Top 10 Sales Methodologies Compared & Explained

ON IDEAL CLIENTS 

While most of our participants agree that their sales methodologies are most appropriate for complex B2B sales environments, there are some differences in how they describe their ideal clients. A few claim to be appropriate for any sales environment, while one (Solution Selling®, owned by SPI) claims to have also cracked the code on high-volume transactional sales. 

ON PROCESS 

All agree that process is separate from, and important to, methodology. They describe process as the set of stages, milestones, and steps that move a prospect through the sale, while methodology is the approach and behavior of the salesperson within those stages, milestones, and steps. Some of the organizations have a specific process that they recommend or sell, while others work with the buyer’s own process. 

ON REINFORCEMENT 

We also uncovered consensus on the matter of reinforcement, and its critical importance to successful methodology and process deployment. Effective coaching, our participants agree, is critical to preventing the “rubber-band” effect of salespeople returning to old behaviors. Technology, and especially CRM and Sales Improvement Tools, provides the right tools for this reinforcement, though traditional CRM has some gaps that require additional technologies in order to perform this function adequately. 

ON CHANGE 

One area where our interviews uncovered wide divergence of opinion is the topic of how methodologies should change in response to changing buyer behavior. Responses ranged from “our methodology is solid and doesn’t need to change” (Sandler and SPIN), to “our methodology is updated constantly based on the latest research” (RAIN Group). Pat Mustico (SPIN) 

clarifies that although the methodology hasn’t changed, “the application of the skills will vary based on changing buyer behaviors.” 

Among those who state that their methodology changes in response to buyer behavior, there is wide divergence in what those changes look like. Leaders at RAIN Group and CEB (The Challenger Sale) in particular disagree on the best approach for salespeople to take in response to current changes in buyer behavior. 

ON TECHNOLOGY 

Regardless of their opinion on whether the methodology itself should change, all agree that changing technology has an impact on implementation. The latest technologies can be used to implement, reinforce, track, analyze, and optimize both sales process and methodology. Finding the right technology to perform these functions can be challenging, but all agree that it is critical. 

Before psychology selling, before needs and pains and solutions and strategies, there was phrenology: The science of selling cars based on the size of a customer’s forehead. No wonder car salesmen have a bad reputation.

Fortunately for customers and sales teams alike, salesmanship has come a long way since the 1800s and early 1900s, when peddlers promoted fake snake oil to cure what ails. Following a number of fits and starts in improving sales process, the 1960s brought a major innovation that resonates through sales organizations today: Needs Satisfaction.

During the decade of the 60s, Xerox Corporation invested several million dollars in response to the end of the dry photocopying patent that had sustained their company through the previous several decades. They developed a “Needs Satisfaction” approach, now also referred to as “solution selling.” This, the first of the modern sales methodologies, was so successful that Xerox packaged and sold it to other corporations, under the name of Professional Selling Skills. 

Several of today’s top sales methodologies were founded by salespeople and sales leaders who were engaged at Xerox during this time period, including Mike Bosworth and Lloyd Sappington. These individuals leveraged the potential and power of Xerox’s approach, and updated their own approaches to create Solution Selling (a trademark of SPI) and ValueSelling, respectively. 

Xerox’s influence is also seen in the methodology founded by Neil Rackham (SPIN Selling), who studied the behaviors of salespeople across more than 35,000 sales calls at organizations including Xerox. More or less simultaneously, salespeople in other marketplaces were uncovering similar insights into effective selling. Notably, David Sandler was selling motivational materials and realized that the old “trick-based” methods weren’t working for him. He explored the emerging science of sales psychology to develop new approaches, which ultimately became the Sandler Selling System, which is still widely used today. 

Meanwhile, Bob Miller and Steve Heiman were selling for IBM during the same time period, and realized that traditional methods were not effective in moving merchandise. They looked to logic and analysis to develop a “win-win” sales approach that is alive and well in the Miller-Heiman Corporation and its patented Strategic Selling methodology. 

