“Understanding why a deal is won or lost is critical, yet most salespeople have little (if any) understanding of the true reasons for winning and losing” writes recognized thought leader in Win / Loss analysis and sales training, and President of Anova Consulting Group, Richard M. Schroder in his opportunity creating and game changing book From a Good Sales Call to a Great Sales Call: Close More by Doing What You Do Best. The author describes how to develop and utilize an effective debriefing process to provide detailed analysis about why sales were really closed or lost.
Richard M. Schroder recognizes that all too often salespeople leave a prospect not ever knowing why the sale was never completed. Most sales representatives, and even their sales managers, simply move on to the next prospect, seeking the next sale. What is not understood by the sales team is that the same mistakes can be repeated over and over again, resulting in even more lost closing opportunities. Richard Schroder provides a comprehensive system for re-examining the lost sale to analyze what went right, and also to determine what also went wrong. This debriefing process provides the sales person with deeper insights into their own sales strategy, helping them to continue using the techniques that worked well. At the same time, and perhaps even more importantly, the debriefing concept will uncover mistakes that can be corrected and avoided in future sales presentations.
Richard M. Schroder understands that all sales representatives possess strengths and weaknesses that vary from person to person. Without a thorough assessment of these strengths and weaknesses, the salesperson will never move past the status quo position of the potential customer. For Richard Schroder, the status quo is as much of a competitor for sales representatives as the products and services offered by another company. Richard Schroder presents a logical step by step procedure, for learning the real reasons, that goes far beyond the features and benefits of the product or service. The author seeks to uncover the much more important relationship between the buyer and the seller. For the authoor, a good salesperson solves an important problem for the customer through open and honest discussion. The book focuses on the critical relationship between the salesperson and the customer, and not on the technical mechanics of the sales process.
For me, the power of the book is how Richard Schroder describes the crucial factor of open and honest communication between the seller and the buyer. Unlike many other sales books that teach tactics and techniques, the author helps the sales person build a positive and open sales conversation. Should the sale fall through without completion, Richard Schroder provides a complete debriefing process to uncover the real reasons for the failed sale. Since this debriefing concept is important, the process must be conducted using the best practices and proper etiquette. The book contains valuable chapters on how to debrief the client honestly and with mutual respect. Through the procedure outlined by Richard Schroder, honest feedback can be obtained, and mistakes can be avoided in the future.
I highly recommend the unique and insightful book From a Good Sales Call to a Great Sales Call: Close More by Doing What You Do Best by Richard M. Schroder, to anyone involved in sales from entrepreneurs, to sales representatives, to sales managers who are serious about understanding what really went right and wrong in a sales conversation. This book enters into the seldom discussed, but extremely important, area of the post-sales conversation debriefing process.
Read the sales building and very practical book From a Good Sales Call to a Great Sales Call: Close More by Doing What You Do Best by Richard M. Schroder, and discover the best practices for utilizing the sales debriefing concept. The book contains all of the tools and ideas necessary to design, develop, and utilize the very valuable debriefing procedure. The end result will be more closed sales, a much more effective sales team, and many more satisfied customers.
For Immediate Release
Contact: Andrew Cloutier
Anova Consulting Group, LLC
(617) 731-1045
andrew@anovaconsulting.com
BROOKLINE, MASS., February 12, 2013 – Win loss survey data from Anova Consulting Group shows that the proportion of plan sponsors remaining with the incumbent after conducting full 401(k) provider searches has continued to grow for the fifth consecutive year. Anova is a leading provider of Win / Loss and client satisfaction analysis in the financial services industry.
For the sales situations Anova researched in 2012, 31% of mid-large market finals with between $20MM and $500MM in plan assets resulted in the plan sponsor remaining with the incumbent recordkeeper, up from 28% in 2011 and 18% five years ago. This figure does not include non-competitive re-bid situations, which are an increasingly commonplace alternative to a full search / RFP process for plan sponsors who are not necessarily dissatisfied with their provider but conduct periodic due diligence reviews for fiduciary reasons. Anova has conducted over 1200 win, loss, and departed client interviews with mid-large 401(k) plan sponsors since 2007.
