Application Article
Winter 2009
65
THE EDWIN MOSES THEORY OF DIRECT SALES
By Gordon Storholm
Recent investigation in sales training tends to emphasize the sales process as a partnership between buyer
and seller. The need to develop relationships with several key players in the buying organization has been an
area of research focusing on the business – to – business model. At the same time most direct sales training
has continue to concentrate on the sales process as a two person, sum zero game, viewing this process as an
exercise in overcoming resistance by the prospect. A more positive approach establishes benchmarks which
assure the sales person of a more cooperative, less adversarial approach to making the sale! These
benchmarks consist of four hurdles to be negotiated, with positive feedback reserved at each hurdle.
Successfully overcoming each hurdle in turn assures the sales person that a major step in the process is
moving toward an orderly positive, conclusion, thus or avoiding the frustration experienced when the
salesperson is unable to close the sale. A good lesson can be learned by comparing the sales process to 400
meter hurdles event at a track meet. This observation is appropriately manual “The Edwin Moses Theory”
of direct sales, referring to the all-time champion of this even.
One of the most frustrating aspects of direct
sales occurs when the salesperson arrives
(finally) to the close segment of the process and
is unable to make the sale. In many, if not
most cases, this disappointing phenomenon
occurs because the salesperson has not
achieved agreement on the major elements of
the process. Viewed as simulating as high
hurdles event at a track meet, a logical
sequence of events leading to the sale
eliminates a great deal of the complicity of the
interaction.
One of the best known and most widely
respected athletes to come out of the U.S.A. is
Edwin Moses, the two-time Olympic and four
-time world champion in the above event.
The reason why Edwin Moses never lost a
race was in great measure, because of his
analysis, as a physicist and mathematician of
what it took to successfully negotiate the
hurdles. Yet, had he not engaged in a deliberate
and rigorous planning process, it is unlikely
that he would have achieved the success he
did.
Likewise, a careful planning process is
necessary for direct sales people if they are to
be successful. An analogy to a hurdle race
seems to be appropriate to the direct sales
process. If the salesperson cannot vault over
each hurdle in its proper progression, he/she
is unlikely to make a sale.
An unfortunate consequence of the sales
situation is, unlike a track meet, when the
salesperson trips over a hurdle, he/she has
lost the race, but may not be aware of it.
There exist four basic hurdles which must be
overcome before the salesperson can win the
race. Barring the few cases where the sale is
made in spite of the salesperson, an
understanding of the Edwin Moses Theory
will increase dramatically his/her success rate.
Unlike business to business sales, (where
success hinges more on rational factors and
less on emotional factors), a long lead time
from introduction to order is nonexistent. A
well developed plan of action is necessary, yet
many direct sales organizations train salespeople
in techniques that can best be described as hitand-miss.
Vol. 9, No. 1
66
Journal of Selling & Major Account Management
A brief exclamation of the evolution of sales
training is as follows:
Phase I The Sales Formula Era
Prior to and following WWII, there was little
differentiation made by trainers between B-B
and B-C Sales. B-B emphasis on getting to the
top in front of decision maker, but formula
was the same -AIDA. During this period,
there seemed to be an implicit assumption
that there was one decision maker, who was
always present and had authority to buy.
Phase II The B-B, B-C Era
During the late 70s and early 80s, sales trainers
allowed that all sales wouldn’t be closed on
one call and there was a differentiation made
between direct sales and B-B sales.
Phase III The Electronic
Relationships Selling
Age
and
From the early 90s, sales training literature and
programming emphasized relationship selling
as part of a partnership between the
salesperson and the customer or prospect.
There was an emphasis on reordering and
developing long term relationships with
customers, with less emphasis on direct sales
training.
Direct sales has generally been viewed as twoperson, sum zero encounters with the winner
being determined by who sold who. There
was a strong emphasis on closing almost to
the exclusion of any other elements of the
sales process and there existed an almost
Freudian hierarchy among direct sales forces,
with the greatest respect being accorded to the
strongest closers.
A VP of a major
encyclopedia firm once remarked to me
“books (the term used by insiders for their
product) weren’t made to be read, they were
meant to be sold”.
The basic sales presentation nearly always
consisted of overcoming objections and
backing the prospect into a corner where the
Northern Illinois University
only alternatives were outright rejection or a
purchase. After implementation of various
consumer laws, larger numbers of
cancellations ensued, but the purpose of the
sales process remained virtually the same.
