方法与优势
根据买方职责和成交阶段调整资料重点:负责日常使用的人需要理解操作流程,负责决策的人可能更关注业务匹配和投入条件。不同版本共用已确认的产品事实,让内容有针对性,同时保持说法一致。
根据买方角色和当前成交阶段,准备能用于真实沟通的销售赋能资料。提供商品或服务事实、客户背景和常见异议后,这项 Skill 可以帮助助手整理异议回应、演示提纲、竞品比较与决策资料,尤其适合电商批发业务、B2B 产品和面向商家的软件销售。
客户刚开始了解问题时,需要的资料与最后比较供应商时并不一样。这项 Skill 会结合客户所处阶段和决策角色选择内容,要求卖点能够被事实支持,而不是在每份材料里重复笼统的优势介绍。
适合准备销售会议,或改进团队经常使用的沟通文档。原始方法主要面向 B2B,应用到电商时更适合批发和商家服务。它负责准备内容,不会发送外联消息,也不能凭空提供投资回报或效果证明。
根据买方职责和成交阶段调整资料重点:负责日常使用的人需要理解操作流程,负责决策的人可能更关注业务匹配和投入条件。不同版本共用已确认的产品事实,让内容有针对性,同时保持说法一致。
竞品资料和异议回应使用带日期的证据,也说明其他方案在什么情况下更合适。这样销售能够针对真实差异回答问题,清楚解释适用边界,而不是依靠“我们什么都更好”的说法推进沟通。
产品事实、买家角色、交易阶段、销售模式、可用证明和带日期竞品证据。
使用能发现已安装 Skill 并读取辅助文件的兼容 Agent。外部服务或创作运行环境需另行配置。
主要用于 B2B 销售,电商适配场景是批发或商家软件销售;不负责外联发送,也不能编造 ROI 证明。
将指令复制给 Codex 或 Claude Code,让助手从原始仓库下载固定提交,安装完整文件并检查所需依赖。
请在我当前使用的应用中安装 sales-enablement,直接执行文件安装,不要只解释步骤。
原始仓库:https://github.com/coreyhaines31/marketingskills.git
固定提交:e85f3cbc2e4a79bf33b2a12e9bdd9087d414735b
Skill 路径:skills/sales-enablement
1. 将这个版本下载到新目录。执行随包脚本前,先阅读 SKILL.md 和安装参考文件,不替换成其他作者的包。
2. Codex 安装到 ~/.agents/skills/sales-enablement,Claude Code 安装到 ~/.claude/skills/sales-enablement,只安装到我正在使用的应用。安装完整 Skill 文件夹,保留 scripts、references、assets 和随包声明;将仓库根目录许可证一并保留。先检查所有目标目录;已有安装时,说明差异后再决定是否替换。
3. 比较来源和安装目录的文件清单、文件哈希,检查文档要求的运行时、依赖及外部连接。只配置此 Skill 所需的本地依赖,适用时使用隔离环境;账号登录由我在本地完成,不把凭据贴进聊天。
4. 返回来源提交、实际安装路径、文件检查结果及尚未完成的运行环境配置,说明如何调用 sales-enablement。文件复制与应用发现分别检查,需要时新建会话。不要执行生产任务,也不要把安装完成说成已确认业务效果。以下为已核对版本未经改写的 SKILL.md。安装完整包才能保留引用的脚本、素材和指引。下方启动提示词为 EcomAgentTools 编写的示例。
---
name: sales-enablement
description: "When the user wants to create sales collateral, pitch decks, one-pagers, objection handling docs, or demo scripts. Also use when the user mentions 'sales deck,' 'pitch deck,' 'one-pager,' 'leave-behind,' 'objection handling,' 'deal-specific ROI analysis,' 'demo script,' 'talk track,' 'sales playbook,' 'proposal template,' 'buyer persona card,' 'battle card,' 'battlecard,' 'competitive one-pager,' 'win-loss analysis,' 'why are we losing deals,' 'loss reasons,' 'how do I respond to this objection,' 'prospect just said,' 'help my sales team,' 'sales materials,' or 'what should I give my sales reps,' 'cold call script,' or 'voicemail script.' Use this for any document or asset that helps a sales team close deals. For public competitor comparison pages, see competitors. For running buyer interviews or churn research, see customer-research. For marketing website copy, see copywriting. For cold outreach emails, see cold-email. For the offer being sold (bonuses, guarantees, pricing structure), see offers."
metadata:
version: 2.4.0
---
# Sales Enablement
You are an expert in B2B sales enablement. Your goal is to create sales collateral that reps actually use — decks, one-pagers, objection docs, demo scripts, and playbooks that help close deals.
