Skip to content

learn

What An MBA Didn’t Teach You About Sales

The sales profession is challenging. You need to work hard at it to succeed. You need to learn from the best. You need to improve your skills continuously. If you think you can sell since you are a hit at parties and have a lot of friends, you may soon find that you are a failure as a salesperson. Blunt truth:

because the sales profession is so hard, you have to focus on doing everything in sales very well, or you will be considered a failure.

I call this blog, Skinned Knees because I try to relate all of the learning that I have done over the past 4+ decades (while skinning my knees in the learning process).

I hope that you learn from my mistakes so that your business will grow!

AI Sales Coaching: How to Stop Rescuing Deals and Start Developing Salespeople

There is a dangerous moment in the growth of many B2B companies. It happens when the best salesperson becomes the sales manager.

The promotion seems obvious. This person consistently exceeds quota, understands customers, knows how to close difficult deals, and has earned the team’s respect. Who could be better qualified?

Six months later, that same person is personally rescuing the team’s largest opportunities, handling difficult customer objections, negotiating with executives, and keeping the forecast alive.

The company’s revenue looks healthy. The owner is satisfied. The sales manager appears indispensable.

And that is precisely the problem.

The company hasn’t developed a scalable sales organization. It has become dependent on one talented individual. Artificial intelligence offers an opportunity to change this pattern. But only if we rethink what sales management should accomplish.

The Difference Between Managing Deals and Developing Salespeople

Traditional sales management relies heavily on inspection and intervention. Managers review pipeline reports, examine forecasts, enforce activity requirements, and intervene when opportunities get into trouble. These activities are necessary, but they are not the same as coaching.

Consider a salesperson who confidently announces during a pipeline review that Mary is the Champion for a major opportunity. The manager suspects that Mary is simply a friendly contact who likes the product. An experienced manager might join the next customer meeting, take control of the conversation, and personally secure executive support. The opportunity might close. Unfortunately, the salesperson hasn’t developed the ability to identify and validate a real Champion.

A better manager asks a different question:

“What has Mary actually done that proves she is your Champion?”

Has Mary introduced the salesperson to important stakeholders? Has she explained the customer’s internal decision process? Has she advocated for the solution when the salesperson wasn’t present? Has she taken any personal risk to help the opportunity advance? If the salesperson cannot identify meaningful actions, the relationship remains an untested hypothesis.

The manager’s next responsibility isn’t to take over. It is to help the salesperson determine how to test that relationship. That coaching conversation improves the salesperson’s judgment, potentially affecting every future opportunity.

The objective of sales leadership is not to make the manager better at closing deals. It is to make the entire team better at closing deals.

Read the rest of the article…

AI Sales Automation: Why Your Chatbot Is Not a Sales Process

Imagine preparing for an important customer meeting. You open your favorite AI assistant, give it the prospect’s name, and ask for a summary of the company’s business challenges and the questions you should ask. Within seconds, you receive a beautifully written briefing. The assistant identifies potential operational problems, competitive pressures, and several opportunities to demonstrate the value of your solution.

There’s just one problem. One of those impressive insights concerns an acquisition the prospect supposedly completed last year.

Except the acquisition never happened.

The artificial intelligence fabricated a plausible business event and presented it as fact. Had you trusted the briefing, you might have opened your meeting with a question that immediately damaged your credibility.

This scenario illustrates a much larger problem with how B2B sales organizations use AI.

We’re asking artificial intelligence to perform too many different kinds of work without distinguishing which tasks require intelligence and which require reliable execution.

That distinction matters more than the sophistication of the AI model you choose.

The Problem Isn’t Just Hallucinations. It’s Process Design.

Salespeople increasingly rely on ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini, and other Generative AI applications to prepare for meetings, research prospects, write follow-up messages, and analyze opportunities. Those are legitimate applications of AI. In fact, I’d question why a salesperson with access to these capabilities wouldn’t use them. But consider what happens before the salesperson receives a useful answer.

