• CE Principle
• History of the CE Principle
• A new training
• Definition´s

A new training course on the CE principle

 

I simply introduce myself, I am once again the salesman, as I described at the beginning.

I am flattered today to be invited here to the next sales seminar entitled: “Personal control of success” It sounds good, and as a knowledge-hungry salesman I hope to find new ways of getting into the Top Ten.

The seminar starts very strangely. The trainer asks for a definition of success and failure, then asks for a definition of behaviour and about the business calibration points, followed by a definition of the role of the salesman. I wait in vain for a great sales method. Instead he tells us something about the company’s Emperor game and the resultant foggy tactics.
I can follow it, but what does it have to do with me?

I very slowly grasp where the trainer is leading. The origin or cause of all behaviour lies in thinking. This thinking involves two paradigms, which I didn’t previously know. It now becomes clear to me why sales methods, techniques and tricks cannot function as such, as our first trainer made us believe.

By concentrating on the method, we are prevented from being aware of the customer and of his personal wishes. The customer then feels himself to be ignored, he tries to see through the game, because he doesn’t like being bamboozled. The customer goes into defence mode. As a result, no partnership relationship can be established, as only subsequently became clear to me and which sounded logical, but how can I implement it in practice?

The trainer assures me that everyone is already doing it, but isn’t aware of it. Owing to upbringing and experience, and due to society’s thought patterns, people apply a mindset that is detrimental to attaining successful sales. The other paradigm should be used, because therein lies the secret of successful communication. Is that right? I keep comparing the trainer’s statements with my own sales experiences.

It applies to my best customer Müller Lüdenscheidt, I simply go in, know what I want to say to him and everything else just flows from there. But surely I shouldn’t do the same in the case of the customer who doesn’t buy? The trainer says yes, I simply need to be able to answer two questions before the meeting:

What do I want to say to the customer?

What do I want to know from the customer?

I normally know what I want to say to the customer, but I find it more difficult to decide what I want to know from him. I want to know a lot from Müller Lüdenscheidt, he also interests me as a person, but surely the others have to be convinced. The trainer says I should treat all customers in the same way, and be as interested in them as I am in Müller Lüdenscheid. Can I really believe it? I also believed the last trainer and it didn’t work.
But then I won’t be in control of the meeting any more, I protest, and the trainer says you can never be in control of a meeting, and that one needs to think of a sales meeting more like a mystery tour.

Interest and curiosity about the customer’s opinion: what benefit is the customer seeking from the product range, from personal service or from the service of the company? Do I know that about all customers? “Of course, absolutely“ I tell the group, but secretly I know how much I don’t know.

There must be no compelling intentions towards the customer, they are contraindicated. Now I finally know why I failed at Müller, Meier and Schulz. I now know my personal failure factors. I can analyse these after every meeting. If my compelling intention of eliciting a yes from the customer once again overcomes me, and I notice this during the meeting, I can immediately make a switch and say STOP, I don’t have enough information, and I need to find out under what circumstances the customer would buy and what he is looking for in terms of the product and service. I take plenty of food for thought home with me from the meeting, I also know my success and failure factors, so I don’t need to practise any method on my family, or especially on the customer.

It is the Monday following the seminar. I am trying again with Ekel Müller, but hang on, if I even think about Ekel Müller, I will probably experience another disaster. I was not in my role in conceptual terms, but now I consciously enter it and am pleased to see the person and customer Müller, and take an interest in his opinion and his wishes. It worked, Müller was far nicer today and had more time. He gave me plenty of information, as he hadn’t done last time, and told me under what circumstances he would buy, and about the fact the seller’s personal service was very important to him, and that he wanted to do business with me as soon as he could see that I took my new role seriously.

It has all become much more enjoyable: Müller buys, Meier buys, Schulze buys and I like them all as much as Müller Lüdenscheidt, and I get into the Top Ten, and if I continue to work on myself in this way, I’m sure I’ll be Number One one day, and if I become a manager, I will need to view all my staff in the same way as my customers, so that I can offer them the help they need in their role.

The history of the CE principle or On the Lookout was and remains for me a decisive part of my life, both professionally and privately. I have found that a simple solution in the truest sense of the word is hidden behind human mindsets. However, in order to consciously implement the solution, one must be willing to honestly analyse oneself and be willing to take personal responsibility for one’s own failure and success.

Anyone offering this willingness is in a position of being highly productive on behalf of the company. Motivation and satisfaction are just some of the prospects one can derive from the conscious implementation of the CE principle.