I’m sure you’ve heard the story of breakfast. It goes like this. Chickens are merely interested; pigs are totally committed. Which one are you?

They’re afraid to act and, at the same time, they’re scared not to. And the recent recession has only added to that. Everything has been turned upside down. Marketing doesn’t work like it used to. Selling doesn’t work like it used to. Many high value products and services are now often seen as just a commodity to buy at the lowest price. Globalisation and the internet means prospects are now more savvy than ever and have a seemingly endless choice from which to buy whatever they want. Nothing is as it was, and it’s getting worse.

 

Prospects aim to remove all the risks they can when buying and because of their sheer size, your bigger competitors are able to mitigate their fears more    small companies or one-man-bands. And that’s because in order to get big, they had to grow. They had to develop staying power. Small businesses are perceived to be that way because they couldn’t grow. It doesn’t matter whether this is true or not; it’s what big companies think.

 

Not only that but prospects often feel that it took less success for a one-band-band to last for 20 years, than it did for a larger firm to survive. And therefore, they believe that it’s more likely that the sole proprietor will experience catastrophic failure than one of the big boys. So convinced are they that many larger firms make it a requirement for bidders to be a certain size just to qualify. 

He or she has to demonstrate commitment; total commitment. And it’s here that the big companies struggle to compete. In other words, they’re chickens and not pigs. The big boys have a reputation for delegating much of their work to people just like you for a much lower fee than they are receiving.  That’s so that they can increase their margins. And to be fair, that’s a perfectly acceptable business practice. Why should you do anything yourself if there’s something else that’s legitimate which if you do will enable you to earn more? But a better question is, why should you settle for doing the lower paying work that the big boys delegate, when you could be winning the same contracts yourself? The problem with the bigger firms is that their overheads are so large that they have to earn more more profit on each contract. It also means, however, that they aren’t fully committed to the work.  In other words, they’re not using their best talent throughout the project. That this is the case is evidenced by the questions that often appear in requests-for-proposals, or RFPs. Frequently, firms will be asked how much time the principals will devote to the project. That means that the contracting firm expects them to spend less full-time on it.

You are as talented as any of the principals in the competing firms. However, you will devote all of your time and expertise to helping them solve their problem, right? You also need the work more than they do, which means that your level of commitment is higher. More than that, you’re giving all you have, rather than all that’s necessary.  It’s a critical difference. As a result, you’re able to deliver higher quality than the big boys.

Your expertise (which is the highest in your niche) + your commitment (which is the greatest in your niche) = the lowest risk for your prospect.

 

If you would like to know more about winning larger project against bigger competition - contact me here