocation among stakeholders. Instead of jumping straight to brainstorming, it would be more effective to first understand the perspectives of all stakeholders involved. Consider asking questions to uncover their priorities and concerns, which can help in tailoring a solution that aligns with everyone's interests. This would also demonstrate active listening and value exploration. A more structured approach, perhaps using techniques from SPIN Selling or Consultative Selling to identify the implications of their budget concerns, would enhance your response. Overall, you need to focus on discovery before diving into a solution.
Score: 4 - Good intent but needs more depth and alignment with the customer's situation.
2.
5
/ 10Question:
"With the current economic climate, how can we justify the ROI of this health insurance upgrade to our board?"
Answer:
Given the landscape of the economy we truly understand how this decision is difficult. With that being said the coverages under the new upgrade are night and day in comparison to the old structure. Preventative care is covered at 100%. That’s just one!
Feedback:
The response acknowledges the economic concern, which is a good start, but it lacks depth in addressing the ROI question specifically. While mentioning the difference in coverages, it does not provide concrete data or examples of how the upgrade can lead to cost savings or improved outcomes that would justify the investment to the board. Additionally, it could benefit from asking follow-up questions to explore the board's priorities or any specific concerns they might have. Overall, it could be more solution-focused, possibly utilizing the SPIN Selling technique to delve deeper into the implications of not upgrading.
The tone is appropriate, but the response feels a bit rushed and doesn't fully engage with the prospect's need for justification. Including more specific value exploration would enhance the effectiveness of the response.
Score: 5
3.
5
/ 10Question:
"Our team is already stretched thin managing other projects; I’m not sure we can take on the implementation of a new insurance plan right now."
Answer:
That’s why we are here to do all the work for you guys. To make this transition as easy and seamless as possible.
Feedback:
The response addresses the concern of the prospect by emphasizing that the salesperson's team will handle the implementation, which is a good start. However, it lacks depth in demonstrating understanding of the prospect's situation and does not provide any specifics about how the process will be made easier. Additionally, it could benefit from a more empathetic tone, acknowledging the challenges the prospect's team is facing. There are no questions asked to explore further or to show curiosity about their current projects, which could help in building rapport. Overall, the response is a bit too vague and does not fully engage the prospect in a collaborative manner.
4.
4
/ 10Question:
"I’ve heard mixed reviews about your company’s stability; how can you assure us that you won’t be our next problem?"
Answer:
We are simply the best at what we do! Maybe our competitors put deceiving information out about us to sway people’s decisions. Let me earn your trust with one solution at a time!
Feedback:
The response lacks effectiveness in addressing the concern about the company's stability and does not provide specific assurances or evidence to alleviate the prospect's fears. The tone is overly confident without addressing the prospect's valid concerns. While the mention of earning trust is a positive aspect, it does not demonstrate a clear solution-focused approach. There is also minimal curiosity or discovery regarding the specific mixed reviews and no active listening is evident. Overall, the response could have incorporated a more consultative approach by asking questions to better understand the prospect's worries and providing relevant examples or data to support the company's stability.
In this context, a score of 4/10 reflects the need for improvement in addressing the objection directly and collaborating with the prospect to build trust.
5.
5
/ 10Question:
"We have an existing vendor that we’ve been with for years; what guarantees do you have that your solution is superior?"
Answer:
I’ve looked over and studied the other company you’re referring to, they are great! What separates us from them is our abundance of products that we have. We have triple the amount of products as them to tailor each policy for your employees. Also our software streamlines the process and makes things very easy to transition.
Feedback:
The response acknowledges the existing vendor positively, which is good for rapport. However, it falls short in addressing the specific concern about guarantees of superiority. While mentioning the abundance of products is a strength, it lacks concrete evidence or metrics to prove superiority. Additionally, it could engage the prospect more by asking questions about their current experience and areas for improvement. The tone is somewhat promotional but could benefit from a more consultative approach, focusing on understanding the prospect's needs better. Overall, the response is a step in the right direction but needs more depth and exploration of value.
