『TheInquisitor Podcast with Marcus Cauchi』のカバーアート

TheInquisitor Podcast with Marcus Cauchi

TheInquisitor Podcast with Marcus Cauchi

著者： Marcus Cauchi Laughs Last Ltd
無料で聴く

今ならプレミアムプランが3カ月 月額99円

2026年5月12日まで。4か月目以降は月額1,500円で自動更新します。

概要

 Business Insights & Strategies From Experts: Unveiling Simple Truths Behind Success.

I’m always grateful for Reviews and remember to SubscribeCopyright 2022 . All rights reserved. マネジメント マネジメント・リーダーシップ 出世 就職活動 経済学
エピソード
  • Andy Weins: How the Words Your Sales Team Uses Are Costing You Deals — and How to Fix It

    Andy Weins: How the Words Your Sales Team Uses Are Costing You Deals — and How to Fix It
    2026/04/20
    Most sales leaders invest in process, technology, and training. Almost none of them invest in the one lever that silently controls all three: the language their people use — out loud and in their own heads. Andy Weins has spent 20+ years in the military as a mass resiliency trainer, built a business from scratch, and studied the neuroscience and psychology of how the words we choose wire our behaviour. In this episode, he and Marcus Cauchi go deep on the specific phrases that signal avoidance, underperformance, and self-sabotage, and the language patterns that drive ownership, execution, and results. If you lead a sales team or run a company, this is not a soft conversation about mindfulness. It is a diagnostic tool. By the end, you will recognise the exact words your team uses when they are not going to close the deal, and you will know what to replace them with. Why This Matters Every sales team has what looks like a pipeline problem, a skills problem, or a market problem. Often it is a language problem in disguise. When your salespeople say "I just wanted to follow up," they are signalling low value before they have even started. When they say "I should call that account," they are parking it indefinitely. When they say "we need more leads," they are frequently deflecting accountability for what they already have. The language your team uses in CRM notes, forecast calls, and customer conversations is data. It tells you who is owning their number and who is performing learned helplessness. This episode gives you the framework to hear that signal clearly. Key Themes and Takeaways 1. Blame, Excuse, and Denial: The Three Default Failure Modes Andy opens with a concept drawn from Brené Brown's work on shame: when there is a gap between what we want and what we have, the brain defaults to one of three responses — blame, excuse, or denial — because they require the least cognitive effort. In sales, this shows up as: Blame: "The prospect went dark." "Marketing isn't generating quality leads." "The economy is tough."Excuse: "I didn't have time to prep." "The deck wasn't ready."Denial: "I didn't really want that account anyway." The correction Andy offers is deceptively simple: ask "Where is my DNA in this?" Even if you are 1% responsible for a poor outcome, claiming that 1% shifts you from passenger to driver. For sales leaders running deal reviews, that question, where is your DNA in this?, is worth installing as a standard. 2. "Just" and "But": The Two Words That Kill Credibility Before You've Started Marcus flags two words that most people use dozens of times a day without realising their cost: "Just" — minimises what follows. "I'm just calling to check in" communicates low value, low confidence, and low intent. Andy's framing: just justifies the nonsense that's about to happen. Train your team to remove it entirely from outreach language. Not "I just wanted to reach out" — "I'm calling because..." "But" — cancels everything before it. "Great work on that proposal, but..." means the compliment is noise. Two conflicting ideas, only one of which is true: the one that comes after but. In coaching conversations with reps, this matters. In customer conversations, it is fatal. These are not stylistic preferences. They are trust and credibility signals that prospects and internal stakeholders pick up subconsciously. 3. The Difference Between a Desire and an Expectation — and Why It Determines Whether You Hit Target Andy draws a sharp distinction that has direct application to how sales leaders manage their teams and how salespeople manage their customers: An expectation is what you want from someone else. It sets you up for resentment, conflict, and passivity — because other people are not here to meet your expectations. A desire is what you want. It is owned. It creates agency, because the question that follows is what are you willing to do to get it? In sales management, the difference sounds like this: Expectation: "My reps should be hitting 80% of quota by Q2."Desire: "I want a team hitting 80% by Q2. What am I prepared to do to coach, structure, and resource them to get there?" The second version puts you back in the problem. That is where leverage lives. 4. "Need" vs "Want": Why Needs Create Victims and Wants Create Agency Drawing on Dan Sullivan's 10x Is Easier Than 2x, Andy argues that needs are a trap. When you say "I need a six-figure salary" or "we need more pipeline," you are constructing a prison: a world where survival is contingent on something outside your control, which justifies inaction when that thing doesn't arrive. Wants work differently. "I want more pipeline" immediately opens the question: what are you willing to do to generate it? The conflict becomes internal — which want is greater, your want for comfort or your want for results? — and internal conflict is where growth happens. For founders: audit the language in your strategy meetings. Count how many times ...
    続きを読む 一部表示
    49 分
  • Ryan Berman - Risk to Relationship in B2B Sales, Procurement Strategy and Total Cost of Ownership