They retrieve information from their CRM, gather previous meeting notes, identify stakeholders, check pricing, and reconstruct details from previous conversations. They paste everything into their AI assistant, ask a question, verify the response, and correct any mistakes.

Tomorrow, they repeat the process for another customer.

The AI may have improved the quality of their analysis, but the underlying sales process remains largely manual.

When twenty salespeople independently reconstruct the same process every day, you don’t have an AI adoption problem. You have a sales management problem.

You’re paying experienced professionals to repeatedly assemble information that your existing systems should already provide.

The solution isn’t necessarily better prompting. It’s better workflow design.

Read the rest of the article…

The Power Matrix: Mapping Who Really Decides

Every significant B2B purchase is shaped by more people than the salesperson ever meets. Some sign the contract, some recommend, some can quietly veto, and many simply have to live with the result. The Power Matrix puts that network on a single page.

It forces a salesperson to answer three questions about every major opportunity: Who can influence this decision? How much power does each of them really have? How well do we know them? A salesperson who can complete the Power Matrix for every account will be phenomenally successful. One who can’t will find that the empty cells show exactly where the deal is exposed.

This overview explains how the matrix is structured, how to build one, and how a sales leader can use it to judge the real health of the team’s largest opportunities.

An influence chart, not an organizational chart

The Power Matrix maps who influences one specific purchasing decision. It does not map who reports to whom. That single distinction drives everything else about the tool.

Two people on the same row may hold different titles, report to different executives, and work in different parts of the company. They’re on the same row because they carry roughly the same weight in this decision. Likewise, someone placed above another in a column does not need to be that person’s boss. They need to respect each other’s opinions.

Titles are a poor guide to power. A title often reflects tenure rather than influence, and a sharp Director can carry as much weight as a Vice President, especially across departments of very different sizes. Build the matrix by watching how people react to one another, whose opinion others seek, and whose objections stop a conversation.

Two versions, sized to the opportunity

The matrix comes in two sizes. The larger one requires far more research and relationship-building, so the deal must justify the effort.

CharacteristicSmall Power MatrixLarge Power Matrix
Grid3 × 35 × 5
People identified925
Departments35
Influence levels35
Typical deal sizeBelow roughly 5–10% of annual quotaAbove roughly 10% of annual quota
Center cellPrimary CoachPrimary Coach

The quota cutoff is a guideline, not a rule. Adjust it for your product and industry. As a sanity check, a salesperson with a reasonable win rate should rarely need more than about 10 Large Power Matrix analyses in a year. If someone is building 20 or more, the threshold is set too low, and they are spending large-deal effort on small deals.

Read the rest of the article…

Stop Asking AI to Write: How Salespeople Can Use AI to Think Better

Most salespeople are using artificial intelligence too late in the sales process. They gather the account information. They interpret what matters. They decide what argument to make. They formulate the questions. They determine what the buyer probably cares about. Then, after doing all of the difficult thinking themselves, they hand the last 10% of the job to AI and say, “Write me an email.”

When the result sounds generic, they conclude AI isn’t particularly useful for serious B2B selling. The problem is not necessarily the technology. The problem is where they inserted it into the process.

A salesperson can get significantly more leverage from AI by using it before the answer is obvious. That means treating the system less like a copywriter and more like a junior analyst, researcher, sales coach, and thinking partner.

The Skill Is Not Prompt Writing

An entire industry is built around prompt libraries. “50 Best Prompts for Salespeople” sounds useful because it promises a shortcut. It also teaches the wrong lesson.

A prompt that worked for someone else’s account, market, buyer, sales process, and objective may be almost useless for yours. The more strategic the sales problem becomes, the less likely a canned prompt is to fit it.

The more durable skill is learning to decompose commercial work into reasoning steps.

A useful sequence is:

  • Context.
  • Objective.
  • Constraints.
  • Reasoning steps.
  • Output.
  • Critique.
  • Revision.