## Before Starting
**Check for product marketing context first:**
If `.agents/product-marketing.md` exists (or `.claude/product-marketing.md`, or the legacy `product-marketing-context.md` filename, in older setups), read it before asking questions. Use that context and only ask for information not already covered or specific to this task.
Gather this context (ask if not provided):
1. **Value Proposition & Differentiators**
- What do you sell and who is it for?
- What makes you different from the next best alternative?
- What outcomes can you prove?
2. **Sales Motion**
- How do you sell? (self-serve, inside sales, field sales, hybrid)
- Average deal size and sales cycle length
- Key personas involved in the buying decision
3. **Collateral Needs**
- What specific assets do you need?
- What stage of the funnel are they for?
- Who will use them? (AE, SDR, champion, prospect)
4. **Current State**
- What materials exist today?
- What's working and what's not?
- What do reps ask for most?
---
## Core Principles
### Sales Uses What Sales Trusts
Involve reps in creation. Use their language, not marketing's. If reps rewrite your deck before sending it, you wrote the wrong deck. Test drafts with your top performers first.
### Situation-Specific, Not Generic
Tailor to persona, deal stage, and use case. A deck for a CTO should look different from one for a VP of Sales. A one-pager for post-meeting follow-up serves a different purpose than one for a trade show.
### Scannable Over Comprehensive
Reps need information in 3 seconds, not 30. Use bold headers, short bullets, and visual hierarchy. If a rep can't find the answer mid-call, the doc has failed.
### Tie Back to Business Outcomes
Every claim connects to revenue, efficiency, or risk reduction. Features mean nothing without the "so what." Replace "AI-powered analytics" with "cut reporting time by 80%."
### Claims Reps Can Defend
Reps repeat what you write to buyers who can check it. Anything a buyer can disprove in a minute costs more than it gains.
- **"Why we win" needs evidence**: win/loss interviews, call recordings, customer quotes, or CRM reasons backed by one of those (see Win-Loss Analysis). Without it, write advantages as hypotheses for reps to test, and say what evidence would confirm them.
- **Competitor claims follow the competitors skill's evidence rules**: dated, sourced, "not listed on their site" rather than "they don't have it," and no stating their motives as fact. Reps can reason about why a competitor did something, labeled as a guess.
- **Include where you lose.** A competitive doc that admits when the competitor is the better fit is one reps will trust in front of a buyer.
---
## Sales Deck / Pitch Deck
### 10-12 Slide Framework
1. **Current World Problem** — The pain your buyer lives with today
2. **Cost of the Problem** — What inaction costs (time, money, risk)
3. **The Shift Happening** — Market or technology change creating urgency
4. **Your Approach** — How you solve it differently
5. **Product Walkthrough** — 3-4 key workflows, not a feature tour
6. **Proof Points** — Metrics, logos, analyst recognition
7. **Case Study** — One customer story told well
8. **Implementation / Timeline** — How they get from here to live
9. **ROI / Value** — Expected return and payback period
10. **Pricing Overview** — Transparent, tiered if applicable
11. **Next Steps / CTA** — Clear action with timeline
### Deck Principles
- **Story arc, not feature tour.** Every deck tells a story: the world has a problem, there's a better way, here's proof, here's how to get there.
- **One idea per slide.** If you need two points, use two slides.
- **Design for presenting, not reading.** Slides support the conversation — they don't replace it. Minimal text, strong visuals.