The Need for a Direct Sales Protocol
In the face of a recent B-B monopoly on sales
literature and training techniques, the need for
a well thought-out direct sales process still
exists. Most consumers, in fact, still make
their major expenditures on real estate,
automobiles, high education venues for
themselves and their children, financial
services, and to a lesser extent, “big ticket”
goods and services, as travel, consumer
products ,home improvements, insurance, and
personal items such as expensive jewelry. In
most cases, the decision to make the above
expenditures can be influenced by a
salesperson; indeed, the decisions makers are
present, and qualified, can be sold.
Implicit in direct sales has always been the
notion that if the sale is not closed or the first
meeting, the odds of a sale all appreciably. It
is a fact that most direct sales trainers
subscribe to the notion that there is no second
chance for the direct salesperson, the
implication being that if the prospect(s) need
to think about it, the sale will not happen.
Although there is no scholarly empirical
evidence to move or disprove this fact, the
notion that the sale must be closed on the first
call is a universally held belief by experienced
direct sales professionals.
Given the fact that is it necessary or at the
very least, highly desirable to consummate the
sale in one call, there would appear to be a
need for an organized formula to accomplish
this goal. The two most commonly accepted
models for the direct sales process have been
the AIDA and the PPCF theories.
The AIDA Model embodies a process of
getting the prospect’s Attention, getting his/
her Interest in the product or service,
Application Article
stimulating Desire and finishing with the final
step, Action, as closing the sale. The PPCF
theory emphasis Prospecting, or getting in
front of a qualified prospect, making a highly
organized Presentation, leading to a logical
conclusion, the Close, with the final step, the
Follow up to solidify the sale. Nearly all direct
sales trainers teach some version of these
models.
Both of these Models are effective in so far as
they are carried out according to the script and
if the prospect cooperates. At each step, there
must be some mechanism for handling
questions or objections and for practicing trial
closes to determine the intensity of the
prospects’ interest. In neither model, however,
is there a device or mechanism to allow the
direct salesperson to know that the sale has
not been lost. Although this would seem to
be a minor point its importance cannot be
overestimated. Nearly every direct sales
presentation stresses the need for the
prospects’ agreement on minor points leading
theoretically to an agreement to buy.
Unfortunately, there can be present in the
dialogue certain factors that are not taken into
account by the salesperson and can prove fatal
to the sale. These factors are not necessarily
related to anything the salesperson did wrong;
in fact, they are factors that are so basic that
they are often ignored. Essentially, these
factors are related to the quality of feedback
from the prospect.
The Edwin Moses Theory
Edwin Moses, the two-time Olympic hurdles
champion, was arguably one of the mentally
and physically prepared athletes in the world.
Yet, even at the apex of his career, Moses
could easily lose the race simply by tripping
over one of the hurdles. It is not documented
whether this ever happened to him in practice,
but it has certainly happened to most, if not all
direct salespeople. The difference is that if the
track star fell over a hurdle, he was manifestly
out of the race; in the case of the salesperson,
Winter 2009
67
it is possible for him/her to trip over the
hurdle and not be aware of it. The result is
not only a lost sale, but probably the loss of
confidence as well, as the failure to negotiate
all of the hurdles is more subtle, and not
readily noticeable.
The Edwin Moses theory of direct sales places
four hurdles in front of the salesperson. In
order to successfully overcome the hurdles, he
or she must, of course, have total product
knowledge, be aware of possible objections
and experienced in the logical steps involved
in the presentation. What is often overlooked,
however, are four of the basic principles
necessary to making the sale. These basic
principles are, metaphorically, the hurdles
which must be overcome to win the race.
Hurdle #1 The First Impression or
credibility
Sales trainers for the most part tend to view
the opening of the sales process as a
preliminary to the presentation rather than as
an integral part of the process; an objective in
itself.
The First Impression presents a
difficult step for the salesperson in as much as
there is no objective feedback mechanism
indicating that the hurdle has been overcome.
Yet, failure to make a positive first impression
assures the runner’s tripping over the first
hurdle, in most cases eliminating him/her
from the race. The insidious aspect of this
failure to negotiate the first hurdle is that the
salesperson is likely unaware that he/she is
out of the race. In most cases, awareness of
negotiating this hurdle as a major part of
winning the race is of enormous important
indeed, a structured sequence of events should
be set down in order to insure successful
navigation of the hurdle. A well thought out
series of check points ranging from
promptness of the appointment, appropriate
dress to a warm up consistent with the
personality type of the prospect (s).
