We have all had to deal with anti-sponsors, people in a client organization who don’t want you to get work at their companies.  Dealing with them tests a professional’s rainmaking prowess.

One rainmaker I know advises his people to “nuke’em,” by going to their bosses and pointing out that they are obstructing progress.  I have no doubt that this man does just that and does it successfully.  It’s not an approach for all professionals in all situations.

My colleague, Gary Pines, a proven rainmaker, took a different approach with an anti-sponsor, whom I will call Marie, who was blocking our chance to work at an old client.  For some reason, she took a dislike to Gary and Harding & Company.  We are not sure why, but perhaps it was because on our original assignment we were brought in by the Managing Partner of her firm, without Marie’s knowledge or approval.

Whatever the reason, she was trying every tactic she could to make sure we got no more work.  She said that the members of the committee she was working with didn’t want us, though we knew from moles on the committee that this wasn’t true.  She said that we were more suited for a small piece of work, awarding the larger share to a competitor.  Even when the competitor failed to produce results, she continued to resist hiring us.  She threw up barrier after barrier.

Gary, a cheerful, likeable, gentlemanly person, might have been able to nuke this anti-sponsor, because of his relationship with the Managing Partner and several key committee members assigned to selecting consultants.  Instead, he chose to win her over.  Over the next eight months he wore away her resistance.

He remained irrepressibly sunny and helpful to her.  He included her in most of his communications with the firm, demonstrating that he wasn’t trying to go around her.  He was helpful above and beyond what was required, in spite of her sour responses.  During one meeting with her at which she was raising objection after objection, he leveled with her, saying, “Marie, somewhere along the way we got off on the wrong foot with each other.  I don’t know why or how and I don’t care.  From today, as far as I’m concerned, we’re starting fresh.  I want to work with you, I want to help you and I want you to be a success.”

She absorbed the message without comment, but from then on things began to change.  In communications with others at the firm, Gary made a point of mentioning Marie positively, if she provided him even the remotest excuse for doing so.  He stayed in touch with her and continued to be positive, polite and helpful.  And he wore her down.  Today, she is a strong sponsor for Gary and our firm.

Turning around an anti-sponsor is one of the toughest challenges a professional can face.  It takes emotional intelligence and maturity to resist taking personal affront at someone like Marie and to do what Gary did.  It also takes a lot of hard work.  But the return on the effort can be huge.

Last month in behalf of a reader I posted a Rainmaker Problem, requesting suggestions about how to make a referral.  A couple of readers responded with good ideas, but not many, probably because you were busy with pre-holiday activities.

The subject is an important one, so here are a few suggestions for requesting referrals:

• Pick the right moment.  There are times when you are much more likely to get the help you want than others.  This was the subject of an earlier post, so I will not repeat that discussion here.
• Make it easy for the client to help you.  Broad requests, like Would you consider referring us to others who might need our services?, may get yes for an answer, but they place a large burden on the client to figure you who might be a good contact for you and how to bring up your services.  That’s why they so often produce no result.  You can make it easier for the client by:

1. Being specific:  A request for a referral to the CFO or head of the Consumer Products Division or someone in a senior position at Trigestis Pharmaceuticals is much easier for the client to focus on than a broad plea for help.  Alternatively, you can ask for an introduction to someone with a specific issue with words like Can you think of anyone you know who might also be facing executive succession problems? or Do you know anyone else who handles insurance recovery problems for his company?
2. Make it clear that you aren’t asking too much.  The open ended request for introductions can, and often is, perceived as asking for access to all of a client’s contacts.  That can be off-putting.  Be clear that you aren’t asking for too much.  One rainmaker I know would ask if a client would be willing to make introductions for him and when the client agreed, would follow up with these words:  Could I make a suggestion?  Would you be willing to scan through your contact list and note down ten or a dozen people you know who might benefit from our services? After you do that, we could sit down and talk about them and, together, pick out one or two to target.  If you are uncomfortable with that language, try these words:  Thanks.  That’s awfully kind of you.  Even one or two introductions would be a big help.
3. Provide some language that the client might use when making the introduction.  This saves the client time coming up with the right approach and makes him more effective at getting you in the door.  You can use words like these:  We find that people dealing with international litigation often respond well when someone says, “If you even need a rock-solid, expert witness on transfer pricing issues, you might want to talk with Brenda Smith.  She helped us on . . .” Or you can help your client filter out good introductions form bad ones with words like We find that if you ask someone if they are interested in green design and that they say they are, it is easy to get them to agree to a meeting with us.