### Customization by Buyer Type
| Buyer | Emphasize | De-emphasize |
|-------|-----------|--------------|
| Technical buyer | Architecture, security, integrations, API | ROI calculations, business metrics |
| Economic buyer | ROI, payback period, total cost, risk | Technical details, implementation specifics |
| Champion | Internal selling points, quick wins, peer proof | Deep technical or financial detail |
**For full slide-by-slide guidance**: See [references/deck-frameworks.md](references/deck-frameworks.md)
---
## One-Pagers / Leave-Behinds
### When to Use
- **Post-meeting recap** — Reinforce what you discussed, keep momentum
- **Champion internal selling** — Arm your champion to sell for you
- **Trade show handout** — Quick intro that drives follow-up
### Structure
1. **Problem statement** — The pain in one sentence
2. **Your solution** — What you do and how
3. **3 differentiators** — Why you vs. alternatives
4. **Proof point** — One strong metric or customer quote
5. **CTA** — Clear next step with contact info
### Design Principles
- One page, literally. Front only, or front and back maximum.
- Scannable in 30 seconds. Bold headers, short bullets, whitespace.
- Include your logo, website, and a specific contact (not info@).
- Match your brand but keep it clean — this is a sales tool, not a brand piece.
**For templates by use case**: See [references/one-pager-templates.md](references/one-pager-templates.md)
---
## Objection Handling Docs
### Objection Categories
| Category | Examples |
|----------|----------|
| Price | "Too expensive," "No budget this quarter," "Competitor is cheaper" |
| Timing | "Not the right time," "Maybe next quarter," "Too busy to implement" |
| Competition | "We already use X," "What makes you different?" |
| Authority | "I need to check with my boss," "The committee decides" |
| Status quo | "What we have works fine," "Not broken, don't fix it" |
| Technical | "Does it integrate with X?," "Security concerns," "Can it scale?" |
### Response Framework
For each objection, document:
1. **Objection statement** — Exactly how reps hear it
2. **Why they say it** — The real concern behind the words
3. **Response approach** — How to acknowledge and redirect
4. **Proof point** — Specific evidence that addresses the concern
5. **Follow-up question** — Keep the conversation moving forward
### Two Formats
- **Quick-reference table** for live calls — objection, one-line response, proof point. Fits on one screen.
- **Detailed doc** for prep and training — full context, talk tracks, role-play scenarios.
**For the full objection library**: See [references/objection-library.md](references/objection-library.md)
### Live Deal Objection
When a rep brings one objection from a live deal ("the CFO just said Acme is half the price, I have a call in an hour"), answer that deal. Don't hand back a generic doc.
1. **Pin down the moment**: who said it, their role, the exact words, deal stage, and what happens next (call, email, procurement). The rep is often short on time: answer with your assumptions stated and ask only for what would change the answer.
2. **Name the likely concern behind it** and say what in the deal points to it. If two readings fit, give the rep a question that tells them apart before they argue either one.
3. **Give one response the rep can say as written**: acknowledge, address the real concern, bring one proof point, end with a question.
4. **Use only proof the rep can stand behind.** Pull from the objection library, case studies, and battle cards. If nothing fits, say so and suggest the claim to verify. Don't invent a stat, customer, or competitor number, and don't repeat the buyer's claim about a competitor as fact. "Half the price" may not include the same scope, so have the rep ask what's in their number.
5. **Say when not to fight.** If the objection shows a real fit gap, say so and suggest how to qualify out or narrow scope.
Afterward, suggest the rep log the objection and how it went. Live objections are the raw material for the library and for win-loss analysis.
---
## Battle Cards
A battle card is a reusable one-competitor guide for reps, used across many deals. For a single live objection, use Live Deal Objection. For public comparison pages, see competitors. Every line follows Claims Reps Can Defend.
**Ask which competitor.** If the request doesn't name one and context doesn't identify it, ask in one short question. You can name the likely candidate for the user to confirm, but don't draft until they do. A polished card about the wrong competitor looks finished, so nobody questions it.
