Selling Your Value Proposition How to

Transform Your Business into a Selling

Organization 1st Edition Cindy Barnes
Visit to download the full and correct content document:
https://textbookfull.com/product/selling-your-value-proposition-how-to-transform-your-
business-into-a-selling-organization-1st-edition-cindy-barnes/
More products digital (pdf, epub, mobi) instant
download maybe you interests ...

The Innovation Mode How to Transform Your Organization

into an Innovation Powerhouse George Krasadakis

https://textbookfull.com/product/the-innovation-mode-how-to-
transform-your-organization-into-an-innovation-powerhouse-george-
krasadakis/

Selling Your House Second Edition Ilona Bray

https://textbookfull.com/product/selling-your-house-second-
edition-ilona-bray/

Selling Naked: A Revolutionary Approach to Launching

Your Brand Online Jesse Horwitz

https://textbookfull.com/product/selling-naked-a-revolutionary-
approach-to-launching-your-brand-online-jesse-horwitz/

Selling Today Partnering to Create Value 15th Global

Edition Michael Ahearne

https://textbookfull.com/product/selling-today-partnering-to-
create-value-15th-global-edition-michael-ahearne/
How KPIs Help Transform Business and Governance 1st
Edition Kpi Organization

https://textbookfull.com/product/how-kpis-help-transform-
business-and-governance-1st-edition-kpi-organization/

Selling It to Buy Daddy a Christmas Gift Selling It

Book Five 1st Edition Amanda Clover

https://textbookfull.com/product/selling-it-to-buy-daddy-a-
christmas-gift-selling-it-book-five-1st-edition-amanda-clover/

Luxury Selling: Lessons from the world of luxury in

selling high quality goods and services to high value
clients 1st Edition Francis Srun

https://textbookfull.com/product/luxury-selling-lessons-from-the-
world-of-luxury-in-selling-high-quality-goods-and-services-to-
high-value-clients-1st-edition-francis-srun/

Value-Added Selling : How to Sell More Profitably,

Confidently, and Professionally by Competing on Value -
Not Price 4th Edition Tom Reilly

https://textbookfull.com/product/value-added-selling-how-to-sell-
more-profitably-confidently-and-professionally-by-competing-on-
value-not-price-4th-edition-tom-reilly/

TurboStrategy 21 Powerful Ways to Transform Your

Business and Boost Your Profits Quickly Tracy

https://textbookfull.com/product/turbostrategy-21-powerful-ways-
to-transform-your-business-and-boost-your-profits-quickly-tracy/
Praise for Selling Your Value
Proposition

‘We are living in the Age of the Customer. Selling Your Value
Proposition provides leaders with fresh, insightful advice on how to
drive the customer-centric business transformation our new world
requires. The time has come for every employee to join the sales
team, and Barnes, Blake and Howard provide a blueprint with
powerful case studies to arm leaders with what they need to get
started. A must-read for the transformational leader of the future.’
Cate Gutowski, VP, Commercial Digital Thread, GE Digital

‘In Creating and Delivering Your Value Proposition the Futurecurve

team helped companies tackle the central, most critical, question
they need to address in order to be successful in the market: what is
it that makes us unique? Put differently, why should your customers
buy from you instead of your competitors? Now, in this terrific
follow-up book, they help companies translate their unique value
proposition into a set of messages that the salesforce can use to
drive growth. In so doing, the authors tackle a question that is just
as difficult and vexing for managers: what would have to be true in
the customer’s world for them to want to PAY us for our unique
differentiators? Together, these two books – packed with practical
advice, tools and case examples – are must-read material for B2B
CEOs, sales leaders and marketers intent on driving growth in
markets increasingly crowded with seemingly commoditized
offerings.’ Matthew Dixon, Group Leader, CEB, and co-author,
The Challenger Sale and The Challenger Customer
‘Packed with tried and tested tactics and dozens of examples from
real organizations, this is an essential read for executives in large
corporates or anyone who wants to be customer-centric (internal or
external), innovate and stay ahead of the game.’ Simon Gale,
Procurement Director, Sony Europe

‘If we keep looking at our customers through the same lens, having
the same conversations with them, telling them the same things, not
properly hearing the answers, we wake up one day and we don’t
understand each other any more – and worse, we have been
replaced. This book wakes us up and gives us a new way to look at
and think about our customers, and then transform the relationships
that we have with them.’ Andy Head, Business Development
Director, NATS

‘Deconstructing all the key elements of what a genuine customer-

centric organization looks like, Barnes, Blake and Howard guide us
through the most engaging examination of value, and its relationship
with customers and organizations. With an emphasis on how to use
the tools and implement them effectively, the authors deliver a must-
read for all executives seeking to gain, or further, their organization’s
advantage through deep and resilient relationships with customers.’
Christopher Taylor, Executive Vice President – Strategic
Development, Survitec

‘This book is essentially the most helpful business mentor you’ve

ever met. It thoughtfully reminds us that it’s our customers’ lives and
ambitions that govern their appetite for our products and services,
not our predetermined sales plan. As a leader from local
government, where customers and sales are not familiar concepts, I
found its clear, concise and creative insights and methods
empowering. First to understand where our products and services sit
with helping our customers have a better day, on their terms not
ours. Then with that humility and integrity to execute a sales process
that unlocks our customers’ own fulfilment. I think we all want to
buy from businesses who can do that with grace and style.’ Andrew
Grant, Chief Executive, Aylesbury Vale District Council

‘Selling Your Value Proposition provides insight, acumen and a clear

understanding of how to effect organizational change – without
turning the organization and its processes upside down. The case-
study approach is most helpful, not only to provide exemplars but to
show that the challenges in business today are not simply based on
the size of the business, but on system-level and individual-level
factors that are driving both internal staff behaviour and also
customer behaviour. Being able to respond to these sometimes
competing forces in a strategic and tactical way is critical for growth
and acceleration.’ Dr Femida Gwadry-Sridhar, founder and
CEO, Pulse Infoframe Inc

‘A critically important survival manual for a digital, disruptive age, in

which your value proposition must continually evolve to keep up with
connected customers.’ Dave Gray, founder, XPLANE, and
author, The Connected Company

‘Selling Your Value Proposition isn’t only about your value

proposition. It’s about aligning everything your company does to put
the customer at the centre of everything you do. The book focuses
on learning what value experiences your customers and markets
expect, then on mobilizing your delivery of those experiences
through sharp sales and marketing execution. Selling Your Value
Proposition helps you align everything you do to create value
experiences that are meaningful to your customers.’ Dave Brock,
CEO, Partners In EXCELLENCE

‘This book shows senior executives how to develop authentic and

systemic value propositions in a world where both technology and
societal awareness are changing how and why people choose to buy.
The authors provide clear guidance on how to implement genuine
change through their proven methodology and 10 laws of value
proposition selling. I recommend this book to both established
businesses and the new generation of entrepreneurs who wish to
create genuinely engaging companies in which the whole
organization is totally focused on understanding and meeting
customer needs.’ Simon Robinson, co-author, Customer
Experiences with Soul: A new era in design and Holonomics

‘Your value proposition is at the heart of everything you need to do

to sell and grow effectively. Yet my experience is that the vast
majority of companies fail to invest enough time and energy into this
key area. In this superb book, Cindy Barnes, Helen Blake and
Tamara Howard bring their expertise and experience alive with a
clear road map to enable you to put together a powerful value
proposition, translate it into a selling proposition and ultimately
transform your business into an authentic, trusted “selling
organization”. If you are ambitious to win more business and grow
your sales faster, this book is a must-read.’ Gordon McAlpine,
entrepreneur, mentor, and bestselling author, Scale Up
Millionaire
Selling Your Value
Proposition
How to transform your business
into a selling organization

Cindy Barnes
Helen Blake
Tamara Howard
Publisher’s note
Every possible effort has been made to ensure that the
information contained in this book is accurate at the time of
going to press, and the publisher and authors cannot accept
responsibility for any errors or omissions, however caused. No
responsibility for loss or damage occasioned to any person
acting, or refraining from action, as a result of the material in
this publication can be accepted by the editor, the publisher
or any of the authors.