In 2002, John Holland, Frank Visgatis, Gary Walker, and Mike Bosworth brought forward a new methodology in response to yet another change in the marketplace. According to Holland and Visgatis, the current (at that time) solution sales methodologies had failed to keep up with the fact that most technology buyers were more educated than previously, and were no longer buying disruptive technologies. The language and approach had to change. They developed Customer-Centric Selling® to meet these new needs. 

In 2002, Mike Schultz and John Doerr saw a need for a research-based approach to selling. RAIN Group took into account the results of a major benchmark study showing what buyers want and need from sellers to create the foundation of its methodology, RAIN Selling. RAIN Group continues today in its focus on updating and optimizing the sales system based on in-depth research. In 2005, Dave Kurlan brought forward a new approach called Baseline Selling. Kurlan suggested that while solution-based selling methodologies have a great deal to offer, they are limited by the complexity of implementing them. His methodology, called Baseline Selling, took all the best things about existing methodologies, and reworked them into a simple framework that uses a baseball metaphor to help salespeople more quickly grasp and implement the methodology and process. 

The next big disruption in sales methodology came with the publication of The Challenger Sale by Matthew Dixon and Brent Adamson in 2011. Dixon and Adamson propose that the Internet and content marketing has changed the sales landscape once again, by placing customers in charge of designing their solutions. Where solution selling methods focus on helping the customer to build a solution, the new environment means that customers come to the sale with the solution already built, and simply seeking vendors to fulfill that solution. The Challenger Sale approach is designed to disrupt the customer’s buying process by uncovering un-recognized needs, and position the seller as the best resource to fulfill those needs. 

The publication of The Challenger Sale launched a debate that continues to rage in regard to whether its approach is a genuine revolution, just another way of approaching the same problem, or perhaps a dangerous distraction from effective sales methods. Regardless of the outcome of that debate, every one of the sales leaders we spoke with agreed that the marketplace continues to change, and an effective sales process is critical to every sales organization’s success. 

The Methodologies

In our research, we uncovered the unique origin, history, and approach that informs the character of each sales methodology. Here’s a brief overview.

SANDLER TRAINING

Founded in 1967 by David Sandler, the Sandler Selling System focuses on long-term success over quick fixes. Sandler was one of the first thought leaders to begin talking about the use of “pain” in selling, and the Sandler “pain funnel” remains among its most well-known tools, along with the “submarine” graphic that outlines its step by step approach to prospect engagement. Sandler is a particularly good fit for organizations with complex sales cycles, and can be used by entrepreneurial organizations looking to compete with larger brands, as well as large organizations looking to fill gaps in their sales process. Sandler owns the largest sales training organization in the world, with more than 250 local training centers serving Fortune 500 companies, SMB, and independent producers. We spoke with Sandler’s CEO, Dave Mattson.

MILLER-HEIMAN (AN MHI GLOBAL COMPANY), STRATEGIC SELLING

Founded in the 1960s by Bob Miller and Steve Heiman, Strategic Selling focuses on a practical, repeatable sales process that breaks complex situations down into small, manageable chunks. The approach focuses on creating a win-win situation for buyer and seller, to build long-term relationships. The organization provides "blue sheets" to help sellers win opportunities along a well-defined sales process, and "green sheets" that support all direct customer interactions along the sales process. Strategic Selling is a particularly good fit for complex sales in any B2B vertical market. We spoke with Miller-Heiman’s European Sales Vice President, Klaus Leutbecher.

SOLUTION SELLING® (SPI)

Mike Bosworth developed Solution Selling® from research originally conducted at Xerox in the late 1970s. This research examined the behaviors of top-performing sales professionals at that organization and applied the resulting insights to his methodology, which was later acquired by SPI, the largest Solution Selling® distributor and implementation partner. The approach is has been continuously refined and improved, in response to changing market conditions and ongoing research into what top-performing sellers do differently. Like many sales methodologies, it works well within a complex B2B sales environment but, unlike the others, it also claims to perform particularly well in high-volume commodities markets. We spoke with SPI’s Director of Business Development, Tim Sullivan.