Score: 5
6.
4
/ 10Question:
"I need to present this proposal to my team, but they are very risk-averse; how do we address their concerns about change?"
Answer:
Change is inevitable given that you are actively looking for a better solution to your problem. Regardless of its with me or someone else change is coming. Let me help you and them with this process to make it as easy as possible for you.
Feedback:
The response attempts to address the concern about change by emphasizing its inevitability, which is a valid point. However, it lacks empathy and a deeper exploration of the specific fears or concerns the team may have regarding the change. Instead of simply stating that change is coming, it would have been more effective to ask questions to understand what specific risks or concerns the team has. Additionally, offering a collaborative approach to ease the transition could have strengthened the response. The tone is somewhat dismissive rather than supportive, which may not resonate well with a risk-averse audience. Overall, the response could benefit from a more consultative and value-oriented approach, focusing on how you can specifically address their team's fears and provide reassurance.
Score: 4
7.
5
/ 10Question:
"Your plan seems to lack some key features that are essential for our compliance requirements; can you explain how this would work?"
Answer:
Let’s collaborate on this subject. Our compliance departments can get together and come up with a structure that tailors all of your compliance neees.
Feedback:
The response attempts to engage in collaboration, which is positive; however, it lacks specificity regarding the features in question. It would be more effective to first acknowledge the concern and express understanding of the importance of compliance. Then, detailing how your plan addresses these requirements, or at least indicating a willingness to explore potential adjustments, would enhance credibility. Asking clarifying questions about specific compliance needs would also demonstrate curiosity and a solution-focused approach. Overall, while the intent is there, the execution is lacking clarity and detail, making it less effective in addressing the customer's concern.
Score: 5
8.
5
/ 10Question:
"I’m concerned about the training required for employees to effectively use this new system; how do you usually handle that?"
Answer:
We come to you! We can either do a group setting or individual. Whatever is easier for you and your company!
Feedback:
The response provided addresses the concern about employee training by offering flexible options for training delivery, which is a good start. However, it lacks depth in exploring the potential implications of insufficient training and does not highlight any specific value of the training process or system. There should be more emphasis on understanding the prospect's specific needs and concerns regarding training, as well as how the training can lead to improved outcomes for their employees. Asking follow-up questions to gauge their preferences or previous experiences with training would demonstrate curiosity and active listening. Overall, while the tone is friendly and accommodating, the response could be enhanced with more detailed solutions and engagement.
Score: 5
9.
2
/ 10Question:
"If we decide to invest in your solution, how can you support us in ensuring all team members adopt it smoothly?"
Answer:
Our reputation speaks for its self here. We have never had any issues ensuring that all employees adapt to the change!
Feedback:
The response lacks specificity and fails to address the prospect's concern about smooth adoption. While mentioning a good reputation is a positive aspect, it doesn't provide tangible support or strategies for ensuring team members adopt the solution. There is no evidence of active listening or a collaborative approach to discuss the specific needs of the organization. Additionally, it misses an opportunity to ask questions that could uncover potential pain points or areas of concern regarding adoption. Including details about training, resources, or support systems would enhance the response significantly. Overall, it's more of a vague assertion than a solution-focused answer.
10.
5
/ 10Question:
"The timing feels off with our fiscal year ending soon; how can we align our budget to accommodate this decision?"
Answer:
Budget is a big deal and we understand. We’d love to accommodate to whatever works best for you, whether that’s paying in full or coming up with creative payment plan that suits your company best.
Feedback:
The response acknowledges the importance of the budget concern, which is good. However, it lacks depth in exploring the implications of the fiscal year deadline and doesn't ask follow-up questions to better understand the prospect's situation. A stronger approach would involve confirming the prospect's needs and concerns, perhaps suggesting a tailored solution or alternative timing options. The communication could improve by showing more empathy and understanding. Overall, while there is a willingness to accommodate, the response feels overly generic and misses an opportunity for a more collaborative discussion that could deepen the relationship.
Score: 5