"Better" is a short term strategy.

"Best" is a winning strategy.

There are two primary reasons why trying to be better than the competition is a losing strategy:

─       Leapfrog tactics

─       Comparative analysis

Leapfrog Tactics

It's the cause of "one-upping". Staying a step ahead of the competition will keep you, well, a step ahead. Today you're better; tomorrow it's their turn.

At each successive encounter with the customer, one of you will explain your superiority and cause the buyer to lean in your direction. That will last until the next encounter. In addition to wearing down the poor customer, the differences between the two of you will begin to blur and become less significant or important.

Leapfrog tactics are why we like to go last when presenting to a customer in a competitive sale.

Comparative Analysis

This is the process of inadvertently putting ourselves in the same category as the competition. It's another way of saying, "We're the same as them only different..." We use the word "better", of course, but the customer only hears "different".

There is a temptation to put down the competition when doing comparative analysis. That's always a losing approach. We point out a weakness in the competition and then we show that we are not weak. It's like saying, "they're lousy and we're better than that!" Who wants to buy "better than lousy"?

The Value-Added Approach

With the value-added approach, we demonstrate why our offering is best for the customer's current needs. Instead of comparing our features with the competition's features, we qualify and quantify how our product/service is best in helping them solve their specific problems. The focus is on the customer's criteria, not ours.

We also keep it current by stressing to the customer that we are addressing their immediate situation; not the way things were when they bought from our competitor.

Talking to the customer about how they will benefit from what we offer is superior to temporarily one-upping the competition or side-by-side comparisons.

Example

To best understand this concept, here are three approaches to the same sale discussed above.

Leapfrog:

YOU: "Mr. Customer, our trucks get 5% better gas mileage than our competitor's."

COMPETITOR: "Our trucks have a stronger rear axle - what good is great mileage if the truck is down for axle failure?"

Comparative:

YOU: "Our trucks come in a wider assortment of colors than our competitor's."

COMPETITION: "Our painting process has multiple undercoats and overcoats which will protect your trucks longer and look better."

In these scenarios the customer may resort to a flip-toss decision. Either of the options may be acceptable.

Value-Added Approach: [based on information from pre-call planning]

YOU: "70% of your trips are in areas with the highest fuels costs. Your fuel costs savings last year would have been $83,450 or about $1,350 per unit. How will your traffic patterns compare next year?" (This offers the customer a qualified and quantified benefit that addresses their needs for the upcoming year. The prospect of a potential axle failure is minimal; the competitor's benefit is voided.)

YOU: "The graphics on your trailers indicate that branding is important to your company. Is it important that the tractor color be consistent? After all, most rigs wear out long before they need repainting." (Branding is a current marketing issue; the undercoats and overcoats offered by the competitor bring a less-immediate benefit.)

See the difference? Your customers will!

                               ___________________