    Ryan Berman - Risk to Relationship in B2B Sales, Procurement Strategy and Total Cost of Ownership
    2026/04/17

    In this episode of The Inquisitor Podcast, Marcus Cauchi and Ryan Burman discuss procurement in B2B sales, buyer psychology, total cost of ownership, and how sales teams can build trust with procurement instead of fighting it.

    The discussion reframes procurement as a risk management function rather than a price cutting function.

    Ryan explains that successful sales teams focus less on persuasion and more on aligning with how procurement evaluates suppliers, especially around risk, reliability, and total cost of ownership.

    This episode is relevant for sales leaders, account executives, and commercial teams working in complex B2B sales environments where procurement plays a key role in decision making.

    Key Topics Covered

    * Procurement in B2B sales and how it influences buying decisions

    * Buyer psychology and how procurement evaluates supplier risk

    * Total cost of ownership (TCO) vs ROI in procurement decisions

    * Sales and procurement alignment in enterprise and mid-market deals

    * How to build trust with procurement teams in B2B selling

    * Why co-creation improves sales outcomes compared to traditional pitching

    * Common sales mistakes when dealing with procurement teams

    * How procurement manages risk, continuity, and supplier reliability Key

    Takeaways

    Procurement is focused on risk management

    Procurement teams prioritise reducing operational and commercial risk, not just lowering costs.

    Buyer decision making is driven by risk

    Suppliers are evaluated on whether they reduce uncertainty or introduce it.

    Total cost of ownership matters more than ROI

    Procurement considers long-term costs including quality, supply chain stability, and maintenance.

    Co-creation improves sales success Building solutions with procurement leads to stronger alignment and higher win rates.

    Trust is the deciding factor Buyers prioritise predictability and reduced internal risk over lowest price.

    Key Insight for Sales Teams

    In B2B sales, every deal must satisfy three buyer needs:

    * Functional, does the solution work

    * Social, how it impacts internal stakeholders

    * Emotional, whether it reduces personal and career risk

    Ryan Burman is the founder of Pitch to Procure and creator of the First to Pitch methodology. He helps sales and procurement teams improve alignment, negotiation outcomes, and supplier relationships in complex B2B sales environments.

    Key Quote “The first transaction is not the win. The first transaction is the test of trust. Pass that test and even if you don’t get a deal, you can get a customer for life.” Marcus Cauchi

    Ryan Berman | LinkedIn

    Marcus Cauchi | LinkedIn
    続きを読む 一部表示
    44 分
  • Why 90% of Salespeople Think They're Trusted (And Only 30% Are) with Rowly Hirst

    Why 90% of Salespeople Think They're Trusted (And Only 30% Are) with Rowly Hirst
    2026/03/31
    What does it actually mean to be a trusted adviser and, how would you know if you were one? Most customer-facing professionals believe they're trusted. Their customers largely disagree. That gap is the problem Rowly Hirst has spent his career trying to solve. Rowly is CEO of Relate.US and the creator of Sandy, a generative AI analyst that measures trust in real time using the Maister-Green-Galford Trust Equation: Credibility + Reliability + Intimacy ÷ Self-Orientation. In this conversation, Marcus and Rowly go deep on what trust actually looks like in practice, why the most popular sales frameworks quietly destroy it, and what it takes to become a genuine ally rather than an accomplice, or worse, an adversary. If you spend your days in complex, high-stakes conversations, this episode is for you. What We Cover Why trust is defined not by what someone says about you, but by what they do when they could stay vague, delay, or protect themselves, and choose not toThe difference between an ally, an accomplice, and an adversary in a sales relationship, and the precise moment sellers cross the lineWhy the word "playbook" is the wrong mental model entirely, and what replaces itA masterclass in trust-building from an AT&T store in Boston: how a $50 sale became a case study in the Trust Equation in actionThe five operating principles that separate trusted advisers from everyone elseHow Challenger, BANT, MEDIC, SPIN, and Sandler all fail in the same way under pressure, and what that failure looks like in practiceThe 55 sub-factors Sandy measures across the four components of the Trust EquationWhy gamifying your trust score actually works, and ends up benefiting the customer, not just the sellerThe 90/30 trust perception gap: why over 90% of sales reps believe they're trusted advisers while only 30% of their customers agreeWhat Sandy has taught Rowly about his own blind spots, including a real example of how he lost an investor in a meeting and what he changed afterwardsWhy saying "I don't know" is a credibility asset, not a liabilityHow measurement of trust has gone from a $600 human analysis taking a week to a six-cent automated result in under two minutesGallup's estimate that improving meaningful feedback and trust-building could lift global employee engagement from 20% to 80% — an $8.5 trillion productivity uplift Key Idea from This Episode Trust isn't something you ask for or declare. It's something the other person gifts you, quietly, through their behaviour, especially when risk is on the table. It breaks down not when objections appear, but earlier: when pressure rises and we unconsciously shift from ally to accomplice. The fix isn't a better playbook. It's noticing yourself under pressure and choosing differently. About Rowly Hirst Rowly Hirst is CEO of Relate.us and has over 25 years of experience in consultative sales and account management in financial services. He began developing the thinking behind Relate.us in 2013 after a career taking CEOs and CFOs to meet investors, observing first-hand how poorly the industry measured what actually mattered in high-stakes relationships. Sandy, Relate.us's generative AI trust analyst, is built on the Maister-Green-Galford Trust Equation and measures trust objectively across 55 sub-factors, delivering results in near real-time at a fraction of the cost of traditional survey or human-review methods. Connect with Rowly 🌐 relateUS.com 🔗 LinkedIn: Rowly Hirst Connect with Marcus 🔗 LinkedIn: Marcus Cauchi 🌐 theinquisitorpodcast.com Chapters 0:00 — Introduction & Rowly's background2:34 — Defining trust as observable behaviour under uncertainty4:07 — Ally vs accomplice vs adversary5:28 — Why "playbook" is the wrong model7:05 — The AT&T store story: trust in a 25-minute sale9:45 — The five principles of a trusted adviser12:46 — Where sellers cross the line from ally to accomplice15:17 — What managers should stop coaching17:17 — How Challenger, BANT, MEDIC, SPIN & Sandler erode trust20:09 — What Sandy is and how it works25:00 — The gamification effect27:21 — The feedback people push back against most31:00 — Self-awareness vs self-perception32:31 — The 90/30 trust perception gap33:47 — What would tank Marcus's trust score right now37:50 — How Sandy's coaching evolves across meetings38:07 — Inside the 55 sub-factors40:27 — Vulnerability, credibility, and "I don't know"44:23 — Why proposals fail when the buyer's voice isn't in them45:34 — The cost of measuring trust: then vs now47:23 — The $8.5 trillion productivity opportunity48:24 — Rowly's advice to his 23-year-old self If This Landed Don't rush to agree or disagree. Spend the next few days paying attention. Notice when your curiosity drops. Notice when you try to rescue. And if you catch a moment where trust shifted, in either direction , we would genuinely like to hear what you saw. Stay safe and happy selling.
    続きを読む 一部表示
    53 分
まだレビューはありません