“Over the last five years, the percentage of plans conducting full-blown searches and electing to remain with their current providers has increased roughly 10% each year. If this trend continues, it will mean that in five more years, 50% of the plans conducting finals searches will remain with the incumbent,” said Richard Schroder, president of Anova Consulting Group. “While it speaks highly of industry-wide client service that so many sponsors are content to stay with their existing providers, this trend should not be discounted by sales and product development organizations.”
As search activity becomes increasingly competitive and 401(k) products and services become more commoditized in the mid-large market, retirement plan providers are striving to differentiate themselves and provide prospects with compelling reasons to leave their incumbents. A comparable product offering with comparable fees (or even a minor fee reduction) are infrequently sufficient to entice a plan sponsor to undergo the effort and uncertainty of a conversion to a new provider.
According to Schroder, “The sales teams that are beating the odds are doing a better job of creating immediate value and differentiating their firms’ offerings during the sales process. With increasingly informed buyers and the ever-growing involvement of sophisticated search consultants and retirement plan advisors, providers must clearly articulate their value propositions and offer a highly consultative sales process customized to a sponsor’s specific needs.”
Established in 2005, Anova Consulting Group is a leading market research and consulting firm focused on Win / Loss analysis and client satisfaction analysis. By helping its clients understand why they win, lose and retain business, Anova provides strategic perspectives to its clients, driving better decision-making, product development, sales effectiveness, client service, and continuous improvement. Richard Schroder, president of Anova, is author of the Win Loss Analysis book titled From a Good Sales Call to a Great Sales Call (McGraw-Hill), which details how learning from post-sale debriefing helps close more sales.
For Immediate Release
Contact: Andrew Cloutier
Anova Consulting Group, LLC
(617) 731-1045
andrew@anovaconsulting.com
BROOKLINE, MASS., February 7, 2012 – Analysis of several years of win / loss survey data from Anova Consulting Group, a leading provider of customized market research, sales training and consulting services in the financial services industry, shows that retirement plan sponsors who conduct marketplace reviews with finals presentations are 55% more likely to remain with their current provider today than they were as recently as four years ago.
For the sales situations Anova researched in 2011, 28% of mid-large market searches with between $20MM and $500MM in plan assets resulted in the plan sponsor remaining with the incumbent recordkeeper, compared to 18% in 2007. This figure does not include non-competitive re-bid situations, which are an increasingly commonplace alternative to a full search / RFP process for plan sponsors who are not necessarily dissatisfied with their provider but conduct periodic due diligence reviews for fiduciary reasons. Anova has conducted over 900 win, loss, and departed client interviews with mid-large 401(k) plan sponsors since 2007.
“With the difficult economic environment of the past few years, most companies are more focused on their core businesses than with evaluating their 401(k) plans. Consequently, there’s been a slowdown in RFIs and RFPs, which leads to fewer finals situations, and even then sponsors have been more likely to remain with the incumbent,” commented Chris Cumming, Senior Vice President at Great-West Retirement Services.
According to the plan sponsors, retirement plan advisors, and consultants interviewed, one driving force behind this trend is the increasing commoditization of 401(k) product and service offerings in the mid- large market. “As fee spreads compress and open investment architecture, state-of-the-art technology and customizable participant communications are offered by more competitors, sponsors are increasingly unwilling to undergo the uncertainty and additional effort of a conversion,” said Richard Schroder, president of Anova Consulting Group. “Results from the plan sponsor research we’ve performed over the past decade show a drop-off in provider changes due to core product offering differences — client service issues are now a key catalyst for provider changes.”
“At Putnam, we are seeing sponsors look to improve service delivery, or take advantage of innovation that didn’t exist 3-5 years ago. There is clearly a growing market demand for providers to deliver maximum value to plan sponsors and an enhanced participant experience that leads to higher savings and better retirement preparedness,” stated Edmund F. Murphy III, Managing Director and Head of Defined Contribution at Putnam Investments.
Great-West has observed a similar trend in the mid-large market. “When sponsors conduct a finals process and switch recordkeepers, they are looking to upgrade their overall plan with the latest features and sophisticated investment capabilities while achieving a competitive price point,” added Cumming.