### Structure
1. **When you'll see them**: segments, deal sizes, and triggers where they show up
2. **Why buyers consider them**: their real appeal, in the buyer's words
3. **Where they're strong**: honest, so reps aren't blindsided
4. **Where we win, and for whom**: tied to evidence (see Claims Reps Can Defend)
5. **Discovery questions**: questions that surface the fit criteria where you're stronger, without trashing them
6. **Top objections**: with one-line responses and proof
7. **When to walk away**: deal profiles where they're the better fit
8. **Last verified**: date, and what changed since the previous version
### Keeping It Current
- Re-verify pricing and packaging quarterly, and whenever reps hear something new in deals.
- Tag every competitor fact with its source and date, so a stale line can be found and fixed.
- One page. If reps can't find the answer mid-call, cut until they can.
Pull competitor facts from competitor-profiling dossiers when they exist. To check existing cards for stale claims, see the competitive asset audit in competitors.
---
## Win-Loss Analysis
Win-loss analysis turns CRM outcomes, call transcripts, and buyer interviews into an evidence-backed answer to "why do we win and lose, against whom?" It's the evidence that battle cards and "why we win" sections need.
### Workflow
1. **Inventory the sources** and their bias: CRM loss reasons (rep-entered, skewed toward price and timing), call transcripts (what buyers said in the deal), buyer interviews (most candid, smallest sample).
2. **Include wins.** A loss reason means little without the deals you won against the same competitor.
3. **Segment before you count.** Split by competitor, segment, deal size, and stage lost. "We lose on price" across everything often hides "we lose mid-market deals to one competitor on onboarding."
4. **Code each deal** with one primary reason (plus any secondary ones), a supporting quote, and the source, so primary counts add up. Have one person code, or double-code a sample, so "primary" means the same thing throughout.
5. **Report counts with sample sizes.** "6 of 9 losses to Acme cite onboarding time" beats "onboarding is a top theme." State n every time. Small slices are directional, and under ~5 deals it's a signal to watch, not a finding.
6. **Turn findings into assets.** A deal with only a one-word CRM reason is low-confidence: confirm it with transcripts or interviews before it changes a battle card. Then update battle cards, the objection library, and discovery questions, and send product gaps to the product team.
**For coding schemes, interview questions, and report format**: See [references/win-loss-analysis.md](references/win-loss-analysis.md)
---
## ROI Calculators & Value Props
### Calculator Design
**Inputs** (current state metrics the prospect provides):
- Time spent on manual processes
- Current tool costs
- Error rates or inefficiency metrics
- Team size
**Calculations** (your formula for value):
- Time saved per week/month/year
- Cost reduction (tools, headcount, errors)
- Revenue impact (faster deals, higher conversion)
**Outputs** (what the prospect sees):
- Annual ROI percentage
- Payback period in months
- Total 3-year value
### Value Prop by Persona
| Persona | Cares About | Lead With |
|---------|-------------|-----------|
| CTO / VP Eng | Architecture, scale, security, team velocity | Technical superiority, integration depth |
| VP Sales | Pipeline, quota attainment, rep productivity | Revenue impact, time savings per rep |
| CFO | Total cost, payback period, risk | ROI, cost reduction, financial predictability |
| End user | Ease of use, daily workflow, learning curve | Time saved, frustration eliminated |
### Implementation Options
- **Spreadsheet** — Fastest to build, easy to customize per deal. Works for inside sales.
- **Web tool** — More polished, captures leads, scales better. Worth building if deal volume is high.
- **Slide-based** — ROI story embedded in the deck. Good for executive presentations.
---
## Demo Scripts & Talk Tracks
### Script Structure
1. **Opening** (2 min) — Context setting, agenda, confirm goals for the call
2. **Discovery recap** (3 min) — Summarize what you learned, confirm priorities
3. **Solution walkthrough** (15-20 min) — 3-4 key workflows mapped to their pain
4. **Interaction points** — Questions to ask during the demo, not just at the end
5. **Close** (5 min) — Summarize value, propose next steps with timeline
### Talk Track Types
| Type | Duration | Focus |
|------|----------|-------|
| Discovery call | 30 min | Qualify, understand pain, map buying process |
| First demo | 30-45 min | Show 3-4 workflows tied to their pain |
| Technical deep-dive | 45-60 min | Architecture, security, integrations, API |
| Executive overview | 20-30 min | Business outcomes, ROI, strategic alignment |
### Key Principles
- **Demo after discovery, not before.** If you don't know their pain, you're guessing which features matter.
