A few days ago, we proposed an article on how to overcome objection (link!!!!). This article from HubSpot completes this previous article. It explains how to turn an objection into an opportunity. Rest assured the objection is not an end in itself!
It’s one of the most common questions salespeople ask: “How do I overcome a tough objection?” The answer may come as a surprise -- you don’t. When a prospect or customer throws a tough objection your way, your job isn’t to “overcome” it. Why not? Because traditional turnarounds are completely ineffective.
Here’s what a traditional “turnaround” sounds like: “Bill, I have to tell you, other people said the same thing about our delivery times, until they saw how we could blah blah blah … ” Typical salespeople will try to defend and justify their position, and that kind of comeback is combative and adversarial. And the prospect rarely believes you or changes their mind.
We have a Sandler Rule for this: Only the prospect can overcome an objection, not the salesperson. Look for a way to reverse the direction of the conversation so that you get into a deeper conversation and uncover more information about what’s important to the prospect. Then the prospect might choose to withdraw the objection in exchange for something more valuable.
This strategy takes practice. Here’s a good way to get started. Write down a list of the most common questions, challenge statements, or objections that you run into in your average work week. Then take a few moments to:
Write what you think the prospect might be really asking or saying. There are likely many possibilities here. Try to identify as much of the intent behind the question as possible.
Write a conversational or nurturing question you can ask instead ofanswering the prospect’s challenge directly -- a “reverse” that helps you get to a hidden truth below the surface of the question.
Figure out how to precede that question with a “stroke,” or something that validates the prospect’s objection so they feel heard and understood.
To read more: