Dealer Integration, How To Deal With Human Spirit?

With the integration of distributors, more and more dealers are beginning to realize that this is a shortcut for them to quickly break through regional restrictions and form regional monopoly.

But many dealers also found that the integration of dealers is not easy, because most dealers are "elite".

There are no good things. Those people are "declined".

Moreover, those distributors who choose to implement the integration also find that the distributors who participate in the integration are not at ease, and there are a lot of dealers who are intent on "rebellious".

For dealers who want to integrate, how to deal with this talent?

Many dealers integrate, not much technology.

With their years of experience and social networks, those leading dealers have pulled together a bunch of "brothers" and are ready to negotiate with manufacturers.

A product that satisfies everybody or selects a factory that everyone can see is pleasing to the eye. This is the ultimate benefit of this integration.

But this interest is very fragile, because this union is not difficult, many dealers joined such an integration body, and soon they also learned this mode of operation skills.

And then they will start their own stove.

"Rather than being a chicken head, not a cow", it is logical logic in these people's logic.

Therefore, for any dealer who wants to take the lead, it is not feasible to deal with these talents at the beginning of dealer integration.

Many dealers are accustomed to direct "material interests" to attract people, so many of the leaders are no exception. They promise to participate in the integration of the following dealers: "the bag can earn no money", "how much a year".

But business is not so simple. The author has seen a big dealer personally. Two years ago, the spirit of distribution, whether his original business or the huge capacity of business network expansion after the consortium, made him full of vision for the future.

But two years later, when I saw him again, he had already haggled a lot, and he was in the commitment to these talents.

From the perspective of business strategy, the biggest problem of this man is that he has not worked out a suitable development strategy, or has used the same set of models that he can work in the consortium.

Is this a paradox of "chicken first or egg"? Should we first have the ability or should we make money first?

It is impossible to say that those elite dealers are incapable.

Because, after all, they still run companies, at least they are still alive, and some live very well.

But after all, whether they should make money or improve their overall ability first is always debated.

As a "boss", there is no doubt that this guy is quite satisfied with his manipulation in the market.

So he put forward a plan to control the market resources for the whole consortium.

But when it comes to promoting this plan, many dealers (who are all human beings) propose to make such an improvement plan, can they make money and earn money?

The guy is also very confident that the demands of the following elite people will be pressed down by giving a promise, that is, "if I follow me, I can't make money and I will pay for it".

What about the result?

Two years later, he kept languish in his constant guidance and complaints.

Because he thought he could achieve the unification of product mix through integration, and eventually aborted in the Yin and Yang violation of the individual.

Without the carrier of money, his consortium became a "chicken ribs" which he could not afford to abandon, and the dealers who had participated and the dealers who were still working together were always talking about his past commitments.

He was tired and annoyed, and at last he looked much older than he did two years ago.

For the dealer's friend's experience, his own summary is his strategic design, the feasibility and effectiveness of the business mode and so on, and there are relatively large defects at the beginning, which eventually led to this kind of dissatisfaction.

But he did not notice that there were still bigger problems in his original communication link.

Communication is also an important part of dealing with dealers.

Many companies die from strategy and death from execution. For dealer integration, the proportion of deaths from communication is often higher than the previous two.

But what links do we really need to pay attention to?

1) bilateral negotiations vs multiparty negotiations

The dealer is accustomed to using one to one way to negotiate and communicate with the "small brothers" of the cooperative enterprises and distributors, and considers himself a negotiator.

So when he was elected to be a leader of a consortium of nearly twenty dealers, he cheerfully took office and immediately began to implement the first plan after taking office: to formulate a unified network management policy.

At that time, each dealer member had their own successful operation mode, while the new "big guy" thought that the unified strategy had several advantages.

When he delivered his inaugural address at the general assembly, he explained that the Federation must achieve long-term success by relying on all members to adhere to the new and unified mode of network operation, management and expansion. He also explained the reasons one by one.

Shortly after his speech, a fire broke out in the backyard.

He was attacked by all his children.

Some of these "younger brothers" do not want to participate in the implementation of the new policy, but others wait and see.

Within a few days, he received 10 calls and asked him to give up the new proposals.

Where is the new "big guy" wrong?

He neglected the significant differences between bilateral negotiations and multilateral negotiations.

Many similarities between the two will make us see their differences.

The main difference between the two lies in the fact that once the negotiations have reached two or more, it is possible to form an alliance - just as the 10 younger brothers in this case join forces against his new deal.

Yes, we need special preparations to establish alliances.

Entering multilateral negotiations means attacking and defending ahead of time, that is, how to establish a winning alliance or how to organize blocking coalition to fight against other parties.

Because the alliance will play a key role in most multiparty negotiations, the participants in the negotiations also need to pay close attention to the interaction between the members of the negotiations.

Therefore, the most important principle of establishing alliances is to consider how and when to negotiate with each other.

Because there is an important common goal in bilateral negotiations and multi-party negotiations: finding out the trading space in negotiations.

"Trading space" refers to the space in which partners are converted to (even temporary) solutions in negotiations.

The parties in the trading space turn their main competitors into clear partners without sacrificing their respective interests, and do everything possible to create greater value for all parties.

In the trading space, you and the negotiating parties accept, or at least temporarily accept, the idea that helping the parties to meet their respective interests will make it easier for them to achieve the goal of negotiation.

Therefore, in the trading space, whether it is dealing with two people or with ten or twenty people, in order to achieve success, you need to pay close attention to the needs and interests of all parties, put forward proposals to balance the interests of all parties, stop criticizing the other side, explore creative and non binding ideas and suggestions, and jointly determine the steps to solve the problem.

At the same time, finding out the opponent's bottom line is also an important step in communication.

Because entering the bargaining space is not a guarantee that everyone is happy, it can achieve the best results.

But when it finds out the bottom line of the opponent, it can help the alliance to produce more than their "sub optimal" negotiation results.

But the most difficult part of distributor's integration is more competitors.

Communication with one or more negotiating partners is often unpredictable.

When you have only one opponent, you usually have to calculate your conditions and conditions.

With the increase in the number of negotiations, whenever you need to form a new alliance or feel that the new alliance will result in the negotiation result against you, you must recalculate the advantages and bargaining chips of your negotiation.

In addition, the negotiations and communication in dealer integration are ultimately aimed at forming a unified alliance.

In the process, the dealer's "big guy" ignores the importance of establishing a cooperative alliance in the process.

He must realize that once he enters the negotiations of distributor integration, there must be a winning alliance behind him.

In the previous case, 10 dealers joined together to oppose his proposal.

This is also because the "big man" obviously spent too much time with his subordinates to review the specific content of his proposed policy and did not spend enough time to consult other distributors, and tried hard to win their support for the reform plan.

From this point of view, you can see that the failure of the "big guys" communication is too much attention to detail and no attention to strategic communication.

From the failure of the bigwigs, we can come up with a rule of establishing alliances: carefully consider how and when to negotiate one to one with the negotiating parties.

When you talk to every opponent who may become your ally, they may ask you to make an intentional commitment, and you may not know what other potential partners will do at this time.

In order to prevent your commitment from becoming a stumbling block, you must seriously consider some key issues.

If, after the negotiation, how do we divide the benefits?

Before I get to know what other people are going to say, do I want to reach a "good looking" intention with the current people?

At this stage, the goal of the big guys should be to get a relatively definite commitment from the possible alliance partners, and at the same time, leave room for changing commitments.

In the absence of clear guidelines, this delicate process is indeed hard to grasp, but the results will prove that your efforts have not been wasted.

Then, the bigwigs can consider carefully and choose the alliance partners.

In addition, it is necessary to point out that many dealers will integrate into the "horn of the bull" or not to solicit opinions from others.

Therefore, in order to avoid the latter result, we need to manage the negotiation task group and manage the negotiation schedule and rules.

Otherwise, the whole process will be in chaos or even deadlock.

Because there is a so-called "group myth" phenomenon.

When people work together, the desire to reach agreement sometimes has the upper hand, making them unable to weigh all possible choices, which will affect their decision-making ability.

To this end, in the negotiations of dealer integration, it is even necessary to hire "middlemen" specially to set up a special group, to control the negotiations to advance according to the plan, and to seek answers to the relevant management organizations or advisory bodies for the problems encountered in the negotiations.

Most of the time, the overwhelming majority of participants agree that "unanimous consent" is the best decision rule.

Therefore, according to this rule, it is not easy for the head runner to integrate the dealer. He needs to make the negotiation parties try to seek consistency and make every effort to meet the interests of each side and achieve almost complete agreement.

Of course, the leaders who have reached an agreement can also have greater interests, such as improving the network strength through integration, improving their social status and bargaining chips in front of manufacturers.

It should be said that dealer integration is a game of "smart people".

But for such a group of people, the definition and description of rules, rules and rules of the game, and long-term interests, potential benefits and future vision are no more important than "direct material interests".

Although dealers like to play "little nine nine", they all like "not to see rabbits without flying hawks".

But the integration of dealers can still be so touching because it is not just for the eyes.

Among them, how to grasp the propriety is still worth exploring.