First published in Great Britain and the United States in 2017 by

Kogan Page Limited

Apart from any fair dealing for the purposes of research or

private study, or criticism or review, as permitted under the
Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988, this publication may
only be reproduced, stored or transmitted, in any form or by
any means, with the prior permission in writing of the
publishers, or in the case of reprographic reproduction in
accordance with the terms and licences issued by the CLA.
Enquiries concerning reproduction outside these terms should
be sent to the publishers at the undermentioned addresses:

2nd Floor, 45 Gee Street

London
EC1V 3RS
United Kingdom

c/o Martin P Hill Consulting

122 W 27th St, 10th Floor
New York, NY 10001
USA
4737/23 Ansari Road
Daryaganj
New Delhi 110002
India

www.koganpage.com

© Cindy Barnes, Helen Blake and Tamara Howard, 2017

Specific © of the models and methodology in this book

relating to The Value Proposition Builder™, The Value
Pyramid™ and The Value Proposition Blueprint™ belong
to Cindy Barnes and Helen Blake – Futurecurve/Greener
Consulting Ltd, 2017.

The right of Cindy Barnes, Helen Blake and Tamara Howard to

be identified as the authors of this work has been asserted by
them in accordance with the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act
1988.

ISBN 978 0 7494 7991 6

E-ISBN 978 0 7494 7992 3

Typeset by Integra Software Services, Pondicherry

Print production managed by Jellyfish
Printed and bound by CPI Group (UK) Ltd, Croydon, CR0 4YY
CONTENTS

Cover
Title Page
Copyright
Contents
List of Figures
List of Tables
List of contributors
Foreword
Acknowledgements

Introduction

01 How the world has changed

What companies try

What not to do
References

02 Why businesses need a value proposition

A road map for success

Why start with a value proposition?
The difference between price and value
Realigning around a common vision
Customer interactions, the good and the bad
References

03 How to develop a value proposition

 The Value Proposition Builder™

Market
Value experience
Offerings
Value hierarchy
Alternatives and differentiation
Proof/evidence

Value Proposition Blueprint™

See things from the customer’s viewpoint
References

04 How to translate a value proposition into a sales

proposition

Understanding what customers value

How customers see you
Identify your core skills and capabilities
Decide where to place propositions on the Value
Pyramid™
Create customer-centric propositions
Choose the right sales approach(es)
Frame the sales proposition in the right story
Make sure that everything you do supports your sales
propositions
Case studies: value propositions to sales propositions
References

05 The sales process

Stages of the sales process

What is happening at each stage of the cycle?
The four sales types
 The buying cycle
References

06 The sales story

When does the story begin?

Why a story?
Lessons learned
Different sales behaviours
Team selling
References

07 Winning business: the 10 Laws of Value Proposition

Selling

Law 1: the whole company plays a role in supporting the

sales process
Law 2: the customer is part of the business system
Law 3: the structures and behaviours of a business must
be kept in balance with each other
Law 4: sales behaviours must be directed towards helping
the customer gain maximum value from sales
offerings
Law 5: understand and be clear about the difference
between marketing and selling
Law 6: ensure that all business processes support the
market positioning
Law 7: don’t try to change everything all at once; you
need an evolutionary plan
Law 8: use the sales process as a guide and select the
appropriate sales approach and style for your market
positioning
Law 9: you can’t mix your selling styles in one meeting
 Law 10: this process – the value proposition work and
organizational adjustments – never stops
Reference

08 Creating the selling organization

Ways to create the selling organization

Small, semi-autonomous teams
Decentralized organizations
Simple processes
Industrial democracy
Lean start-up
Clear, open culture
Powerful values and purpose
What next?
References

Appendix 1: Value Proposition Workshop survey results

Appendix 2: Case studies
About the authors
Index
Backcover
List of Figures

FIGURE 2.1 The definition of a value proposition

FIGURE 2.2 Customer experience mapping – components and

process

FIGURE 2.3 Customer experience journey

FIGURE 3.1 The Value Proposition Builder™

FIGURE 3.2 Research continuum

FIGURE 3.3 The Value Pyramid™

FIGURE 3.4 Worked example of Value Pyramid™

FIGURE 3.5 The Value Pyramid™ showing ‘The Solution Gap’

FIGURE 3.6 Value Proposition Blueprint™ with example outputs

FIGURE 4.1 The Value Pyramid™

FIGURE 4.2 Summary sales approach

FIGURE 4.3 Telecoms value chain

FIGURE 4.4 Aircom Value Proposition Blueprint™

FIGURE 4.5 Your value proposition gives you the design framework
for how you want your customers to buy once they have made
contact
FIGURE 5.1 The eight steps of the sales process

