Are Your Sales Presentations Writing Checks Your Data Can’t Cash?
Marketers, I noticed of late that we are telling some very tall tales. We are loading sales presentations with, what seems to be, a steadily increasing amount of misinformation and, most notably, misattribution regarding product/service results.
The misattribution is the most alarming trend. From what I’ve seen recently, sales presentations are including more quantitative components and measurements (great!) but then wildly attributing quantitative results to the products/services being pitched (oooooh, no...you lost me at, “our ABC product led to an increase/decrease of XYZ!”).
Perhaps this is a situation driven from the current economic realities of our collective businesses...and desperate times call for desperate marketing [measures]. Starting my professional career in Sales, I can’t say that I wouldn’t have used these same materials...they’ve got numbers, percentages, and beautiful visuals. However, I believe that we are taking liberties with the increasing amount of data that we have available.
Correlation Versus Causation
There has been plenty written, by much more learned professionals, about correlation versus causation and our frequent confusion between the two. I will, however, put my own angle on that dynamic with my simple thought process:
In today’s dynamic and complex business environments if I think something directly and solely caused some outcome (attribution)...I should probably take another look (kind of a measure-twice-cut-once type of philosophy).
Attribution is extremely difficult to (conclusively) prove, but very easy to lay claim to...a few supporting metrics and a chart and we’re good to insert that statement into a presentation.
My ‘Square Peg Round Hole’ Example
Not to make claims without some evidence, I’m including one of my favorite examples presented to me (just this month). To protect the identity of this organization, I have anonymized and greyscaled the slide.
My reaction to seeing this slide was immediately negative...thinking, “wow that’s a weak correlation with a brute-force slam into attribution.” I couldn’t stop myself from interrupting the presentation to question the Rep and this slide. For me, this one slide immediately invalidated all previous and following quantitative slides.
There are so many factors that contribute to organizational growth that this slide, even when used casually, is simply reckless. (Let’s not even get into the ‘source’ of the data.)
Taking my point to an exaggerated extreme, let’s assume those same ‘growth’ companies all use Waxie sanitary supplies. I could, therefore, as easily make the argument Waxie brand of toilet seat liners are ‘fueling growth’. By choosing the superior product like Waxie those companies’ employees are happier and have consequently grown over their competitors that do not use Waxie. Pow! Here’s a contract, sign now!
Using flawed attribution, you can see how any brand is interchangeable on this slide...all we need are a few talking points:
So What Would I Do
Alright so it’s all too easy to cast a critical stone...and, true, it is a difficult sales environment out there, so how could you present the point differently (and accurately).
I would address the slide for what it is: a point of interest versus a data point. There is potential value to building content around how the solution is being used within those business as a component supporting their growth. In this case, testimonials and examples would be far more powerful than misattribution.
To borrow from the fine print of advertising disclaimers:
We need to enjoy our access to data responsibly.
