* required field
Bonus Gift

44 Ways to Stay Connected and Be Remembered. Find out how you can make your networking work with our FREE Guide.
We promise to never sell, rent, trade, or share your email with any other organization.

Claim Your Free Subscription Now!

Each month our ezine features networking and business articles to help you connect with professionals, build relationships, and grow your business.

 

Networking Article from Networking Today Canada, Nat'l

Recent Articles from Cities Across Canada

Hi, how are you? …and Other Weak Wimpy Words

At Telephone Doctor, we call the phrase "Hi, how are you" the 4 KILLER words. They are probably the most useless words you can utter when making cold sales calls. (Even warm ones.)

True story: Years ago, while living at our house, my mother answered our phone. And after her gentle, "Hello" came the following: Hi, Mrs. Friedman (she wasn't Mrs. Friedman). How are you?"

My mother, an open, honest person, simply went on to say, "I'm so glad you asked. My back is killing me, my pacemaker is a little slow, the sore on my knee looks horrible, I've got the worst headache, and feel like I'm getting the flu. How are you?" The man on the phone said, "Compared to you, a hell of a lot better" and hung up.

Hi, how are you? USELESS. Totally USELESS. Get them out of your vocabulary. Opening a call with: Hi, HOW ARE YOU screams, "I'm out to sell you something." Well, Nancy, what should we say?

Telephone Doctor's method of making outgoing cold calls is slightly different than others. Frankly, there are many ways to make that first, cold call. Telephone Doctor's is one of many. We just know it works.

Start by introducing yourself. Full disclosure at the top of the call. That's all. It's simple. A cold call should go like this: Prospect: Hello. You: My name is Nancy Friedman. (Please use your own name.)
I'm with First Fancy Mortgage.
I need to speak with Bob Smith.

That's all. Simple. You see, with the Telephone Doctor's full disclosure at the top of the call, it's difficult to get screened. Not impossible, but difficult.

Why? Because we give the name and company first, what's left? Maybe: "May I ask what this is in regard to?" But as a former executive assistant, I can tell you, when someone is good enough to give me two thirds of the pie, I was willing to put the call through without asking the "reference" question.

You see, people are told to screen. A receptionist or administrative assistant doesn't wake up and think, "Great, I'm going to screen all calls today." They're told to screen. They hear: "Find out who it is and who they're with." That's what they're told. The "what is this in reference to?" question is easy to handle if you're going to accept the Telephone Doctor's method of full disclosure at the top of the call.

So you've given the person who has answered the call your name up front. They can't screen you for that. You've given them the company you're with, so they can't screen you on that. What's left? Right. "What is this in reference to?" Or perhaps it's asked, "Will he know what this is in regard to?" (Both questions make me want to throw up.)

But you're about to get a technique that has never failed me. Although I will say, I use the full disclosure technique consistently, I'm unable to recall the last time anyone asked me the "reference" screen. But when it happens, and it might, use the Telephone Doctor's NEVER FAIL answer.

"Yes, I'm interested in doing business with your company." Think. Who would challenge that statement? Can you just see someone telling their boss? "Someone's on the phone who wants to do business with us, you don't wanna talk with him, do you?"

As I reread this I see we got a little off track. Let me get back to "Hi, how are you?" Lose those words. They are useless. Do use full disclosure at the beginning of your call, because if you use the full disclosure statement at the top of the call, you won't get screened– ever. You may get the, "What is this in reference to." But now you know how to handle that!

Onward to some other weak wimpy words; words that roll off our tongues but are ineffective and need to be avoided.

Weak Wimpy Word #1 – THINK: "I think you’ll like the information I have for you." Think? Think you’ll like it? Is there a doubt in your mind? There shouldn’t be. Every time you tell someone you “think” he’ll like it, or you “think” it’ll work, or “think” it’s right; you leave doubt. The word isn’t necessary. And without it, the sentence becomes much stronger. "You’ll like the information I have for you." It’s a statement of confidence; of conviction; of someone who believes in what he or she has to offer. THINK – a Weak Wimpy Word.

Weak Wimpy Word #2 – JUST: "I’m just calling to see if you got the information I sent." Study that line. If that’s all you’re calling about, when they say, "Yes I got it" you should say "Okay, thanks. That’s all I wanted to know." and hang up. But will you? Probably not. Remove the word JUST – another Weak Wimpy Word. Not necessary. Useless.

Remove it. Again, the sentence becomes stronger when the word "just" is removed. "I’m calling to be sure you received the information I sent you" and then include a benefit statement or a question.

And by the way, asking, "Do you have any questions?" is weak and wimpy, too. If you want to strengthen that one, make it a statement. "Mrs. Friedman, most of the folks I’ve sent that particular brochure to have several questions. Let me go over it with you, now."

All simple tips – but all tried and true. And all work.

Nancy Friedman is president of Telephone Doctor®, an international customer service training company headquartered in St. Louis, Missouri, specializing in customer service and telephone skills. She is a KEYNOTE speaker at association conferences and corporate gatherings and is the author of four best selling books. Call 314-291-1012 for more information or visit the website at www.telephonedoctor.com.

Published in Networking Today, March 2006.



Search Articles

 in Titles
 in Content
 by Author

More Articles

May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006
December 2005
November 2005
October 2005
September 2005
August 2005
July 2005
June 2005
May 2005
April 2005
March 2005
February 2005
January 2005
December 2004
November 2004
October 2004
September 2004
August 2004
July 2004
June 2004
May 2004
April 2004
March 2004
February 2004
January 2004
December 2003
November 2003
October 2003
September 2003
August 2003
July 2003
June 2003
May 2003
April 2003
March 2003
February 2003
January 2003
December 2002
November 2002
October 2002
September 2002
August 2002
July 2002
June 2002
May 2002
April 2002
March 2002
February 2002
January 2002
December 2001
November 2001
October 2001
September 2001
June 2001
May 2001
April 2001
February 2001
January 2001
December 2000
November 2000
October 2000
September 2000
May 2000
November 1999
October 1999
August 1999
May 1999
April 1999
March 1999

 

Select a City