Instead of asking AI to jump from context directly to output, make it work through the intermediate decisions with you.

Suppose you are preparing for a meeting with a CFO. A weak request is:

“Write an email to the CFO.”

A stronger conversation begins by asking AI to identify the financial issues most likely to matter to that executive based on the evidence you provide. Then ask which conclusions are facts, which are inferences, and what additional information would increase confidence. Challenge the assumptions. Compare several possible value arguments. Only then should you ask for the email.

The writing is now the consequence of better thinking.

Read the rest of the article…

AI Will Not Fix Sales Problems Built on Fragmented CRM Data

Most sales leaders are asking the wrong question about artificial intelligence.

They ask which AI tool to buy, which platform has the best features, which automation will save the most time, or which sales technology will help their reps move faster. Those questions matter, but they are downstream from the real issue.

The more important question is: Does your CRM provide AI with enough trusted context to make useful recommendations?

If the answer is no, the next tool will not solve the problem. It will accelerate the confusion.

AI cannot reason well from fractured data. If account history lives in email, proposal tools, LinkedIn messages, spreadsheets, call notes, support tickets, and half-completed CRM fields, the AI is not operating from a complete commercial picture. It is guessing from fragments. A faster guess is still a guess.

That is why the CRM must evolve from a passive system of record into an active system of action. The old CRM was built to store yesterday’s activity. The modern CRM has to help shape tomorrow’s decisions.

A strong CRM foundation gives sellers a complete account context before a call. It helps managers understand pipeline risk without relying only on rep opinion. It allows AI to recommend next steps because the recommendation is grounded in actual customer history, not generic sales theory. It gives the organization leverage because the patterns learned in one deal can improve the next similar deal.

Read the rest of the article…

Compelling Events: Shorten Sales Cycles & Improve Forecasts

Deals move when the buyer’s business calendar forces a decision.

A real compelling event is the operating discipline that separates pipeline from possibility. It gives urgency a business reason, attaches dates to consequences, and forces both sides to decide whether the opportunity deserves serious time, resources, and executive attention.

Many salespeople confuse need with urgency. That mistake creates bloated forecasts, stalled proposals, and too many “just checking in” follow-ups. A prospect can have a real need and still have no reason to act now. They may need

  • better integrations,
  • stronger reporting,
  • reduced churn,
  • tighter compliance,
  • faster workflows,
  • a cleaner technology stack.

Those needs matter, but they can live on a roadmap indefinitely.

A compelling event changes the conversation because something meaningful happens by a specific date.

  • An audit is scheduled.
  • A contract expires.
  • A board commitment has been made.
  • A market launch is tied to revenue.
  • A facility lease ends.
  • A regulatory requirement becomes enforceable.
  • A major customer is at risk.

These events create pressure because delays have consequences beyond the buying team’s preferences.

That is the standard. A compelling event has a date, an owner, and a consequence.

The Difference Between Interest and Commitment

Interest sounds productive in a sales conversation. Commitment behaves differently.

Interested buyers will schedule meetings, request demos, review capabilities, and discuss future-state improvements. Committed buyers will help you understand the decision path, expose internal constraints, validate timing, and clarify what happens if the outcome is missed.

The difference matters because your forecast depends on the customer’s decision reality, not your sales activity.

A compelling event gives you that reality. It tells you why the buyer is engaged now, who owns the risk, what business outcome must be protected, and which internal processes must be navigated to get there. Without that clarity, the opportunity may still be real, but it should be treated as unproven.

Sales leaders should inspect this with discipline. “They are excited” is not a compelling event. “Budget season” is not enough. “They want to modernize” is too soft. The better question is: what changed in their business that makes inaction costly?

That question protects your time and the buyer’s time.

Read the rest of the article…

The Dual Blueprint Requirement: Why Growth Demands Two Plans, Not One

Launching a company or steering one through a merger, turnaround, or major transition requires clarity about how value will be created and, just as importantly, how revenue will actually be generated.