- **Customize to their use case.** Use their terminology, their data (if possible), their workflow.
- **Leave time for questions.** A demo where the prospect doesn't talk is a demo that doesn't close.
**For full script templates**: See [references/demo-scripts.md](references/demo-scripts.md)
**For cold call openers, voicemails, and first-minute pushback**: See [references/cold-call-scripts.md](references/cold-call-scripts.md)
---
## Case Study Briefs (Sales Format)
### How Sales Case Studies Differ
Marketing case studies tell a story. Sales case studies arm reps with fast-access proof. Keep them short, outcome-focused, and tagged for retrieval.
### Structure
1. **Customer profile** — Industry, company size, buyer role
2. **Challenge** — What they were struggling with (2-3 sentences)
3. **Solution** — What they implemented (1-2 sentences)
4. **Results** — 3 specific metrics (before/after)
5. **Pull quote** — One sentence from the customer
6. **Tags** — Industry, use case, company size, persona
### Organization
Organize case studies so reps can find the right one instantly:
- **By industry** — "Show me a case study for healthcare"
- **By use case** — "Show me someone who used us for X"
- **By company size** — "Show me an enterprise example"
---
## Proposal Templates
### Structure
1. **Executive summary** — Their challenge, your solution, expected outcome (1 page max)
2. **Proposed solution** — What you'll deliver, mapped to their requirements
3. **Implementation plan** — Timeline, milestones, responsibilities
4. **Investment** — Pricing, payment terms, what's included
5. **Next steps** — How to move forward, decision timeline
### Customization Guidance
- Mirror their language from discovery calls
- Reference specific pain points they mentioned
- Include only relevant case studies (same industry or use case)
- Name the stakeholders you've spoken with
### Common Mistakes
- **Too long** — If it's over 10 pages, it won't get read. Aim for 5-7.
- **Too generic** — Templated proposals signal low effort. Customize the exec summary at minimum.
- **Burying the price** — Don't make them hunt for it. Be transparent and confident.
---
## Sales Playbooks
### What Goes in a Playbook
- **Buyer profile** — Who you're selling to, their goals and pains
- **Qualification criteria** — BANT, MEDDIC, or your framework
- **Discovery questions** — Organized by topic, not a script
- **Objection handling** — Top 10 objections with responses
- **Competitive positioning** — How you win against each competitor
- **Demo flow** — Recommended sequence for each persona
- **Email templates** — Follow-up, proposal, check-in, breakup
### When to Build
- **New product launch** — Reps need a single source of truth
- **New market segment** — Different buyers need different approaches
- **New hire ramp** — Playbooks cut ramp time significantly
### Keeping It Living
Playbooks die when they're not updated. Review quarterly, get input from top reps, and remove anything outdated. Assign an owner — if nobody owns it, it rots.
---
## Buyer Persona Cards
### Card Structure
| Field | Description |
|-------|-------------|
| Role / title | Common titles and reporting structure |
| Goals | What success looks like for them |
| Pains | What frustrates them daily |
| Top objections | The 3-5 objections you'll hear from this role |
| Evaluation criteria | How they judge solutions |
| Buying process | Their role in the decision, who they influence |
| Messaging angle | The one sentence that resonates most |
### Persona Types
- **Economic buyer** — Signs the check. Cares about ROI and risk.
- **Technical buyer** — Evaluates the product. Cares about capabilities and integration.
- **End user** — Uses it daily. Cares about ease and workflow fit.
- **Champion** — Advocates internally. Needs ammunition to sell for you.
- **Blocker** — Opposes the purchase. Understand their concern to neutralize it.
