Skip to content

productivity

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!

How to Win When AI-Powered B2B Buyers Already Know Your Product

Imagine walking into a major prospect meeting after two days of preparation. You have reviewed the account, refined your presentation, and rehearsed your opening. Three minutes into your presentation, the vice president of operations interrupts.

“We already know what your product does. We compared you with five competitors using AI.”

She turns her laptop around. On the screen is a spreadsheet with 200 rows of features, prices, reviews, and implementation claims. Some entries are accurate. Others are questionable. Every entry has already influenced how her team thinks about your solution. Your instinct might be to continue the presentation, challenge the inaccuracies, or defend your product feature by feature. All three responses surrender control of the business conversation. The buyer does not need another source of product information. She needs help making a decision.

The Salesperson’s Information Advantage Is Gone

Artificial intelligence has changed what B2B buyers can accomplish before they speak to a salesperson. Generative AI tools can summarize technical documents, compare competing products, model pricing scenarios, identify perceived weaknesses, and develop vendor shortlists in a fraction of the time those activities once required.

According to Gartner’s May 2026 research, 45% of surveyed B2B buyers used generative AI during a recent purchase. Sixty-seven percent said they preferred a sales-rep-free experience. Yet 69% wanted to validate AI-generated insights with a sales representative. Those numbers are not contradictory. Buyers increasingly prefer to gather information independently, then turn to someone who can help them assess its reliability, apply it to their business, and reduce the risk of a bad decision.

This changes the definition of value selling. A salesperson’s value is no longer primarily access to information. It is the ability to translate evidence into business judgment and confidence in decisions.

Your Most Dangerous Competitor Is No Decision

An AI-assisted buying committee may be more informed individually and less aligned collectively. The CFO asks an AI assistant to identify the cheapest alternative. Operations prioritizes reliability and throughput. IT investigates integration and cybersecurity. Procurement scores the vendors against another set of criteria. Each stakeholder arrives with an apparently objective answer. The answers do not necessarily agree. More information creates more debate, more validation requests, and more reasons to defer the decision.

This is how information paralysis becomes a revenue problem. The salesperson who responds with another 40-slide deck adds information without resolving uncertainty. The stronger seller identifies the few factors that determine whether the investment produces a measurable business result.

For a manufacturing automation purchase, those factors might be unplanned downtime, production throughput, and integration costs. The other 197 spreadsheet rows may be informative without being decisive.

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…

AI Prospecting Agents: Build More Pipeline Without Adding More SDRs

One of the more frustrating realities in modern sales is that a company can invest heavily in technology and still leave its best salespeople doing work that should never require their time.

The CRM is open. So is LinkedIn. There is an intent-data platform in another tab, a contact database in another, a sales engagement platform somewhere else, and perhaps a conversation intelligence tool running in the background.

The company has a technology stack. What it may not have is a prospecting system.

That distinction matters.

A collection of tools still depends on someone remembering which accounts matter, noticing when a former champion changes jobs, deciding which buying signals deserve attention, researching the account, moving information between systems, writing the message, and following up. When people are the integration layer connecting all those systems, the company has not really automated prospecting. It has simply given its salespeople more software to operate.

The Prospecting Advantage Has Changed

Traditional outbound sales was built around scarcity. Finding contact information, researching a company, and uncovering a credible reason to approach someone required significant effort. That made volume difficult and valuable.

Artificial intelligence changed those economics.

Today, generating another email is nearly free. Finding another prospect is relatively easy. AI can produce hundreds or thousands of messages faster than a sales team could ever review them. That does not make those messages valuable.

When volume becomes inexpensive, volume stops being a competitive advantage. Relevance becomes the scarce resource.

We need to evolve our systems away from asking, “How can we send more outreach?” Rather, we need to be thinking of, “How can we identify the people who deserve our attention right now and give our salespeople something useful to say when they contact them?”

A modern prospecting system therefore has to answer five questions continuously:

  1. Who should we pursue?
  2. Why should we pursue them now?
  3. What should we say?
  4. Which channel and timing gives us the best chance of engagement?
  5. When should a human salesperson enter the conversation?

The fifth question is particularly important.

Read the rest of the article…

Your Sales Compensation Plan Is Quietly Managing Your Sales Team

A salesperson reaches the final week of the quarter with a major opportunity ready to close. Legal has approved the agreement. The customer is prepared to move forward but asks for a 15 percent discount.

The salesperson understands what the discount does to margin. So does the sales manager. Finance knows as well. Yet the salesperson is measured on revenue, the manager needs the deal to make the quarterly forecast, and neither is directly rewarded for protecting margin.

The discount is approved. The deal closes. The commission increases. Everyone celebrates.

The company may have just paid someone extra to give away its profit.

No one acted dishonestly. The compensation plan worked precisely as designed. That is the problem.

Compensation Is a Management System

Most companies treat sales compensation as an administrative process. Leadership creates a plan, finance calculates payments, and managers resolve disputes when the numbers do not match expectations.

That view misses the strategic role compensation plays.