Another driver of the decline in 401(k) provider changes is sales-related. Failure to differentiate is a frequent sales process critique among bids lost prospects who elect to remain with the incumbent. “In an increasingly competitive marketplace with a finite amount of deal flow, sales teams really have to bring their “A” game to win the business,” suggests Schroder. “Before entering a finals presentation, I would urge any sales team to identify 4 or 5 ways in which they are different from the competition and articulate them during the presentation.”
According to Patrick Murphy, Managing Director and Head of Sales at New York Life Retirement Plan Services, “A ‘me too’ approach is not effective in sales finals presentations. Plan providers have to develop products and services with differences that are truly meaningful to plan sponsors. Those providers who can demonstrably add value and have an impact on plan results will be the winners going forward.”
Established in 2005, Anova Consulting Group is a leading market research and consulting firm focused on Win / Loss analysis and client satisfaction analysis. By helping its clients understand why they win, lose and retain business, Anova provides strategic perspectives to its clients, driving better decision-making, product development, sales effectiveness, client service, and continuous improvement. Last year, Richard Schroder, president of Anova, released a book about Win Loss Analysis titled, From a Good Sales Call to a Great Sales Call (McGraw-Hill, 2011), which details how learning from post-sale Win / Loss debriefing helps close more sales.
February 7, 2012 (PLANSPONSOR.com) – Retirement plan sponsors who conduct marketplace reviews with finals presentations are 55% more likely to remain with their current provider today than they were as recently as four years ago.
According to survey data from Anova Consulting Corp., for the sales situations in 2011, 28% of mid-large market searches with between $20MM and $500MM in plan assets resulted in the plan sponsor remaining with the incumbent recordkeeper, compared to 18% in 2007. This figure does not include non-competitive re-bid situations, which are an increasingly commonplace alternative to a full search/RFP process for plan sponsors who are not necessarily dissatisfied with their provider, but conduct periodic due diligence reviews for fiduciary reasons.
“With the difficult economic environment of the past few years, most companies are more focused on their core businesses than with evaluating their 401(k) plans,” said Chris Cumming, senior vice president at Great-West Retirement Services. “Consequently, there’s been a slowdown in RFIs and RFPs, which leads to fewer finals situations, and even then sponsors have been more likely to remain with the incumbent.”
According to the plan sponsors, retirement plan advisers and consultants interviewed, one driving force behind this trend is the increasing commoditization of 401(k) product and service offerings in the mid-large market.
“As fee spreads compress and open investment architecture, state-of-the-art technology and customizable participant communications are offered by more competitors, sponsors are increasingly unwilling to undergo the uncertainty and additional effort of a conversion,” said Richard Schroder, president of Anova Consulting Group. “Results from the plan sponsor research we have performed over the past decade show a drop-off in provider changes due to core product offering differences—client service issues are now a key catalyst for provider changes.
“At Putnam, we’re seeing sponsors look to improve service delivery, or take advantage of innovation that didn’t exist three-five years ago,” said Edmund F. Murphy II, managing director and head of Defined Contribution at Putman Investments. “There is clearly a growing market demand for providers to deliver maximum value to plan sponsors and an enhanced participant experience that leads to higher savings and better retirement preparedness.”
Great-West has observed a similar trend in the mid-large market. “When sponsors conduct a finals process and switch recordkeepers, they are looking to upgrade their overall plan with the latest features and sophisticated investment capabilities while achieving a competitive price point,” Cumming said.
Another driver of the decline in 401(k) provider changes is sales-related. Failure to differentiate is a frequent sales process critique among bids lost prospects who elect to remain with the incumbent. “In an increasingly competitive marketplace with a finite amount of deal flow, sales teams really have to bring their “A” game to win the business,” suggests Schroder. “Before entering a finals presentation, I would urge any sales team to identify four or five ways in which they are different from the competition and articulate them during the presentation.”
Patrick Murphy, managing director and head of sales at New York Life Retirement Plan Services, added, “A me too” approach is not effective in sales finals presentations. Plan providers have to develop products and services with differences that are truly meaningful to plan sponsors. Those providers who can demonstrably add value and have an impact on plan results will be the winners going forward.”
