The Pokemon Principle
I learn by chance that it's the thirtieth anniversary for Pokemon cards. Whatever they are. Although I do remember the absolute clamour among grown-ups around fifteen years ago when Virtual Reality seemed the future. As those that ought seemingly know better got consumed with Pokémon GO through their camera phones.
The numbers are astonishing though. From the billions of cards bought to the prices such 'shiny cardboard' commands.
After a gamers' shop owner appeared on a breakfast telly sofa to illuminate all this - cards can change hands for a grand - presenter Sarah Campbell divulged this startling admission;
"I'm feeling a bit bad that I've just given my sons' Pokemon collection to the local charity shop. I did a clearout, and they didn't know, until now..."
Both guest and co-presenter suitably aghast; ʏᴏᴜ ᴅɪᴅɴ'ᴛ!
Despite the quasi-contrition, I couldn't help be struck by it.
One the one hand, typical entitlement of the day encapsulated; no concept at all from where value forms, whether it be experiential, individual or financial.
Yet on the other, who wouldn't benefit from a disciplined sprinkling of life laundry decluttering (me included, yikes)? Sometimes, you just have to let go...
For us in Solution Sales it is less about the act of chucking but more the theme this (un)conscious dismissal represents among our potential buyers.
Consider this. Who hasn't felt the scorching ire from having our own precious chattels cast binward, combustion raging in the bewilderment of how can it possibly be that only we understand this monumental injustice?
Now transfer that onto a commercial operation.
Someone, somewhere has something of value to them that is threatened.
Our equivalent of a treasured physical trinket now hidden in a process, or more likely, element of a broader way something is done.
Have we an understanding of any cherished, irrational even, psychological attachment buyers might hold an aspect of their legacy workflow in?
There'll be those eager to safeguard such. No matter how infrequently called upon. With others keen to update such keepsake archaisms. Typically through their elimination.
In my cubrep days I vividly recall one first meeting where reaching the office of the 'boss' meant walking through a room chock full of clerks giving us daggers.
It soon dawned on me that they knew our purpose, with belief computerisation we would bring meant their jobs disappearing.
This links too with general 'change' selling approaches.
In this case, the mum feels permitted to release some house space. Discussing it first would no doubt have helped. Sometimes getting those in charge to say what improvement needs to take place then asking what must we take into account is enough to start off in the right direction. Yet all too often doesn't quite happen.
Our biggest barrier isn't always the upfront battle over technical feasibility. Especially when there lurks an unacknowledged emotional attachment to the old way of working.
There's a potential flag for each of these binary positions either side of a neutral. Map whether each buyer personality be sentimentalist or scrapper.
Do our supporters-in-chief prospect-side know what treasured way of working might prove a barrier to overall progress?
What ingrained, invisible workflow are we accidentally threatening, and who is guarding it?