expect it's meant to be, I think there is an in between. Yes, we need to sell our self, but we also need to let a potential client know we are selective and we would like them to be one of our select clients. But make them prove themselves worthy of our business. No. Just like in an interview, the best conversation between seller and buyer is an open conversation so we determine the client's needs and can advise how we can fill those needs efficiently and effectively. One approach I particularly liked in my sales training is the get to the point up front approach. When opening the meeting you state, "Mr. Simmons, the purpose of this meeting is to see how we can work together. My goal is to add you to our select list of clients." Then, you launch into a two sided conversation, and if you sell yourself and your business, you walk out with a client.
Added by Gay Carter at 1:20pm on February 14, 2011
hem a better return on investment in terms of hiring than the "old-school" approach of locating and approaching top talent directly?
IMO, the Social Web is just a new tool - a really cool and exciting tool - that can (but by no means needs to be) be used as part of a winning recruitment strategy, but to suggest that it in some way replaces the need to (or is better than) directly approach talent (and heck, selling to talent) is a claim based on hope and not on evidence.
I've spoken to a number of companies who have been sold to by the new "Social Recruiting" industry, and none of those approaches even came close to seeing the bigger challenge for those companies - the here and now problems of getting sales closed, getting products made and getting promises delivered.
The world may be "going social" - for now - but it's by no means a given that these techniques, which can, in some situations, work really well, will replace the existing and established best practice of active dialogue and developing real relationships.…