• Don’t put the client on the spot.  Show that you recognize that the client many choose to back away from an introduction with words like Timing is everything, so if you bring up the subject and feel that this isn’t the time to introduce us, don’t even try.  I trust your judgment on this completely.  This is especially important if the client shows even the slightest hesitation about making a specific introduction.  Asking for advice rather than an introduction is another way to reduce pressure:  I want to meet Joe Smith.  Do you have any suggestions for the best way to do that?
• Keep the client informed about what happens.  Always notify the client about how the introduction went, whether or not it was a success.  If the introduction turns into new business for you a year later, it is still important to let the client know what happened, because it shows you acknowledge the help he provided, and so reinforces the behavior.
• Be thankful.  This should be done whether or not the introduction is successful.

Do any of you have additional ideas?

Rain making requires building a referral network by maintaining contact with people over the years.  That’s how most rainmakers sell accounting, actuarial, architectural, engineering, legal, consulting and other professional services.  Much of this work is done by phone, because phone calls cost less in time and money than do face-to-face meetings and because they allow conversation to flow to productive subjects in a way that email doesn’t.

But, something there is that does not love a call . . . namely me.  Left to my inclinations, I would use the phone only in emergencies and for ordering pizza.  I am, in fact, an expert at avoiding making phone calls.

Here are some things you can do to avoid even the most essential calls:

• Tell yourself that the probability of anything good coming out of the call rounds to zero and give up immediately.  The statement of probability is true, which is why the tactic works so well.  Of course, if you make enough calls to enough people, the cumulative probability of something good happening gets quite high, but let’s not think about that.
• Take a quick look at your email in-box before calling.  This highly recommended tactic almost always works, because you immediately surrender control of your day to responding to urgent, if not always important, matters.  By the time you are done, you must move on to something else and can put off calling until tomorrow, when you can repeat the process.
• Tell yourself that your calls will be unwelcome and you will become a pest.  Years of personal experience and experience with hundreds of professionals show me that this statement is untrue, as long as you handle yourself properly, focusing on the other person’s needs rather than pushing a sale. Still, imaging myself being rejected for being pesky feeds my personal insecurities so effectively that it stops all effort cold.
• Treat calling as if it is something you must squeeze in on top of everything else you must do.  That way it is the first thing that gets squeezed out.  For this to work you must never acknowledge that calling is equally or even more important to the firm and to yourself than the other things you are responsible for.
• Repeat to yourself over and over that bringing in business isn’t really your responsibility or, at least, shouldn’t be.  Of course, this can be career limiting, but a dedicated call avoider won’t let that stop him.

There are other trivial techniques for avoiding the phone—sharpening a pencil, going to the bathroom, getting coffee; I have tried them all—but the five I have listed are the best for busy professionals.  Just recognize that when time comes around for promotions (or layoffs, for that matter) and your business development contribution is reviewed, these excuses won’t help you.

Slippage refers to the difference in price for a stock between what the investors estimates he will pay and what he actually does pay, due to changes in price that occur during the process of buying. Efficient buying reduces slippage.  It is a concept that applies to selling professional services, too.

There are times when a client or prospective client or network contact is more than usually predisposed to help you.  This can be, for example:

• When you have just finished an excellent piece of work for the client.
• When the prospective client becomes excited about your potential to help him.
• When you have just had a conversation at a conference with a network contact that shows the potential you have for helping each other.

The value of such opportunities fades as time passes.  The client’s desire to help you in return for the excellent work you did ebbs as she gets absorbed by other urgent matters.  The prospective client loses some of the enthusiasm generated at your meeting.  The network contact also forgets the conversation you had as the days go by.

