Our product was great and our sales fell.

We had a great product.
And it killed our sales.

In 1981 I got my first computer sales job at Digital Equipment Corporation (DEC). We had some of the best, most highly-engineered products.

Our CEO and founder, Ken Olsen, built a great company. MIT trained engineer. But Ken was an engineer first.

He thought that by giving enough engineering handbooks to enough engineers, the products would sell themselves.

BTW - He also thought paying a sales commission for that was bad and unnecessary.

This worked well until the IBM PC came out, and computers in general were beginning to perform so non-engineers could approach and use them.

Sales fell.
Layoffs came.
We fell behind and got acquired.

What I learned from this experience, and what really applies to today’s sellers, is people don’t want to have to figure it out. They want to know why they'll be better off in 3, 6 or 12 months after they buy your product. 🎯

Over the years, I've seen hundreds of fantastic products end up as a roadkill. Because they assumed people knew enough to know how good their products were.

Your job as a founder or salesperson is to paint the picture of a life or career that will be better off (and free from risk) after purchasing from you. Not hoping they just figure it out.

Is your company assuming your prospects just “get it”?

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)

1. Why did a "great product" lead to a decline in sales for DEC? Having a superior product wasn't the issue; the problem was the assumption that the product would sell itself. The leadership believed that providing technical handbooks to engineers was enough, failing to realize that as the market expanded to non-engineers (like with the IBM PC), buyers needed to understand the practical benefits rather than just the technical specifications.

2. What was the "Engineering Handbook" mistake? CEO Ken Olsen, an MIT-trained engineer, focused on technical excellence. He believed that if you gave enough data to other engineers, the logic of the product would be self-evident. This ignored the emotional and functional "why" that drives most purchasing decisions, especially for non-technical users.

3. Why is "painting a picture" more effective than listing features? Prospects often struggle to translate technical features into personal or professional success. By painting a picture of how their life or career will be better in 3, 6, or 12 months, you remove the "work" from the buying process. You transition from being a vendor of parts to a provider of a better future.

4. How does the "risk" factor affect sales for great products? Even the best product carries a perceived risk for the buyer (e.g., "Will this work for me?", "Will I look bad if this fails?"). If a salesperson doesn't explicitly address how the product makes the buyer free from risk, the buyer may stick with a "safer," more well-known, or simpler alternative—even if it is technically inferior.

5. What is the biggest takeaway for modern founders and salespeople? The biggest lesson is that logic alone doesn't scale. You cannot assume your prospects "get it" just because your engineering is sound. Your job is to bridge the gap between your product's capabilities and the prospect's desired outcome. If you leave them to "figure it out," you've already lost the sale.