“If you walk the footsteps of a stranger you’ll learn things you never knew you never knew.”
Today on this Forum I played with a thought exercise about persuasive arguments vs. ineffectual ones.
As a test subject I used arguments the AFM and Secondary Market Fund have tried to use to convince more buyers to use the services of L.A. musicians.
The question wasn’t what do you think of their talking points, but rather how effective do you think they are and have been.
THE EFFICIENT SALESPERSON
Agents, lawyers and union leaders try to increase the demand for those they represent and to steer the buyers to the most advantageous deal for their clients.
They all face continually evolving obstacles and challenges and must modify their sales pitch accordingly.
Through research, trial-and-error, feedback and an honest evaluation of results, the salesperson needs to be willing to constantly rewrite their game plan to respond to that new information.
INSANITY IS DOING THE SAME THING OVER AND OVER AND EXPECTING DIFFERENT RESULTS
There is a trap of echoing the same talking points without really gauging how effective they really are.
Some inefficient salespeople, like the example of the AFM, repeat the same arguments over and over for years without continually gauging their effectiveness.
Just because they believe their own pitch doesn’t mean the customer agrees and buys into it.
GETTING WHAT YOU WANT
All of this can be applied to any pursuit or form of sales and negotiation (including getting hired as a composer).
The goal is to convince someone to use your services and then convince them towards giving you more of what you want in the deal.
INVENTIVE THINKING
During the depression Pepsi Cola was struggling to stay alive. So they changed strategies and focused on the cost value of their product by offering a 12-once bottle vs. Coke’s 6.5-onces for the same five cents.
Their jingle was:
“Pepsi-Cola hits the spot / Twelve full ounces, that’s a lot / Twice as much for a nickel, too / Pepsi-Cola is the drink for you.”
As a result, sales doubled.
Years later Pepsi remained #2 to Coke. After some research they discovered that there was a slight preference in the first sip of their product over their competitor.
Based on that, they came up with the wildly successful Pepsi Challenge campaign where they sold the idea that theirs had the superior taste of two similar products.
A brilliant example of creating and executing a wildly effective argument.
THE PROOF IS IN THE SALES OF THE PUDDING
As a composer one must continually evaluate how effectively you are being presented and sold.
No matter how much you may wish your pitch was working, at some point, if it is flopping like the AFM examples, you need to be willing to figure out why the buyers aren’t buying and to be willing to change approaches to something new that might work instead.
WHAT ARE YOUR THOUGHTS?