SPIN SELLING

In the 1980s, behavioral psychologist Neil Rackham conducted research over 12 years and 35,000 sales calls, looking at what sellers and buyers actually did during those sales calls. He then correlated that research with sales success. Rackham was hired by Xerox, Kodiak, Motorola, and others to use that research to help them develop their internal sales methodologies. In 1988, he founded SPIN Selling, which stands for Situation, Problem, Implication, Need-payoff. The approach is best suited for complex B2B selling situations and focuses on helping buyers draw their own conclusion that they need the product or service. We spoke with SPIN Selling’s president and principal consultant, Pat Mustico. 

VALUESELLING FRAMEWORK 

In 1991, the ValueSelling Framework was created by Lloyd Sappington, one of the leaders of Xerox’s sales methodology revolution. The methodology’s parent company, ValueSelling Associates, was later purchased by its current owner, Julie Thomas. The ValueSelling Framework simplifies sales methodology to make it easier for salespeople to learn and master. It is best suited for companies with complex B2B sales cycles, who are competing on value and using differentiation to win. The ValueSelling Fromework is translated into 12 different languages with multiple training modalities available, and facilitators available across the globe. We spoke with ValueSelling Associates’s CEO and President, Julie Thomas. 

CUSTOMER-CENTRIC SELLING® 

Founded in 2002 by John Holland, Frank Visgatis, Gary Walker, and Mike Bosworth, Customer-Centric Selling® was developed in response to the maturity of the business technology market. Holland and Visgatis noted that buyers were no longer investing in disruptive technologies, but rather improvements on old technologies. The methodology is based on Rackham’s research into how people buy, updated to focus on asking the right questions of modern technology buyers. Though its origins are in the technology industry, Customer-Centric Selling® is a good fit for any B2B organization with complex sales. We spoke with Customer-Centric Selling®’s co-founder, John Holland. 

RAIN SELLING 

In 2002, Mike Schultz and John Doerr founded RAIN Selling in response to insights from a major benchmark study they conducted that year. They designed it to better satisfy what modern buyers want and need from sellers, and continue to update and optimize the methodology based on ongoing research. They are known for their in-depth sales performance research and analysis. RAIN Selling is best suited for complex sales processes involving multiple decision makers. Organizations in financial services, professional services, and technology industries, for instance, often represent a good fit. We spoke with RAIN Group’s President, Mike Schultz. 

BASELINE SELLING 

Founded in 2005 by Dave Kurlan, Baseline Selling was created as an answer to the difficulty of getting salespeople to buy into complex sales methodologies. Baseline Selling uses a baseball metaphor to divide sales into “bases” that represent stages of the sales process. Baseline Selling is a good fit for growing mid-market companies with sales forces of 30-100 individuals, in any industry. We spoke with Baseline Selling’s CEO, Dave Kurlan. 

THE CHALLENGER SALE 

Matthew Dixon and Brent Adamson published The Challenger Sale in 2011 in response to the way that content marketing and wide availability of information has changed the sales landscape. They claim that solution selling—a category into which nearly all the other methodologies fall— is dead, and a new approach is called for. The Challenger Sale, owned by CEB, focuses on disrupting the customer’s buying process by uncovering un-recognized needs. Its leaders declined to answer what specific industries or types of sales it is best suited to serve. CEB’s leadership was unable to participate in the study. 

In the course of our research for this paper, we uncovered both surprising commonalities and intriguing differences of opinion among the participants in the study. 

These conversations yielded important insights into the biggest challenges facing the sales industry today, including process implementation, reinforcement, and the role of technology. 

MYTH-BUSTING

SALES METHODOLOGY IN TRANSACTIONAL SALES ENVIRONMENTS

Common wisdom has it that sales methodology is best suited for complex sales. Nearly all the experts we spoke with agreed that their approach is best suited for B2B industries whose sales cycles are long, buying committees are complicated, and transaction sizes are large. 

There was one stand-out exception to this rule, however. Tim Sullivan, with Sales Performance International, says that while his organization’s methodology, Solution Selling®, was originally focused on complex, long-cycle technical sales, changes in buyer behavior have expanded the methodology’s applicability. While it is still used in complex sales environments, it has also been implemented successfully in high transaction volume organizations. 