---
## Output Format
Deliver the right format for each asset type:
| Asset | Deliverable |
|-------|-------------|
| Sales deck | Slide-by-slide outline with headline, body copy, and speaker notes |
| One-pager | Full copy with layout guidance (visual hierarchy, sections) |
| Objection doc | Table format: objection, response, proof point, follow-up |
| Live objection | Likely concern, one response the rep can say as written, proof, follow-up question |
| Win-loss report | Scope, findings with counts and quotes, by-competitor breakdown, asset updates |
| Demo script | Scene-by-scene with timing, talk track, and interaction points |
| ROI calculator | Input fields, formulas, output display with sample data |
| Playbook | Structured document with table of contents and sections |
| Persona card | One-page card format per persona |
| Proposal | Section-by-section copy with customization notes |
---
## Task-Specific Questions
If context is missing, ask:
1. What collateral do you need? (deck, one-pager, objection doc, etc.)
2. Who will use it? (AE, SDR, champion, prospect)
3. What sales stage is it for? (prospecting, discovery, demo, negotiation, close)
4. Who is the target persona? (title, seniority, department)
5. What are the top 3 objections you hear most?
---
## Tool Integrations
For partner sales enablement, see the [tools registry](https://github.com/coreyhaines31/marketingskills/blob/main/tools/REGISTRY.md):
| Tool | What It Does | Guide |
|------|-------------|-------|
| **Introw** | Partner engagement tracking, deal registration, mutual action plans | [introw.md](https://github.com/coreyhaines31/marketingskills/blob/main/tools/integrations/introw.md) |
---
## Related Skills
- **competitors**: For public-facing comparison and alternative pages
- **competitor-profiling**: For the competitor dossiers that feed battle cards
- **customer-research**: For running buyer interviews and broader voice-of-customer research
- **copywriting**: For marketing website copy
- **cold-email**: For outbound prospecting emails
- **revops**: For lead lifecycle, scoring, routing, and pipeline management
- **pricing**: For pricing decisions and packaging
- **product-marketing**: For foundational positioning and messaging
以下是主要功能的用例提示词,可以直接复制使用。
起草批发买家单页材料 适用于:起草批发买家单页材料。请准备:产品事实、买家角色、交易阶段、销售模式、可用证明和带日期竞品证据。
请使用已安装的 sales-enablement Skill。任务:起草批发买家单页材料。输入:[INPUT]。限制:[CONSTRAINTS]。先检查缺失信息,再输出可审查的结果、依据、假设和下一步。主要用于 B2B 销售,电商适配场景是批发或商家软件销售;不负责外联发送,也不能编造 ROI 证明。[INPUT][CONSTRAINTS]制作有来源的竞品应对卡 适用于:制作有来源的竞品应对卡。请准备:产品事实、买家角色、交易阶段、销售模式、可用证明和带日期竞品证据。
请使用已安装的 sales-enablement Skill。任务:制作有来源的竞品应对卡。输入:[INPUT]。限制:[CONSTRAINTS]。先检查缺失信息,再输出可审查的结果、依据、假设和下一步。主要用于 B2B 销售,电商适配场景是批发或商家软件销售;不负责外联发送,也不能编造 ROI 证明。[INPUT][CONSTRAINTS]编写演示脚本与异议处理指南 适用于:编写演示脚本与异议处理指南。请准备:产品事实、买家角色、交易阶段、销售模式、可用证明和带日期竞品证据。
请使用已安装的 sales-enablement Skill。任务:编写演示脚本与异议处理指南。输入:[INPUT]。限制:[CONSTRAINTS]。先检查缺失信息,再输出可审查的结果、依据、假设和下一步。主要用于 B2B 销售,电商适配场景是批发或商家软件销售;不负责外联发送,也不能编造 ROI 证明。[INPUT][CONSTRAINTS]模拟采购人 Dana 为三位同事买杯子,预算 $75,需要向主管说明总价和适配条件。输入提供商品事实、发现记录和虚构竞品报价。
案例输入资料:business-inputs.zip
Use the sales-enablement Skill.
Prepare a one-page purchasing brief for an office buyer buying three mugs within a $75 budget. Use the supplied product facts and competitor observations. Calculate the delivered subtotal, explain suitability and care, address likely objections and give a clear approval step. Deliver a polished single-page PDF and an editable HTML version.
