Value propositions are unquestionably important in B2B sales, especially for large, complex, or intangible offerings. Some suggest a value proposition is the key component of successful sales. And most would say a value proposition is a necessary condition for success, if not a sufficient one.
But I think we overstate the value of value propositions. Not only are they not sufficient, but sometimes they’re not even necessary. They are frequently less important than classic issues of needs and wants. And discussing value propositions without overtly addressing client confidence in the capability of the seller is not useful.
Value propositions are unquestionably powerful. But if you think nailing down a clear value proposition is going to solve your sales issues, think again.
Thinking About Value
First, some definitions. I’m using ‘value’ in a simple, narrow way to mean economic value. For example, I might offer a client a value proposition that says, ‘By using a distinctive approach to account development, I can improve top-line revenue by 10% within six months at virtually no cost to margins.’ The ‘value” is ‘10% of full-margin top-line revenue,’ and the total statement includes reference to how I’m going to achieve it and in what realm of the client’s business.
But usually that’s not how clients start out thinking. In my experience, clients go rather quickly from ‘We’ve got a revenue problem’ to ‘The biggest reason for our revenue problem is sales force turnover.’
It’s a quick hop to ‘We need a sales force recruiting solution.’ In which case, my highly articulated value proposition about the account development process, even if it’s correct and relevant, doesn’t even get invited to the party.
Their problem – ‘10% top-line revenue gap’ – may rhyme with your value offering ‘10% top-line revenue growth’, but if the buyer is fixated on sales force turnover, game over. You could argue you need to present your value proposition earlier in the buying cycle, but that’s a problem outside the value proposition per se.
Call that the ‘misaligned diagnosis’ problem. Another problem is relative lack of urgency. A 10% increase in top-line growth, while it sounds great, may produce yawns in organisations that are transfixed by products going off patent, or by R&D rejuvenation, or by M&A activity, or by the urgency of a cost-cutting drive.
A value proposition can work its magic only if the client a) agrees on the issue at hand, b) feels a need to address the issue, and c) wants to use the particular value proposition to address the need.
That is not a radical statement. And yet it is often violated all the time. Sales people keen on articulating value propositions to clients risk making the world look like a nail to match their value proposition hammer. We know better than to sell product vs solution, but it’s so tempting when the ‘product’ is disguised as a total value proposition.
This can work in the sellers’ favour. Over half my clients already see what they want in my offerings by the time they contact me. They articulate my value proposition for themselves. And unless they’ve gotten it wrong (not very common), there’s little point in forcing them to tweak it. At that point, the imperative to add value as the opportunity presents itself becomes the key task.
Selling Value And Buying Value
Suppose you haven’t productised the value proposition. You’re engaged in a constructive dialogue with an interested client. You’ve articulated your value proposition, they comprehend it, and it meets their needs. However, the same can be said for two competitors, each of whom is also talking to your potential client about increasing top-line revenue by changing the account development process.
Several issues then arise, such as the level of detail. You could call this a deeper level of value proposition, but below some level it starts to look like just product variations.
The biggest issue for buyers at this point is often not the value proposition at all, but the confidence or trust the buyer has in the seller. Confidence and trust can not only overcompensate for lower stated value, but they can overturn the proposition entirely.
Expected Value
Consider two firms competing for a bid, with general agreement on the value proposition that the client is looking for. Let’s say the economic value calculated by each firm is about net R5 million. Sophisticated decision analytics might reveal the client has 90% confidence that firm A will deliver fully on the expected value, but only a 75% level of confidence that Firm B will do so.
That’s 15 percentage points variation in expected value — the same as if one firm had quoted a value of R750 000 more than the other! It’s also a discrepancy often sufficient to entirely wipe out the fees difference between the two sellers. Even greater discrepancies emerge when the issues turn to, ‘What if things go wrong? What will they be like to work with then?’
Yet this discrepancy virtually never gets talked about — at least not in a direct and quantitative way. The discussions are more along the lines of, ‘I don’t know. I just don’t feel like when push comes to shove they’re going to be able to get with our programme.’
If you lose a bid and are lucky enough to get some post-bid debriefing, you’re not likely to hear, ‘Well, we just didn’t feel like when the chips were down you’d be able to get with our programme.’ That would be the corporate version of politically incorrect speech.
Instead, you will hear, ‘The other guys had a more compelling set of resumés on their team,’ or ‘We just felt like we had to go with their longer track record in this area.’ In other words, the language of value proposition gets cited as post hoc justification even though it was not the basis for the actual decision. More prosaically, people buy with their heart and rationalise it with their brains.
Trust Can Even Overturn a Value Proposition
I’ve been on both ends of this one. I won a job by telling the client they flatly didn’t need to do a significant part of the job they were requesting. I won because I showed I could figure out the right thing to do. And the proof of it was they didn’t bother to solicit other bids around the new value proposition.
Sadly for me, I’ve lost this way, too. It’s not about picking the right game, it’s about picking the person who knows how to pick the right game.
The Role of Value Propositions
Too often it’s assumed that the purpose of the value proposition is so obvious it doesn’t need stating. Duh! We assume clients buy value, clearly expressed, and tightly calculated. After all, that’s what they say they do. There are seriously valuable roles for a value proposition, of course. They are:
To force the seller to have a point of view:
My client may or may not buy what I’m selling, but my statement of it marks a beginning point of discussion, a coherent account — one that suggests other ideas, proves I’ve thought things through, and shows I am worthy of valuable time.
To give the buyer ‘air cover’ in justifying a decision internally:
A B2B buyer wants to be able to tell anyone who asks, but especially his superiors, that they bought a proven product with a 35% ROI that will provide a 15% CAGR by an experience-based approach to account management. They do not want to tell everyone they chose vendor A because, gee, they really felt good about them — even if that’s the truth.
To undergo a required, universal protocol:
Like meeting ISO standards, following tax rules, or complying with traffic laws, the tight definitions that come from rigorous thinking about value propositions are an assurance of quality. They may be a little pro forma, they may be subject to some tweaking, and they may not be a guarantee. But if everyone must do them, they form a common denominator by which to compare something of importance — value.
