Sunday, October 20, 2013

Right-Selling

In a previous consideration of cross-selling and upselling tactics, I stumbled across the notion that, in some instances, steering the customer toward a less expensive item that is a more appropriate to their needs is the smart move.  It doesn't really fit the definition of "upselling" because that is a short-term tactic mean to gain as much revenue from the customer in a single selling session - so it stands to reason it should be considered an entirely separate tactic, which I'll call "right-selling" for lack of a better term.

My sense is that right-selling is not very widely practiced or considered, though that's largely based on personal experience and conversational accounts of others whose typical encounter with a salesman involves an unpleasant process of having to decline upgrades and features they didn't want in the first place and do not see the value of purchasing.   It's clearly a practice of trying to sell more today at the cost of creating a customer who will be more inclined to buy from someone else the next time they are in need.

And therein lies the problem of upselling: it is a trade-off designed to increase short-term revenue (and likely profit, because the mark-up on "deluxe versions" and "additional features" is significant) that is indifferent to the consequence of losing of long-term customer value that may be greater.   I will concede that in some instances,  the math works out the other way, such that the short-term revenue gain is worth the long-term loss when future values are discounted - but these instances are likely rare.

Some vendors, and some entire industries, are infamous for this kind of practice.   The example that comes to mind is Best Buy, and appliance retailer who is very pushy about extended warranties.  The last time I purchased an appliance from them, I had to decline their extended warranty four times - once from the clerk who "helped" me select the item, again from the department manager, a third time from the cashier, and a fourth time from the delivery crew.  This is likely the reason that the last time I purchased from them was about a decade ago - and likely it was also the "last time" in the sense of "never again."

On the other hand, some vendors have won my loyalty by right-selling.  For example, auto mechanics are infamous for attempting to sell additional and unnecessary services to customers who need a simple repair.   In fairness, sometimes the damage is more extensive that the customer realizes and more work is genuinely necessary, but mechanics have upsold services too often and too clumsily for customers to trust in their honesty.   In my own experience I have had two repair shops that right sold me - telling me that I needed a less extensive and less expensive repair than I had described to them.

The benefit in doing so is that they won my loyalty, almost instantly.  I have not considered, and would not consider, going anywhere else for automotive services they offer.  (The only reason it's two shops rather than just one is that I moved to a different city.)   I do not expect that I am alone in this, as being right-sold is a very common element of referrals and testimonials I have received from other shoppers.   These people, too, were delighted by right-selling and have given their loyalty to the vendor who practiced it.

The general principle to be derived from these case studies is that customers have a set of expectations - they know what their needs are and have a sense of what it ought to cost to meet them to a satisfactory degree - and where there is a mismatch, they are suspicious.   If the vendor attempts to sell them a more costly solution, they immediately suspect mercenary intent and trust is undermined.   If the vendor suggests a less expensive alternative to meet their needs, they just as immediately recognize that the vendor is concerned about their needs rather than his own profits, and trust is seeded.

The "immediately" in those phrases is significant because there is eventually a reckoning that considers the ultimate outcome of the purchase.  Regardless of whether the customer has been up-sold or right-sold, they will base their final and lasting assessment over whether the purchase solved their needs.  A "successful" (from the vendor's perspective) up-sell that renders no perceived benefit amplifies their sourness about the vendor's motives, and a successful right sell that results in a product that does not solve the problem undermines their confidence in the vendor's competence.   Both are bad for long-term customer loyalty.

So in the end, it seems to come down to the same basic principle: know the customer's needs and sell what is necessary to meet them.   The loyalty of the customer is won or lost, reinforced or undermined, with each and every transaction - and whether it's cross-selling, up-selling, or right-selling it's about offering a product or service that provides a genuine benefit to the customer.   That is not a trade-off for making a profit, but the method by which profit is made.

1 comment:

  1. Agreed! Well-stated too. The smart seller aims at developing a relationship of trust, the crucial intangible in all business. Indeed, if the assumption is that every transaction is an end in itself, upselling makes sense. The fact is, that is almost never the case. You never know when someone you have not heard from for years just pops up on your screen.....

    All the best

    ReplyDelete