Could vs. Should

One of my favorite ways of handling objections is could vs. should. It engages people logically and emotionally. And, like a Swiss Army knife, it has so many uses.

In essence, it means, “Just because you could do this thing doesn’t mean that you should”.

If you sell packaged software or custom software or integration projects, those with IT staff always feel they could do the work in-house. But that doesn’t mean that’s the best solution for them.

Could vs. should is a reframe. It gets their attention. It makes them think. You’re agreeing with them and questioning what they said all at the same time.

You’re questioning whether that’s the best use of their time. You’re making them think about the risk of failure. Or the cost of doing it that way. And that’s what a trusted advisor does. You help them see things from a different perspective.

Your message is: It’s not that you couldn’t do that, but why would you when you have this other alternative?

Of course, the actual words you use and how you say it does matter and it’s person-dependent.

With some you can be short and direct. “Sure you could do that, but is that the best way to solve the problem?”

Others are more thin-skinned, so you need to soften it a bit. “You could absolutely tackle this project in-house like you have many others. When you have an in-house team, that option should always be considered. At the same time, it’s usually wise to compare it to alternatives and see which one makes the most sense. Is this the best use of our resources or should we have them working on something else? Is this a strength for us, or a bit of a risk? Is it less expensive or actually cheaper in the long run? So, it’s not a question of could because you could. It’s a question of should. Should we? What are your thoughts?”

Either way, short or long, direct or indirect, the tactic has the same effect.

Where could you work could and should into your sales calls this coming week?

Have a great weekend!

Bob