The Behavioral Sales Model and Six Sigma Approach to Sales

by Michael Cannet and Alicia M. Alvero
Queens College, The City University of New York

I currently work at a large auto finance corporation that uses Six Sigma (SS) in every department within the bank. Here, SS is seen as a panacea for all problems and many other companies have taken a ride on the bandwagon. However, after I enrolled in an organizational behavior management course, I came to conclude that SS may not be the cure that it is purported to be. SS may affect improvements in customer satisfaction regarding processes that have minimal human interaction (e.g., ATM’s, automated software programs, automated credit transactions, etc.). Unfortunately, SS does not effectively deal with processes requiring intense human interaction (e.g., transaction turnaround times, approvals, customer service, sales, etc.). In contrast, the Behavioral Sales Model (BSM) effectively handles with these shortcomings (Martinko, Casey, & Fadil, 2001).

My employer offers the following explanation of the use SS:
What enables Six Sigma to achieve sustained business gains?

Senior management drives it. Six Sigma is a tool that helps business managers achieve their business goals.

Six Sigma is relentlessly client-focused. Customer requirements are the critical perspective used in Six Sigma analyses.

Six Sigma is data driven. Six Sigma is mathematically defined as having 3.4 errors occur out of every one million opportunities. Such objective measurements can show people the errors in long-standing assumptions and help them make better business decisions.

Notice that from this explanation the employee is not mentioned anywhere. To SS, the client is the main focus. In fact, Pande, Neuman, and Cavanagh (2000), argue that in SS, human behavior is considered “white noise” and should not be considered in SS projects. The only area which applies to the employee is the basic SS training driven by client’s needs in order to meet the objectives of the company. This required training does not consist of powerful behavior analytic methods such as those employed by BSM. This is the main difference, although not the only difference between the two models. As far as their similarities, both BSM and SS use a model to guide them in a direction from start to finish. The following chart will be helpful in understanding and outlining the BSM (Martinko, et al. 2001) and SS (work-related document) models:

Table 1. Outline of Both Models

The focus of this article is on the BSM and SS approach toward sales. SS focuses on the Voice of the Customer (VOC) whereas the BSM focuses on the employee’s behaviors that are relevant to their sales performance. A behavior analyst will determine relevant behaviors based on customer and employer research and base decisions upon this information. VOC is defined as the needs of the target customer, in this case a potential buyer for a product. The product must meet the needs of the customer in order for the customer to be interested in the product. SS focuses on VOC research and process variation control while paying much less, if any, attention to human performance factors with regard to the behavior of sales staff. Understanding client needs is an important factor, but having a well-trained sales staff to make the sales is just as critical. Thus, the BSM model picks up where SS leaves off. The BSM approach to sales focuses on how to introduce and reinforce the behaviors necessary to make a sale. For example, SS focuses on pricing process improvement, branding effectiveness, advertising, etc. in order to try to increase sales performance. SS uses training manuals and sales strategies (which may briefly mention behavioral situations), in contrast to BSM which identifies behavioral targets that need to change to increase sales (e.g., polite behaviors, effective closing skills, conversations with potential customers, etc.).

The heavy focus of client needs allows SS to define and anticipate what customers want, however, an important second phase is establishing a well-trained sales force that can perform high sale probability behaviors and therefore increase revenue for the company. After all, what good is it to have an in depth knowledge of customer needs if a firm can’t offer a powerful, well-trained sales force armed with an arsenal of potent sales related behaviors? Training a strong sales force using learning techniques is what makes BSM a better model with regard to sales.

Krupar (2004) discusses the emphasis of the Kano Model in SS with regard to sales. According to Kano, there are three customer needs which must be addressed to increase sales: a) “must-be needs”—needs of a customer which are the most basic and must be fulfilled to start a relationship, b) “one-dimensional needs”—needs (which are actually wants) the customer wants that can either entice a customer to buy or turn them away, and c) “delighters”—the bonuses customers receive for doing business with the company. All three of these points are customer-focused and may offer the company information concerning what the customer wants; however, as the beginning of this paper pointed out, this is only half the information necessary for a business to increase sales. According to Martinko et al. (2001), the BSM elaborates on this shortcoming by targeting both the customer and the salesperson by: a) identifying the change target—this includes specific sales behaviors of the salesperson, b) creating an intervention based on the outcome of the first step (change target), and c) applying and evaluating the intervention which includes using research designs and reinforcement systems aimed at maintaining desirable sales behaviors.

Human behavior has been researched for many years and has been shown to be an effective means for improving performance in many arenas (Martinko, et al., 2001). I strongly believe SS’s omission of behavior-related concerns will eventually lead to its decline in service-related areas which tend to heavily rely on human interaction. This is especially true when behaviors are the key drivers of outcomes, such as in the area of sales. Service-related businesses looking to increase and sustain employee performance would benefit from implementing the methods of the BSM developed within the field of organizational behavior analysis.

Overall, the deficiencies of SS, as outlined in this paper, may be compensated for by the behavioral techniques used by the BSM Model. The future success of such methods in the business world would be facilitated by creating an online forum where management personnel and behavior analysts can communicate useful information that may be applied to a variety of business settings. Utilizing the internet will ensure this communication on a large scale which would greatly increase awareness and lead to a rise in the use of behavior analysts in service-related areas such as sales.

References

Krupar, J. (2004). Six sigma for sales: Truth about the customers’ needs. iSixSigma. Retrieved April 14, 2004, from http://www.isixsigma.com/library/content/c040112a.asp?action=print

Martinko, M. J., Casey, W. W., & Fadil, P. (2001). A behavioral approach to sales management. In C. M. Johnson., W. K Redmon & T. C. Mawhinney (Eds.), Handbook of organizational performance: Behavior analysis and management (pp. 327-344). Binghamton, NY: Haworth Press.

Pande, P., Neuman, R., & Cavanagh, R. (2000) The Six Sigma Way. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc.

Six Sigma overview: an intranet web based document defining Six Sigma from my employer.