A compensation plan influences which customers salespeople pursue, how aggressively they discount, whether they favor one-year or multi-year agreements, how they collaborate, and whether they prioritize new business, renewals, margin, or market share.

What the company pays for will eventually outweigh what its leaders say they value.

Many sales leaders inherited plans that accumulated years of exceptions, temporary accelerators, regional variations, product overlays, split-credit rules, and special arrangements. The resulting spreadsheet may be technically functional while being strategically incoherent.

The warning signs are familiar:

Salespeople maintain private spreadsheets because they do not trust their commission statements.

Managers spend time resolving payout disputes instead of coaching pipeline.

Quotas are created by adding a percentage to last year’s number rather than analyzing territory potential.

A handful of top performers benefit from every contest while most of the team decides the competition is irrelevant.

These are not motivation problems. They are design problems that consume selling time, reduce margin, and erode trust.

Read the rest of the article…

How to Build a Sales Organization That Survives a Founder Exit

Navigating the complexities of business transitions can be quite a journey, especially for those in sales and leadership roles. When a founder chooses to pass the baton, whether through selling to someone outside the company, passing it within the family, or setting up an employee stock ownership plan, each option comes with its own unique challenges and chances for growth. For salespeople, sales managers, and CEOs of small companies, understanding these dynamics is really important.

When a business owner considers selling to an external buyer, they often experience a surprising realization: the valuation shock. It’s common for owners to overestimate their company’s worth, only to encounter a reality check during the valuation process. This moment is so important because it influences all future negotiations and strategies. Buyers don’t just look at the numbers; they also carefully examine the business’s sales processes and the owner’s involvement. Here, the owner’s role as the main salesperson can be both a strength and a challenge. If the owner accounts for a large share of sales, such as 30%, it can worry potential buyers. 

The key is to build a business that can thrive even when the owner isn’t around, supported by a solid sales system and a talented team eager to keep everything running smoothly.

For the owner contemplating a sale, preparation is key. 

The question to ponder is: what if you were suddenly unavailable? 

Read the rest of the article…

Reclaim Selling Time: How AI Eliminates the Sales Tax and Restores Pipeline Momentum

Most sales leaders are trying to solve a 2026 productivity problem with 2010 management logic. They hire more people, increase activity targets, and apply pressure to the same system. The system doesn’t respond because the constraint isn’t an effort. It’s architecture.

The operational reality is brutal: administrative work is consuming the day and choking selling time. Reps are stuck doing low-level research, logging notes, and stitching together follow-ups across disconnected tools. That “sales tax” creates a momentum gap between good conversations and slow execution. The outcome is predictable: fewer high-quality touches, slower deal movement, less accurate forecasting, and a pipeline that looks busy yet remains fragile.

The fix is not another round of tactical efficiency. It’s a structural reversal: move from a human-led, tech-assisted model to a tech-led, human-centric model. In that design, AI does the machine work—data extraction, workflow orchestration, logging, drafting, hygiene—and the human seller does the work that actually wins deals: judgment, stakeholder navigation, risk reduction, and credibility in the moments that matter.

Think of it as building a Cognitive Revenue Engine. Your reps stop being the engine. They become the orchestrators of an automated engine that produces consistent execution at scale.

This shift has two pillars.

Tactical Efficiency is your time reclaimer. Automate the tollbooth moments: post-call notes, CRM updates, basic research, and first-draft follow-ups. This is not about saving a few minutes. It’s about reclaiming hundreds of hours per rep per year and converting them into customer-facing time.

Strategic Intelligence is where the advantage compounds. AI should be used as a decision partner, not a faster typewriter. The questions change from “Can you write this email?” to “Given this account’s context and our past wins, what risk is most likely to stall this deal, and what’s the next best action?” That is the difference between activity and impact, and it’s the difference between noise and revenue generation.

Read the rest of the article…

The Producer Mindset: Tech-Led, Human-Centric Selling for Faster Pipeline Velocity

Administrative drag is not an inconvenience. It’s a structural failure in modern B2B sales that quietly taxes performance, slows pipeline velocity, and degrades your ability to show up sharp for buyers.

The pattern is predictable. You earn a hard-won meeting with an executive. You know you need a tailored deck that speaks to their priorities. Then reality hits: marketing is backlogged, design is unavailable, and you’re left formatting slides at night like a part-time desktop publisher. That’s the sales tax: time and energy spent on non-selling work that steals capacity from revenue generation.

This is the Tollbooth Effect in action. You build momentum in discovery, then you hit the system’s plaza: CRM updates, meeting notes cleanup, searching old folders for case studies, and wrestling with presentation software. The deal cools while you “pay.” Your edge dulls, not because you can’t sell, but because the operating model forces you into manual labor at the worst possible moment.

The fix isn’t working harder. It’s changing the role you play in the workflow.

In the Producer Mindset, your highest value isn’t typing, formatting, or slide layout. Your highest values are judgment, strategy, and human connection, and those can’t be automated. Technology should lead on mechanics while you stay accountable for truth, tone, and impact. This is a tech-led, human-centric approach: AI accelerates the work, but you control the meaning.

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…