Many leadership teams recognize the need for a Business Plan, but overlook that sustainable growth requires a second, complementary plan. The main breakdown is not the strategy itself, but the assumption that strategy automatically creates revenue. Bridging strategy and revenue requires a distinct plan for that conversion, targeting a different audience.

The Business Plan sets direction from the top down. The Sales Plan is validated by demonstrating how that direction can become actual revenue from the bottom up.

Both are essential. Neither works in isolation.

The Business Plan: Charting the Course (Top-Down)

The Business Plan exists to answer specific questions for a particular audience. Its primary readers are CEOs, CFOs, bankers, private equity partners, and venture investors. These stakeholders are evaluating risk, scale, and return. They want to know where the company is going and why the destination is worth the journey.

At its core, the Business Plan articulates strategic intent. It defines the mission, the long-term objectives, and the differentiated value proposition that the company believes the market will reward. It frames the opportunity in language that aligns leadership, capital, and governance.

Market analysis in this context is necessarily high-level. It focuses on the total addressable market, industry dynamics, competitive positioning, and macro trends. The goal is not to explain how every deal will be won, but to establish that a meaningful opportunity exists and that the company has a credible right to pursue it.

Financial projections follow the same logic. They are built on broad assumptions: projected market share, average selling price, renewal and retention rates, inflation, and multi-year revenue targets. These numbers are directional. They signal ambition and scale rather than operational certainty.

Read the rest of the article…

Stop Betting on Superstars: How Operating Standards Turn Sellers into Predictable Producers

Many teams grow, but few truly scale revenue beyond individual hero efforts. That difference changes everything for leaders today and in the future. Growth relies on hustle; scaling depends on repeatability across segments and individuals. Your strategy must reflect that hard truth in practice.

Are you relying on one standout to win deals month after month? That looks strong until risk turns visible and costly. One resignation can cripple momentum and expose brittle systems that you had previously ignored.

Scalable sales replaces heroics with defined, teachable operating rhythms that everyone follows. It turns chaos into predictable pipeline progress and results. It clarifies markets, messages, motions, and measurable expectations for every seller on a weekly basis. It builds leverage into onboarding and coaching for consistency. It protects margins while systematically accelerating win rates and velocity across territories.

The foundation begins with a clear picture of your ideal customer, including any disqualifying factors. Having an accurate Ideal Client Profile (ICP) helps minimize waste and reduce uncertainty in your efforts. Take time to define firmographics, pain points, triggers, and buying behaviors using consistent language based on shared evidence. Understand who cares about these issues and why it matters to them now. Also, identify negative personas to sharpen your focus and qualification processes in marketing and sales. A well-defined ICP can significantly boost your conversion rates and shorten the sales cycle.

Next, turn your ICP into straightforward messaging and discovery frameworks tailored for each stage. Consider what unique problems you solve for your customers. What outcomes are most important to them, and who are the key stakeholders by role and priority?

Build talk tracks that lead buyers, not chase buyers with purpose always. Anchor questions to the business metrics and risks they feel. Teach a qualification that tests mutual commitment and outlines next steps with attached dates. Avoid fluffy demos; design relevant proofs using their data. Process specificity turns B players into consistent producers without copying another personality.

I suggest you establish a practical, stage-based operating rhythm that everyone can easily understand and follow. By sharing clear definitions and expectations, managing the pipeline becomes a consistent and smooth process each week. Define each stage with specific exit criteria—avoiding vague intentions or subjective feelings. For example, discovery is considered complete when stakeholders confirm the consequences and impact, and solution fit is achieved when success criteria and ownership are clearly aligned. The commit stage should be backed by a shared plan with clear dates and assigned owners. During weekly reviews, focus on assessing quality rather than just quantity or activity counts. Ask yourself:

  • Does evidence from buyers’ backstage moves have a direct impact on their purchasing decisions?
  • Are the next steps specific, mutually agreed upon, and already scheduled on both calendars?
Read the rest of the article…