The attached business materials are:
- inputs/business-brief.json
- inputs/evidence.md
- inputs/product-facts.json
Deliver a complete result.md report that the operations team can read, plus any finished files needed for this task. Keep supporting calculations and evidence with the deliverables. Write the report in English; use the requested target language for customer-facing copy. The business datasets are fictional examples unless the brief explicitly names a live public website.下方直接展示本次 Prompt 产生的主要文件,保留实际输出语言。
Three HarborMugs cost $72 with free US shipping before tax. That leaves only $3 within the buyer's $75 budget. The purchasing brief therefore asks for the final tax-inclusive checkout total before approval; it does not claim that $72 is the final payable amount.
| Item | HarborMug | Fictional DeskSip DS-500 |
|---|---|---|
| Unit price | $24 | $18 |
| Quantity | 3 | 3 |
| Merchandise | $72 | $54 |
| Shipping | $0 at the $50 threshold | $6 per order |
| Before-tax subtotal | $72 | $60 |
| Cleaning | Hand-wash only | Dishwasher permitted |
The competitor is $12 cheaper for this basket and better suited to mandatory dishwasher use. The buyer says hand-washing is acceptable, which keeps HarborMug in consideration but does not establish a performance advantage. Both capacities are 500 ml in the supplied fictional evidence. No heat-retention duration, customer outcome, win rate or procurement time saving is claimed.
| Objection | Response | Evidence / next question |
|---|---|---|
| “The competitor is cheaper.” | “For three mugs, its supplied delivered subtotal is $60 before tax versus our $72. If price is the deciding factor, that option is cheaper.” | C1 and product-facts; ask which other specifications matter |
| “My supervisor must approve.” | “Here is the complete before-tax comparison. Please obtain the checkout tax before approving the $75 budget.” | Budget and B1; $3 headroom |
| “Can these go in the dishwasher?” | “HarborMug is hand-wash only. If dishwasher cleaning is required, choose a compatible alternative.” | Product care restriction; no unsupported exception |
The office manager checks the 9 × 9 × 19 cm footprint and hand-wash routine with the three users. The buyer requests the final tax-inclusive total. The supervisor approves only if it is within $75, or explicitly changes the budget or product choice. If the taxable base is $72, a $3 tax allowance corresponds to 4.1667%; this arithmetic does not determine the applicable tax rate or exemption.
US dispatch takes 2 business days, followed by 3–5 business days in transit. Unused returns within 30 days of delivery require final merchant approval. A return-postage promise is not supplied.
The package contains an editable HTML one-pager and the PDF produced from it. A scripted page-count and text check validates the export. The brief uses fictional buyer roles and evidence rather than a real customer endorsement. No order was placed and no external message was sent.
案例中的商家经营资料为模拟数据;涉及网站检查时,报告中的页面观察来自所列公开网址。
主要用于 B2B 销售,电商适配场景是批发或商家软件销售;不负责外联发送,也不能编造 ROI 证明。
核对源码及随包文件:GitHub e85f3cbc2e4a。本次为静态审查,不代表已完成安装运行或业务效果测试。
使用获授权输入,不把密钥贴入提示词。采用前检查面向客户的声明、计算、代码改动及任何拟议的外部操作。
制作面向具体买家的销售材料、异议回复、演示和竞品简报。框架把材料对应到交易阶段,要求声明可证实,也说明竞品更适合的情形。
按实际 Agent 选择方式,安装完整包,不要只复制页面中的 SKILL.md。 产品事实、买家角色、交易阶段、销售模式、可用证明和带日期竞品证据。 开启新 Agent 会话,明确要求使用 sales-enablement。先用小型样本尝试下方一个场景,并检查输出。
起草批发买家单页材料;制作有来源的竞品应对卡;编写演示脚本与异议处理指南
主要用于 B2B 销售,电商适配场景是批发或商家软件销售;不负责外联发送,也不能编造 ROI 证明。
核对源码及随包文件:GitHub e85f3cbc2e4a。本次为静态审查,不代表已完成安装运行或业务效果测试。
核对源码及随包文件:GitHub e85f3cbc2e4a。本次为静态审查,不代表已完成安装运行或业务效果测试。
暂无评论。