Re:Getting to 'No'
by hammock on Friday March 23, 2012 @11:57AM
(#3745713)
Can't be helped what you're reminded of, but recognize the differences here. Your chess strategy is a short-run winner but a long-run loser, while Jacques' business strategy is the opposite--a short-run loser but a long-run winner.
As I see it, "Getting to no" is achieved one of two ways.
1) you can connect them with the right fit. In this case you are forgoing the immediate sale, but even though you aren't the right fit for that person, at least you are good at something (connecting) and maybe will make a better sale from a referral, or even from them in the future should their business change.
2) you can try to price them out (raise your price). If they don't take it, then you don't risk your reputation by ruining their business with a bad-fitting product. If they do take it, the lost future sale(s) mentioned in #1 is compensated by the higher price.
As I see it, "Getting to no" is achieved one of two ways.
1) you can connect them with the right fit. In this case you are forgoing the immediate sale, but even though you aren't the right fit for that person, at least you are good at something (connecting) and maybe will make a better sale from a referral, or even from them in the future should their business change.
2) you can try to price them out (raise your price). If they don't take it, then you don't risk your reputation by ruining their business with a bad-fitting product. If they do take it, the lost future sale(s) mentioned in #1 is compensated by the higher price.