Skip to content

technology

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…

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 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…

The Buyer’s Clock Starts Before Your Sales Team Notices

A buyer does not become urgent when your CRM creates a record. The buyer became urgent earlier; at that moment, they decided the problem was worth interrupting their day for.

That distinction matters because too many B2B companies design their inbound process around internal workflow rather than buyer momentum. A prospect searches, compares, reads, evaluates, talks to a peer, visits your site, reviews your proof, and finally raises their hand. Then the company they contacted responds as though the buyer has agreed to wait patiently while marketing automation, CRM routing, territory logic, rep availability, and inbox notifications sort themselves out.

That is not a speed problem. It is a revenue system problem.

The real issue is not whether a sales rep should call faster. Of course they should. The deeper question is whether the business can detect, interpret, prioritize, enrich, route, and respond to buyer intent while the buyer still cares. When the answer is no, the company loses revenue without realizing it. The lost buyer does not announce their departure. They simply book with someone else, cool off, or decide the issue can wait.

This is why inbound orchestration deserves executive attention. High-intent inbound activity is not a generic lead flow. A demo request from a target-fit company is not the same as a newsletter signup. A pricing inquiry is not the same as a content download. Treating all of them as “leads” may simplify reporting, but it destroys commercial judgment.

When every lead looks the same, nothing feels urgent.

Read the rest of the article…

Revenue Forecasting Should Be Built on Evidence, Not Hope

Most sales forecasts are not really forecasts. They are seller opinions, manager adjustments, CRM fields, historical averages, and optimism packaged into a number that leadership is expected to trust.

That may have been acceptable when forecasting was mostly an internal sales exercise. It is not acceptable when the board, finance, hiring plans, customer success capacity, and investor expectations are all tied to the revenue number.

The core problem is not that sales leaders are careless. The problem is that many revenue teams are still using an architecture that cannot produce predictability. Spreadsheets, commit calls, and stage rollups organize information, but they do not necessarily reveal the buyer’s truth.

The better question is not, “How confident is the rep?”

The better question is, “What did the buyer actually do?”

That shift changes the entire operating model. Forecasting moves from hope-based to evidence-based. Deals are no longer judged by the confidence in a seller’s voice but by observable buyer behavior: recent engagement, executive involvement, mutual action plans, legal or procurement movement, real next steps, and date-driven urgency.

This is where artificial intelligence and revenue intelligence become useful, but only if the management system is ready for them. AI can identify patterns, detect risk, surface stalled deals, and compare buyer behavior against historical outcomes. But it cannot compensate for weak sales processes, vague stage definitions, poor CRM hygiene, or managers who refuse to inspect the evidence.

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 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…

Building a Zero-Cost AI Sales Stack: How to Validate Value Before You Spend a Dollar

Most sales leaders today feel the tension between innovation and fiscal responsibility. You know artificial intelligence can accelerate productivity, clarify messaging, and drive revenue generation. You also know your competitors are implementing AI-driven sales processes and reaping the benefits. Yet you are expected to somehow produce results without the budget to experiment, test, or validate new technology.

This pressure creates the classic chicken-and-egg dilemma. You cannot get budget approval without demonstrating value, but you cannot demonstrate value without access to capable tools. That tension often leaves sales leaders paralyzed, observing advancements but unable to participate. It is an exhausting cycle that erodes confidence and slows down organizational progress.

The good news is that modern software economics have shifted. You no longer need an enterprise-level budget to run meaningful AI pilots. Instead, today’s freemium models allow teams to build real workflows, automate real processes, and create real sales success with no financial risk. These free tiers exist because vendors want you to become reliant on the workflow, meaning you can use that dynamic to your advantage as you design early-stage pilots.

A practical approach for sales management is to treat free AI tools as validation engines rather than long-term solutions. You begin with lightweight experimentation, focusing on a single friction point that slows your team. Whether the issue involves pre-call research, drafting follow-up emails, or scoring inbound leads, AI can automate repetitive tasks, freeing your sellers to focus on value selling. The goal is not perfection; it is measurement.

Read the rest of the article…