Richard Schroder, MBA ’95, founded Anova, his market research and strategy consulting firm, in 2005. “For seven years, I worked for a firm where I learned the trade and helped build the company,” says Schroder. “I owned a piece of it, so when it was sold, I was able to start Anova. We now have seven employees. We’ve doubled our revenue every year since inception.”
Anova Consulting Group, LLC—named after a statistical term for data analysis— provides customized market research and management consulting to senior executives at financial services firms in the defined contribution and defined benefit space. Some of Anova’s clients include Charles Schwab, New York life, ADP and Putnam Investments.
The company has three main lines of business and focuses on helping clients improve client satisfaction, increase new business win rates and capture a larger share of the IRA rollover market. “Our business is a combination of a product and a service,” says Schroder. “Marketing for Anova is very specific. It’s all personal, one-on-one relationship building.”
Schroder enjoys the challenges and creative possibilities of being an entrepreneur. “I’m more passionate now than when I was an employee,” he says. “I think about my business all the time.”
By Mariana Lemann January 21, 2011
Client service trumps all other criteria in plan sponsors’ selection of 401(k) plan providers.
That’s according to a new survey out from Anova Consulting Group that is based on input from more than 300 midsize- and large-plan sponsors.
The results show that client service has gained in importance in sponsors’ decisions to remain with or swap out providers. And while client service is not a big factor in sponsors’ creation of a short list of providers, it becomes a bigger factor in the final stages of the decision-making process, the study shows.
Plan sponsors surveyed were only 12% more likely to cite client service as a factor in their initial search criteria, but when it comes to their final decisions, 33% were more likely to mention client service as the deciding factor.
The survey was based on telephone interviews conducted within the past year with plan sponsors in the month following their decisions to either switch or retain providers.
Client service has become much more important in the 401(k) space because the market has become much more competitive, says Rich Schroder, president of Anova Consulting Group
“As the industry has become more commoditized, plan sponsors are beginning to base their decisions more on client service,” he says.
A greater focus on fee transparency and the resulting compression of fees have also contributed to the commoditization of plan features in the retirement plan market.
The rise of open architecture and the dissemination of automatic plan features also have made fees less of a factor than the quality of the service rendered to clients, Schroder says. “What we are learning is that as these things become more on par with each other, providers have to go down the value chain.”
Plan providers catering to the middle and large end of the marketplace agree that client service is more important now than it has ever been.
“The fiduciary perspectives on pricing and open architecture have been met and the marketplace is very competitive from a pricing perspective and from an open architecture perspective,” says Wayne Finnegan, head of institutional corporate markets at ING U.S. Retirement Services. “You start to think of the less commodity- like aspects of service or delivery and the importance that has been placed on the experience of the representative that will be handling that account.”
The quality of the service rendered by providers to plan sponsors ultimately depends on intangibles like the client’s chemistry and personal fit with the relationship manager handling the account, Schroder says.
That has been the experience Putnam Investment has had with its clients over the last few years.
“If you look at why plan sponsors choose to leave their current provider or at least look at options in the marketplace, the level of client service is a contributing factor if not a driving factor,” says Edmund Murphy, III, managing director and head of defined contribution at Putnam.
But the decisions clients make are driven by more than client service, Murphy says. “It is not only about being responsive to a customer, but it is being proactive.” He touts Putnam’s client-to-relationship manager ratio, and says the firm has one of the lowest ratios at a time when “a lot of firms [are] cutting back on front-line associates.”
Fidelity Investments attributes the retention of a 20-year contract with Hewlett-Packard to client service and investments in technology. The behemoth announced yesterday that it has extended its relationship with HP for an additional five years. The deal consolidates more of HP’s retirement plan under the Fidelity umbrella.
“They look at this as an opportunity to look at their plans and to consolidate them under one provider,” says Jeffrey Lagarce, executive VP of workplace investing at Fidelity Investments. But Lagarce says that while client service is important, sponsors assess providers on a variety of factors.