This is one of the reasons that rainmakers feel a sense of urgency about following up.  No matter how busy they are, they find time to follow up on such opportunities, recognizing that all their hard work to produce them loses value as time slips by.

I don’t want to overwork this metaphor.  Following up too eagerly can be construed as desperation or as being mercenary.   But, in my experience, among professionals far more is lost from slippage than from pushing too fast and too hard.  And, of course, I am not suggesting that you give up on an opportunity if a week or three has slipped by before you act.  Better late than never.

Still, as a New Year’s resolution, you could do worse than committing to reduce rainmaking slippage by following up on opportunities while the glow you have created burns brightest.

A new RainMaker Blog is now being published by the RainToday people.  It addresses many of the same issues for the same audiences that this one does.  They are offering a free report, Deal or No Deal: Sales Mistakes that Turn Buyers Away.

Years ago, when trying with limited success to help my son with a math problem, I was reacquainted with the beauty of the deductive power of geometry.  Using deductive logic geometry builds from simple properties to complex theorems that explain spatial relationships.  The logic allows us to manipulate forms and objects to create buildings and infrastructure.

I felt that, similarly, deductive logic could be used to explain much of what is required to become a successful rainmaker.  The fundamental elements of rain making are also simple, but, as in geometry, they can be built into complex rules of client development that allow us to get new clients.  Here is a first stab at developing a deductive logic of rainmaking.

A. Basic Properties

1. You sell to people.
2. You can only sell to people you know.
3. To know someone you must first meet him.
4. It follows that the more people you meet, the better your chances of selling something.
5. People move around.
6. A client who moves from one client organization to another can help you open a new account.

B. Relationship Properties

1. The stronger your relationship with someone, the better your chances of selling something to him.
2. Since you can’t have a relationship with someone you don’t know, it follows from (A3) that the first step in starting a relationship is to meet the person.
3. Relationships, good or bad, are based on time together and mutual help.
4. Conversely, it’s hard to have a relationship with someone you never talk to.
5. The more time you spend with someone and the more you help each other, the stronger the relationship is.
6. The more people you know in an account, industry or function, they better you are able to help them.

C.  Good People Properties

1. Good people tend to do well.
2. The more good people you meet, the better your chances of making a sale.
3. It follows from (A5) and (C1) that good people move around.
4. It follows from (A6) and (C3) that good people can get you into a new account.
5. It follows from (A1), (B1), (B3) and (C1) that it is wise to talk to and help good people.
6. Good people tend to have influence with others, and so can introduce you to others and help you develop relationships with them.

D.  Marketing Properties

1. The goal of marketing is to help you meet people and develop relationships with them (by giving you reasons to contact them).
2. Marketing efforts that don’t do one of these two things are probably not worth the investment.

That is as far as I have gotten.  I suspect that a complete logic of rainmaking could be built with this process.   Does anyone one have any corrections or additions to these properties?

Guest post by Gary Pines

I hear many professionals say they do not know what to do with social networks. They neither have the time for them nor see the value in them.  They feel that social networks invade one’s privacy, and that there are enough communications vehicles what with cell phones, email, and a seemingly endless list of old and new media.  And they find the array of social networking options overwhelming with LinkedIn, Facebook, Twitter, My Space, You Tube, and specialized networks for specific professions and industries.

A recent Business Week article points out that new modes of communication have always attracted this kind of reaction.  Among the examples it cites are:

• Socrates’ objection to writing, in part because this “invention” eliminated the need to exercise the memory.
• Henry David Thoreau’s objection to the telegraph, the instant transcontinental communications in the 1840s about which he said, “Maine and Texas … have nothing important to communicate.”
• Western Union’s refusal of an offer to buy the patent rights for the telephone in 1880, asking “whether any sensible man would transact his affairs by such a means of communication.”
• The New York Times editorial against the typewriter because it usurped the art of “writing with one’s own hand.” (What would Socrates think of this).