“We have discovered that some of our best customers use Solution Selling® to sell highly commoditized products,” he says, explaining that it works for them because “except for price, the only way that they can differentiate is by how they engage with customers.” SPI’s success suggests that industries that have traditionally operated on volume and price may equally benefit from the implementation of sales methodologies born in more complex sales environments.

METHODOLOGY AND PROCESS

Among the leaders we interviewed, there was significant consensus regarding the difference between process and methodology. Most agreed that process is a step-by-step structure, with milestones and stages, while methodology is a way of interacting with the customer to move them from stage to stage. 

Dave Mattson (Sandler) described process as the “what” and methodology as the “how.” Several other experts added a third category of “skills and activities” as separate from the methodology.

Julie Thomas, president and CEO of ValueSelling Associates stated the difference between the three (process, methodology, and skills) most vividly with a football analogy. ”The sales process helps you identify where you are on the football field and how close you are to getting into the end zone,” she explains. “Sales methodology is what has to happen to move you from the 40-yard-line to the 30-yard-line. Skills and tactics are the playbook.” 

While they agree on the essential definition of process, each methodology has a slightly different relationship with process, as outlined in the chart on the next page.

WHY SALES ORGANIZATIONS ARE FAILING AT PROCESS

Nearly everyone we spoke with agreed on two points in regard to process: 

• IT’S CRITICALLY IMPORTANT 
• AND MOST ORGANIZATIONS ARE FAILING AT IT

According to Leutbecher (Strategic Selling), World Class Organizations consistently apply sales methodology and process, while average organizations typically do not. Schultz (RAIN Group) says their data shows that 69% of Top Performing Sales Organizations have clearly defined sales processes while, according to Kurlan (Baseline Selling), “only 9% [of all sales organizations] follow an effective sales process.”

“Everybody says they have a process,” says Mattson (Sandler), “but if you ask them to write it down, nobody on the team writes the same thing.” Thomas (ValueSelling) adds that “a lot of companies do pieces of it very well and few companies do all of it well.”

For those companies that do have a consistent process implemented, that process is often ineffective. The participants in our study gave several perspectives on what makes these processes ineffective, all of which boil down to the same problem:

“It’s usually an inwardly focused picture,” says Sullivan (SPI, Solution Selling®). “Some sales organizations,” says Mustico (SPIN Selling), “tie their process to reporting requirements in the CRM rather than basing it on what leads to verifiable outcomes.” Others, says Holland (Customer-Centric Selling®), “focus on product-based training rather than product usage and business outcomes.”

What’s needed, says Sullivan, is a “dynamic, buyer-aligned” process tied to positive outcomes. Thomas adds that in order to accomplish this, sales team leaders and executives must look at the organization holistically to align training, compensation, roles, and reinforcement. 

HOW TO PREVENT BEHAVIORAL “RUBBER-BANDING” 

Besides creating and implementing an effective sales process and methodology, all of our study’s participants agreed that behaviors must be reinforced to prevent behavioral “rubber-banding.” Rubber-banding refers to the phenomenon of trained sales employees returning to old behaviors after the newness of the methodology and process wears off. Everyone agreed that: 

• Sales managers and leaders must be involved and congruent. Coaches and leaders should be trained in process and methodology either ahead of, or concurrently with, the sales team. 
• Rewards and recognition should be tied to implementing process and methodology rather than strictly to wins. 
• Skills and behaviors must be reinforced on a regular basis. 

To this last point, most agreed that both effective coaching and technology are critical elements of effective reinforcement. Sullivan (SPI, Solution Selling®) suggests embedding sales process and methods within CRM systems, and linking each stage to content assets (available on mobile devices) that support the salesperson in using the methodology’s tools and skills. 

“You have to ensure that the learning is reinforced so sellers don’t forget what they learned,” says Schultz (RAIN Group). “Track actions in the CRM and observe sellers live to know what they are doing. Then make sure coaches and managers are available to help sellers work through problems they’re having.”