Experienced salespeople can often sense when
it is time to move into the presentation and
Vol. 9, No. 1
68
Journal of Selling & Major Account Management
continue to hurdle number two, realizing that
if the first hurdle, first impression, has not
been successfully encountered. The sale may
already be lost, only without the knowledge of
the salesperson.
Hurdle #2 Admission of the Problem
It has long been an article of faith among
social scientists that people with problems
cannot make progress until they admit the
existence of their particular problem.
Likewise salespeople are unable to solve
prospects’ problems until that prospect admits
to having the problem in the first place.
There is a distinction between the willingness
to listen to a sales presentation and the
outright admission of a need or want. In the
former case, the salespersons assumes the need
or want by the prospect; in the latter case, the
prospect has stated unequivocally that need or
want is present. The destruction between the
two, although subtle presents the difference
between the salesperson stumbling over the
hurdle, thereby diminishing greatly the
chances of a sale. In fact, if the prospect has
not expressly stated the need or want
(admission of the problem), there is no need
to acquiesce when the salesperson attempts to
finalize the sales process. After all, the
prospect never stated that there was any need
or want only an assumption by the
salesperson, conversely, once the prospect has
admitted a problem (the need or want for the
salesperson’s product or service), the stage has
been set for the salesperson to safely approach
the next hurdle.
Hurdle #3 Acknowledgement of Solution
Prior to approaching this hurdle, the
salesperson has developed a positive support
with the prospect and has gained the explicit
admission that the prospect has a problem the
lack of the salesperson’s product or service; in
short, a need or want. At this point, mutual
agreement has been reached that the need or
want exists, and has been reinforced by the
Northern Illinois University
affirmation by the prospect, thereby
eliminating the possibility of a potential
rejection on the basis of lack of need. The
importance of this step cannot be
underestimated although many experienced
and most inexperienced salespeople fail to
recognize its significance. The third hurdle is
a critical part of the process. Here, the
prospect must recognize the solution to his/
her problem; that the salesperson’s product or
service will fill the need. Naturally, the
salesperson is convinced of this act (assuming
that the product or service will, in fact, solve
the problem) but in many cases, simply
assumes that the prospect also realizes it.
Unfortunately, this also results in the
assumption that there is a tacit understanding
by both parties that the product or service will
fill the need. This assumption may be fatal to
the sale as it has not solidified the need, as it
can kill the sale later on.
In order to get over this hurdle, there must be
a clear, unequivocal agreement by the
prospect that this product or service is the
solution to the problem. This fact must be
verbalized by the prospect in order to
complete the hurdle. There are various
techniques used by direct sales organizations
to help with this step (e.g., getting the
prospect to acknowledge benefits, etc.), but
no amount of subtle persuasive techniques are
as strong as evoking a verbal
acknowledgement that the salesperson has the
solution.
Hurdle #4 A Reason to Buy Now
One of the most frustrating experiences for
sales managers is the post mortem with a new
salesperson who succeeded at every step of
the sale except getting the order. This
scenario is almost always accompanied by a
statement that the prospect was “sold” and
will most certainly order within a short period
of time.
Application Article
Over the past half century, man has developed
life-saving vaccines, travelled in space, and
developed the internet. In spite of all these
wonderful advances one thing that has
remained constant is that direct sales is still a
one-call proposition, in that if the sale is not
consummated on the first call, the likelihood
of it happening at all is, in most cases,
extremely low.
Given this circumstance, it is of the upmost
importance that the salesperson closes the sale
on the first call... For generations, sales
trainers have been exhorting salespeople to
utilize one closing technique or another on the
assumption that at this point, a sale is made;
“you sold him, (the prospect(s)) or he sold
you”. Unfortunately, in most cases, there is
no sale made by anyone, as the salesperson
failed to negotiate one or more of the
previous three hurdles. Conversely, if the
salesperson has meticulously overcome each
hurdle, (assuming the necessary due diligence
has been practiced, e.g. trust, qualifying the
prospect, etc...) The odds of a sale are now
strongly in his/her favor.
