The Win Without Pitching Manifesto

by Blair Enns

We have long been conditioned to think that the written proposal is a necessary step in the buying cycle. It is not.

The document that we write is the contract. It serves as public verification of an agreement we have already formed with the client in conversation. The agreement is an oral understanding that covers the scope of work, timeframe, budget and the basic terms of the engagement. While the agreement may be subject to minor details, all of these issues are addressed in conversation first. The paper is produced only once the agreement has been reached.

Let’s face it, No is the second best answer we can hear. If the client does not see a fit between his need and our expertise, we want to hear so as early in the buying cycle as possible.

We want to operate from the practitioner’s position where we have not overinvested in the sale, where we are not trying to talk the client into hiring us, and where we invite him to say no early and often.

The better clients, when they do recognize expertise, will crack open the façade of the proposal process and agree to a proper conversation. The question is one of merit: is the expertise of our firm deserving of such access?

For if the client does not recognize and value our expertise then we have failed – failed to build true expertise, failed to demonstrate that expertise or failed by pursuing an opportunity that is not properly aligned with our expertise. In most of these cases it is appropriate for us to retreat.

True differences do not shine through in written proposals. If we are pomegranates then we will resist being pushed into a process designed to compare apples to apples.

The flaws of the proposal process are one more reason we must see the request for a proposal as a challenge to be met. Either we leverage the power gained by our expertise to impact the client’s process and replace the proposal and accompanying presentation with conversation, or we walk away and leave this client to another firm.

The most common, and costly, business development mistake shared by creative firms around the world is that of mistaking interest for intent.

But when we push too hard – when we pitch, present and invest in a written proposal – we often make it difficult for the client to be honest with us.

We are under no obligation to provide the client with a reference of services, process and price just so that he can find someone else to do what we would do, the way we would do it, but cheaper. Res ipsa loquitur.

One of our new mantras that we will repeat to ourselves and our potential clients is: We do not begin to solve our clients’ problems before we are engaged.

let us not make the mistake of doing this diagnostic work for free.

Doctors charge for MRIs. Accountants charge for audits. Lawyers charge for discovery. And we charge for our diagnostic work as well, whether it is a brand audit or discovery session that we conduct ourselves, or outside research that we commission.

For these complex challenges in which we must diagnose before we can even begin to quantify a prescription, our clients pay us to write proposals via a phased sale that begins with a diagnostic.

Contracts and Proposals Our proposal is indeed the words that come out of our mouths: “We propose to do X for you, over Y timeframe, for Z price.” Once we have agreement on the proposal, then we write up the contract for signature. Let us be clear to our clients and ourselves: we are not in the proposal writing business. And let us make a promise to ourselves that we will no longer ask a document to do what we ourselves should do: propose.

Instead of seeking clients, we will selectively and respectfully pursue perfect fits – those targeted organizations that we can best help. We will say no early and often, and as such, weed out those that would be better served by others and those that cannot afford us. By saying no we will give power and credibility to our yes.

Our client relationships should not be life sentences.

Clients hire us at times of need. We generally solve the most pressing problems at the beginning of our relationships, and over time the nature of our work slides toward the tactical end of our offering. Thus, our positioning with the client changes. At some point we become less of an outside advisor and more of a partner, and then, ultimately, a supplier. Eventually we part ways.

turnover is healthy,

A clear understanding of our goals – a small number of slowly revolving high-quality clients – makes it easier for us to adopt this selective approach.

“Speak softly and people lean toward you; speak loudly and they lean away.”

The client’s experience in dealing with the selective expert versus the enthusiastic generalist who barges headlong into every opportunity is night and day different. One invites him to advance; the other causes him to retreat.