“Very large clients look at all parts of the equation: competitiveness of fees, technology capabilities, Web capabilities, plan participant retirement planning tools. We have had a long relationship [with HP] and we’ve been able to demonstrate our ability to invest in technology, offer this at a competitive market price, and they have been very satisfied with the service.”
January 19, 2011 (PLANSPONSOR.com) – According to a new survey by Anova Consulting Group, retirement plan sponsors report that client service has now become the number one or number two reason for choosing a new plan provider.
In an earlier survey in 2008 and 2009, client service ranked number three or number four in importance, after fund selection and fees, according to a press release.
Among the reasons for the increased importance of client service are the continued commoditization of funds and technology in the retirement plan marketplace as well as growing fee pressure affecting all providers. Another reason, according to Rich Schroder, president of Anova Consulting Group, is that “many recent plan turnovers have tended to be among plans that are more complex in nature and need a stronger client service team to handle them.”
The survey shows the value placed on client service rose as retirement plan sponsors reached the final stage of their buying process. While plan sponsors were only 12% more likely to refer to client service as a factor in their initial search criteria, 33% were more likely to cite it as a top reason for the final decision.
“These results should be a wake-up call for retirement plan sales teams that are not currently bringing the appropriate service team members to finals presentations,” said Schroder, in the press release. “Plan sponsors want to know how their account will be managed once the sale is made, so for sales teams, it’s critical that relationship managers not only be in the room, but be skilled at presenting in finals situations.”
The 2010 Anova survey included responses from more than 300 plan sponsors in the middle and large markets (plans with over $25 million in assets under administration).
For Immediate Release
Contact: Heather Jenkins
Anova Consulting Group, LLC
(617) 731-1085
heather@anovaconsulting.com
BROOKLINE, MASS. – According to a new survey by Anova Consulting Group, a leading provider of customized market research, sales training and consulting services to financial services and human capital management companies, retirement plan sponsors report that client service has now become the #1 or #2 reason for choosing a new plan provider over a rival firm.
The 2010 Anova survey of more than 300 plan sponsors in the middle and large markets (plans with over $25 million in assets under administration) reveals the significance placed on client service and fit with an account team has increased for plan executives. In an earlier survey in 2008 and 2009, client service ranked #3 or #4 in importance, after fund selection and fees.
Notably, the survey shows the value placed on client service rose as retirement plan sponsors reached the final stage of their buying process. While plan sponsors were only 12 percent more likely to refer to client service as a factor in their initial search criteria, 33 percent were more likely to cite it as a top reason for the final decision.
“These results should be a wake-up call for retirement plan sales teams that are not currently bringing the appropriate service team members to finals presentations,” said Rich Schroder, president of Anova Consulting Group. “Plan sponsors want to know how their account will be managed once the sale is made, so for sales teams, it’s critical that relationship managers not only be in the room, but be skilled at presenting in finals situations.”
Among the reasons for the increased importance of client service are the continued commoditization of funds and technology in the retirement plan marketplace as well as growing fee pressure affecting all providers, according to Anova. Another reason, according to Schroder is that “many recent plan turnovers have tended to be among plans that are more complex in nature and need a stronger client service team to handle them.”
Schroder, whose firm has been performing market research for leading financial services and human capital management firms since 2005, is the author of a new book, From a Good Sales Call to a Great Sales Call (McGraw-Hill, October, 2010), which details how learning from post-sale debriefing helps close more sales.
Established in 2005, Anova Consulting Group is a leading market research and consulting firm focused on Win / Loss analysis and client satisfaction Analysis. By helping its clients understand why they win, lose and retain business, Anova provides strategic perspectives to its clients, driving better decision-making, product development, sales effectiveness, client service, and continuous improvement. Last year, Richard Schroder, president of Anova, released a book about Win Loss Analysis titled, From a Good Sales Call to a Great Sales Call (McGraw-Hill, 2011), which details how learning from post-sale Win / Loss debriefing helps close more sales.
Q: I have been in sales for more than 10 years, and I have changed industries several times. I never had formal training or courses but learn quickly, even when starting from scratch. I am tired, though, of doing it on my own without input of how to be better. My sales managers always seem to be busy with the duties of managing a team and keeping track of sales.