At this point, the odds of making the sale are
even greater if the final hurdle can be
negotiated. To review, the salesperson
established credibility and made a positive
impression on the prospect through the
appropriate interactions (promptness is
arriving on time, appropriate dress, sensitivity
to the prospect(s), personality type, sincerity
etc). The critical hurdle of establishing need
or want was successfully negotiated where the
prospect articulated categorically that the
salesperson’s product would fill the prospect’s
need.
The final hurdle may be the most challenging,
as it requires a well thought out analysis of the
benefits of having the product or service
verses the consequences of not having it from
the prospect’s point of view. Direct sales
doctrine dictates that the traditional closing
techniques be brought into play at this point,
Winter 2009
69
essentially rendering searching the dialog a
two person sum zero game, where the sale
hinges on the salesperson’s closing skills.
Unfortunately, there are three basics
difficulties with this thinking:
•
•
•
In recent years, various laws have made it
simple for a customer to cancel or receive
a purchase. The result of this federal/
state legislation is a higher cancellation
rate of direct sales purchases.
No matter how much training salespeople
receive, most lack the charisma to close on
a consistent basis. This is probably due to
the inability of salespeople to develop a
trust relationship with the prospect.
Unless the presentation is deceptive,
where certain benchmarks have been
reached, (e.g. prospect agreement that a
problem exists, that the salesperson’s
product will solve the problem), the
prospect is likely to deny any urgency to
buy.
In nearly every buying situation, there is some
element which raises the urgency level for the
prospect to buy NOW. This element may
range from a need for quick delivery, limited
availability, all the way to the prospect’s simply
wanting possession of the product or service.
If the salesperson is unable to communicate a
reason to buy NOW, the probability of
making the sale drops precipitously; therefore
the professional salesperson need to develop
an understanding legitimate reason for
urgency., and sales trainers need to supply the
salesperson with an arsenal of legitimate
reasons to buy now which can be tailored to
the situation.
Summary
There is a major difference between the
Edwin Moses model and the typical direct
sales model of overcoming objections
followed by a strong close. In the former,
definite feedback is given to the salesperson
each time he/she has overcome a hurdle. In
Vol. 9, No. 1
70
Journal of Selling & Major Account Management
the latter, the salesperson may have
unwittingly stumbled over a hurdle, this losing
the sale and not being aware of the act. After
all, the basic elements of the sales process
such as making the presentation, selling
benefits, etc. can be learned by rote; the
difficult part of the sale is getting the prospect
to buy. If the Edwin Moses method is carried
out successfully, there will be infinitely less
resistance when the time comes to close the
sale, thus improving the salesperson’s track
record significantly.
Gordon Storholm received his MBA and PhD
from the Wharton School at the University of
Pennsylvania. His professional career includes
experience as a Sales Representative with IBM
and a Sales Manager with Xerox and
Marketing Consultant with Schrello
Associates. He is the author of two text
books on selling and sales management and is
currently Associate Professor of Marketing in
the MBA program at Southeastern University
REFERENCES
Bettger Frank, “How I raised myself from
failure to success in selling” New York,
Harcourt, 1958, 96 pp.
Dreyfack, Raymond, “When the customer
doesn’t believe you” The American
Salesman 1995 Volume 40 pp 26-31.
Duncan, Todd, “Killing the Sale”, Nashville,
Thomas Nelson Publishers, 2004, 202pp.
Farrent, Don “A new look at low pressure
selling” The American Sales Man Jan 1995,
Volume 40 pp 3-8.
Guijun Zhuang, Alex SL Tang “A study on
ethical selling methods in China with a
broader concept of gray marketing” Journal
Northern Illinois University
of Business Ethics April, 2008 Volume 79 pp
85-102.
Popp, Andrew “Cultures of Selling: Perspectives on
consumption and society use 1700” American History
Review, Boston, Spring 2009 Vol. 83 Issue 1 pp213-216.
Sandler, David, “Manage Your Sales for
Success” Franchising World, May/June 1994
Volume 26 pp 18-20.
Sheppard, Greg “It aint what you sell, it’s the
way you sell it” Training and Coaching Today,
September 2008, p 8-10.
Storholm, Gordon and Louis Kaufman,
Principles of Selling, Englewood Cliffs,
Prentice Hall 1985 320 pp.
Storholm, Gordon, Sells Management,
Englewood Cliffs, Prentice Hall, 1982
380pp.
Ziglar, Zig, “Selling 101: What Every Successful
Sales Professional Need to Know”, New
York: Nelson 2006, 96 pp.