To these we can add more recent examples:

• Some people disdained cell phones in 1990 with voicemail messages, saying that they would hinder person-to-person telephone communication.
• By  the middle of the decade others complained that email and the internet would lead us away from real time communication.
• And now … social networks.

Instead of being superfluous, social networks are here to stay.   During the first years of the internet, people could only guess at its future uses and impact.  Now, we are just beginning to explore their potential of social networks.  They are a piece of the rain-making process. Those who stand aloof from them lower their probabilities of success and will  lose out on their the increasing power and value in the years ahead.

In numerous earlier posts (such as Seeing Events Through a Rainmaker’s Eyes, Part 1 and Part 2), I have observed that rainmakers are positive thinkers.  Things we see as bad, such as being stood up for a meeting, they see as neutral or even positive.  (When someone stands you up, it often creates a small chit that you can collect later.)  Things we see as neutral, such as an extra attendee at a client meeting, they may see as positive.  Positive thinking gives them a resilience that allows them to get up and try again and yet again until they win.

This all may sound Pollyanna-ish, but it’s not.  When interviewing people who have observed rainmakers, they often note the rainmakers’ optimism, sometimes mentioning in a tone of mild surprise that the rainmakers’ optimism often proved to be well-founded.  The rainmakers’ positive outlook is shaped and reinforced through experience.  They know not to take an unreturned phone call too seriously, because they’ve had to deal with so many of them.

When rainmakers apply their optimism foolishly, they are as likely to get hurt as anyone else.  Our data base of rainmakers includes several who went bankrupt through misplaced optimism, often in the form of a real estate deal.  Confident that they would sell boatloads of new work, they signed leases for space to accommodate all of the employees they would have to hire to do it.  When the work didn’t appear, they were stuck with the real estate costs.

I make this point for two reasons.  First, it is a caution to rainmakers and those who work with them to question the rainmakers’ optimism, if they seem to be applying it to areas beyond their expertise or to be brushing off the risk of catastrophic consequences, if they prove to be wrong.

My second reason for making this point is to deter anyone inclined to use a colleague’s negative thinking as a brickbat to beat them with.  I’ve had this done to me earlier in my career and seen it done to others.  Branding someone has a negative thinker and berating them for it is a loathsome and ineffective form of bullying.  There is a place for negative thinking in an organization, and when appropriately applied, should be encouraged and rewarded.  When misapplied, the reaction should be education, not derision.  For those interested in this subject, I recommend Martin Seligman’s excellent book, Learned Optimism.  (I have no financial interest in the sale of this book.  I do have a financial interest in the sale of my book, Creating Rainmakers, which also addresses the subject, but decline to recommend it out of modesty and fear of being hauled into court by the blog police.)

Dwight Davies said the following to me long ago:

“At any given time there are three to five things that a company is working on that are driven by the board and CEO on down, and everyone owns a piece of them.  They’re not always the obvious things.  If you are talking to people about  one of those things, you’re helping.  If you are talking about anything else,  you’re on the outside and you’re selling.”

I think this is true wisdom.

One of the key tools in any Rainmaker’s arsenal is a great Client Relationship Management (CRM) system. Unfortunately. many rainmakers and their firms struggle to successfully implement these systems.

On September 21, 2009, a group of rainmakers and experts will provide their own unique perspective to answer the question, “what is the perfect client relationship management system?”

Each expert will draw upon years of experience to outline their vision of the perfect CRM system. This exercise will provide you with new insights into what works, what doesn’t work, and what you should consider when implementing a CRM system.

The experts include:

• Tim Klabunde, Author of the CRM Chapter in the Marketing Handbook for the Design and Construction Professional
• Bernie Siben, Author of A Horse of a Different Color: Marketing in the Public Sector
• Bobby Darnell, Former Director of National Accounts at Reed Construction Data
• Mel Lester, Owner of the Business Edge
• Matt Handal, Contributing Editor of SMPS Marketer
• and me.

Join us on September 21, 2009 by reading each author’s post at the sites listed and contributing by commenting with your own thoughts and experiences.