I never have had managers who are interested in training on an overall basis. They want great results with as little investment of time as possible in the reps. I think I am a natural at sales, but I would do better if I had some creative suggestions along the way for how to improve.
How do I find such a thing when a company does not offer it?
A:You have been hired for your experience and successful sales record, so your managers may feel you do well enough on your own. Independent sales reps have entrepreneurial personalities with perceptive social skills, but they can improve when they apply various processes to their knowledge banks. Seeing as you have done well as an independent learner, you could benefit from reading books on selling, which would replace the formal business courses or seminars you think you have missed.
Peruse the “how to sell” books, and check each author’s background. If you think an author’s background is impressive, review the table of contents to see what the book offers.
Richard M. Schroder, author of “From a Good Sales Call to a Great Sales Call,” researched the sales process for more than 12 years. He found that salespeople repeatedly make the same mistakes, and asking their potential clients why they did not get the sale does not net the real reasons. If you practice Schroders eight-step system — intended for all professional sales reps — you will learn how to analyze why you win and why you lose.
You even may learn that switching industries was not what you needed to do better.
Additional task degrades educated employee
Q:I work alone in sales in a large store. The owner just asked me to mop the floors because the cleaning service has become too expensive. I was offended and in shock. I have a college degree; I’m not a cleaning woman, and I was not hired to do floors. He didn’t even offer me a raise to do this.
My husband does not think the request was that bad. What do you think?
A:In defense of the owner, he is under pressure and has to cut corners. He clearly cannot cut your job, because you are the only salesperson in the store. On your side, you were hired to sell, not to replace his cleaning service.
If you peacefully comply with his request, there is no telling what it eventually will do to your self-esteem. Once you start mopping, your anger may rise higher than you can imagine, and when it does, you may quit in a rage. Do not let it get to that point.
Calmly explain your feelings and thoughts about this with him. You also can call a lawyer to see whether you have a potential cause of action. Do not go ahead with it if you do, but knowing your rights may help you in your discussion.
Jobs may not be easy to find, but if you cannot find peace within yourself because of this change in duties, start looking for another job.
It makes sense: your firm is more likely to land a sale if you skillfully tailor your presentation to the needs of a given prospect. But in order to master …
January 05, 2011
It makes sense: your firm is more likely to land a sale if you skillfully tailor your presentation to the needs of a given prospect. But in order to master customized selling, contends sales-training specialist Richard Schroder, you need to take a standardized approach.
In From a Good Sales Call to a GREAT Sales Call, Schroder suggests the following methods salespeople can use to gain insights into potential clients and incorporate them into their pitches:
1. Write a list of open-ended questions for use with any prospect:
Equip each rep with a series of questions focusing on the potential customer, company and business needs. For example, asking the prospect the personal question “How did you get into the business?” lets your rep learn about the prospect as an individual and identify potential common ground on which to build rapport. And asking the organizational question “How is business?” will help your salesperson understand what the prospects firm is going through, including pain points that your company may be able to address.
2. Get the potential customer talking before your pitch:
Your rep should open a sales presentation by saying something like, “Before I start, can you take a few minutes to fill me in on what is important to you and what is going on with your current provider, product or service? This will help me clarify and better tailor my remarks in the rest of the meeting.” Then your rep should listen carefully to get a clear grasp of the prospect’s specific needs.
3. Restate or paraphrase the prospect’s unique needs before presenting a solution:
By doing so, your salesperson will show that she has listened, and the prospect will get a chance to correct any misunderstandings.
4. Take notes to capture important insights:
Doing so will make the prospect feel important and encourage him to keep talking. It will also help ensure that your salesperson remembers the most pertinent details of what the prospect has revealed so she can incorporate these into her presentation.
5. Highlight the prospects needs in the pitch:
A rep must take care that her presentation covers each of the hot-button issues the prospect has revealed during the early “identifying needs” portion of the sales meeting. And she should not worry if your firms sales materials do not reflect this customization; instead, she should focus on showing the prospect that she understands what he is looking for and on addressing each of his areas of interest.
© 2025 Anova Consulting Group, LLC. All rights reserved
