My name is Greg Walters and I’ve worked in the technology sector since 1988. I've sold and configured and installed networks, accounting software, servers, PCs, laptops, manufacturing systems, corporate identity programs, copiers, EDM, BPO, Scan/Fax/Print, managed print and IT services.
Since 2007, I’ve helped providers build managed print practices, more importantly, I’ve assisted corporations (your prospects) design, build and implement self-managed MPS programs. I’ve been shoulder to shoulder with my clients (your prospects), in Canon, Ricoh, Lexmark, HP, Staples, Xerox and dealer MPS presentations. I’ve seen the best manufacturers have to offer and helped my clients choose the right partner. I’ve also been privy to the conversations and critiques from clients after each vendor presentation – I’ve heard some pretty enlightening things.
Whatever category the dealership falls into – copier, MPS, Managed IT—and whether the job title reads account representative or Vice President of Sales, these mistakes were made by the most seasoned MPS representatives.
Over the years, I have worked with dozens of sales managers. Unfortunately, I can only count two who possessed a skillset above and beyond that of a typical manager. The terrible managers shared a plethora of common traits — boorish, disengaged, privileged, etc. But the best managers also shared characteristics and habits:
They didn’t perform the salesperson’s job — like filling out paperwork — when it would have been more expedient to do so.
They knew how to play office politics to the benefit of the sales department while supporting company goals.
Although they possessed selling skills, they were not selling managers.
They didn’t use foul language and bully people into submission.
At the very top of the heap, the best managers will remove obstacles to your personal success. This is key. A great sales manager limits nonselling activities like vendor training, administration meetings, sales meetings and irrelevant paperwork. Additionally, a good sales manager keeps your service manager on top of installs, handles accounts receivable issues and works for you when commissions are calculated.
"The Washington Post's moving Super Bowl ad uses the power of Tom Hanks' voice to defend journalism..."
-Marcus Gilmer, Mashable, February 3, 2019
How bad has it become when the press runs an advertisement promoting and defending...the press?
Pretty bad.
Worse, the self-serving Washington Post missive displays why the Fourth Estate is alienating audiences and losing relevancy.
The minute-long piece begins with a vision of D-Day, scrolling from the Moon to a state funeral and into "When our nation is threatened..." This is where I stopped paying attention, contemplating the image used to portray "...our nation is threatened...". Something didn't sit right. I recognized the site instantly, yet felt those around me would be challenged to remember the historical value.
While Tom Hanks delivers, "When our nation is threatened..." a shot of the 1995 Oklahoma Bombing fades in.
The bombing was a domestically motivated attack on a US government building, carried out by a madman who was caught, tried and executed.
Why use a 1995 incident to depict our nation under threat?
How many viewers recognize this vision?
1995.
Can you think of an image, in this century, that conveys the clear message of "our nation is threatened"? Be assured, the Washington Post engaged a team of highly paid, publicity EXPERTS. They chose every shot, each word, background audio, musical pace and voice attenuation for a reason - a specific emotional appeal.
Why choose a domestically charged event, 24 years in the past? Are there no other images that might convey a more poignant message?
Why yes. Yes there are...
A reasonable person would ask, "Why would the Washington Post choose not to use a 9/11 image at this point of the commercial?" Surely, the option was reviewed and rejected.
This is not nuance.
This not an accident.
Perhaps it is simply a reflection of a tone deaf effort - or the output of a nefarious cabal. There are two ways our nation comes under threat: from the outside and from within. The Washington Post chose internal danger over external threats, and this is most illuminating.
Does the US media consider internal, domestic challenges greater than global threats?
Or is the media purposefully ignoring external dangers in order to forward an agenda of domestic fear? Perhaps to perpetuate the belief that all the ills in the world are because of the US.
The US public has grown tired to the arrogant, media-state and supporting political players. It must be striking a chord somewhere in those ivory towers - or else there wouldn't be so many lectures masquerading as commercials this year.