FIGURE 5.2 The customer journey so far

FIGURE 5.3 Prospect issues and sales activities

FIGURE 5.4 Moving sales along

FIGURE 5.5 The customer journey – selling through to delivery

FIGURE 5.6 Later prospect issues and sales activities

FIGURE 5.7 Needs-based buying

FIGURE 8.1 Hierarchy versus resilient design

FIGURE APP 1.1 Breakdown of delegate companies by turnover

and payroll

FIGURE APP 1.2 Delegates’ experience of working with the Value

Proposition Builder™ process

FIGURE APP 1.3 How delegates have implemented what they

learned

FIGURE APP 1.4 Barriers to implementation

FIGURE APP 1.5 Measurable improvement after adopting the

Value Proposition Builder™ methodology
List of Tables

TABLE 3.1 Where to use qualitative and quantitative research

TABLE 5.1 The subtext of objections will often vary with each
phase of the process

TABLE 6.1 The emotional journey in the sales meeting

TABLE 8.1 Differences between mechanistic and living

organizations
With gratitude to all our family and friends who have supported us
unswervingly throughout our lives and careers. Cindy, Helen and
Tamara
LIST OF CONTRIBUTORS

Our thanks to:

Ian Bolger, Bolgers
Dave Brock, Partners in EXCELLENCE
Peter Cook, Human Dynamics
Darin De Stefano, writer
Matt Dixon, Corporate Executive Board
Dave Gray, XPLANE
Giles Hutchins, Future Fit Leadership Academy
Dominic John, Customer Alignment
Gene Leonard, LBS Partners
Simon Robinson, Holonomics Education

Our case study contributors:

Jim Bergin, Glanbia Ingredients Ireland
Phil Blades, Aircom International
Andrew Boland, NVD
Tom Cafferkey, LotusWorks
Andy Donlan, Thermodial
Robert Dunne, GlycoSelect
Sean Finlay and Andrew Gaynor, Geoscience Ireland
Paul Foley, DreamTec Software
Andrew Grant, Aylesbury Vale District Council
Andy Head, NATS
Dr Karl McCarthy, Biocel Ltd
Paul McDonald, Sonitus Systems
Jonathan Reed, Mergermarket Group
Paul Roberts, New Oxford Advisory and Consulting
Barry Smith, Abcon Industrial Products Ltd
Lucia Valente, Computational Class Notes
FOREWORD

The company is now fully prepared for the past.

This statement is my rephrasing of ‘The army is now fully
prepared for the previous war’, inspired by John Gall, in his reference
to historian Arnold Toynbee, in which he explains how armies are
typically ‘one war behind’ or one battle behind in terms of strategy,
tactics and technology.
This thinking is very relevant to our organizational world today.
Most of today’s organizations are now fully prepared for the past –
past market conditions, past business challenges and past
opportunities. How many times do we find ourselves rethinking,
redoing, restructuring, reshuffling, reskilling and re-everything – as if
the reality had just stopped for us? Hi there! I am going to stop time
so that you can catch up. Look at all the benchmarking data, all the
trend reports, all the rankings of the Most Admired, the Most
Followed and the Most Sainted of companies, do your re-something,
and then, Me, God of Time, will push the button again.
Really?
Many revamps of product development involve the refining of the
machine, the addition of better oil and the change of a few pieces
here and there. Not many look at a new product development that
may break the rules and jump the curve.
Many human resources/organization development (HR/OD)
people, practices and processes still try to reskill and hire for skills
based on an old skill set that worked in the past. Not many are
courageous enough to look at what may be needed for the future,
including people with zero experience in the relevant area of
expertise.
 Many consulting approaches are still aimed at providing comfort to
the client (and the consultants’ bank managers) as opposed to
providing challenge, which is much more inconvenient and stressful
but is vital to the forward-looking organization.
Marketing and selling processes are often still using old toolkits
created in a time when business was more linear and predictable
and that are inappropriate to new products and market positioning.
Yes, much of what people do in organizations is to get the
company fully prepared for the past.
The whole area of value proposition, from design to
implementation and selling needs is to be looked at properly, making
sure that a business creates a whole system that will elegantly
prepare it for the future, and not the past.
Cindy, Helen and Tamara unpack this challenge with passion and
skill as professionals who have been at this forefront for a long time.
Their contribution is significant for the future, not the last war.
Dr Leandro Herrero
Chief Organization Architect
The Chalfont Project/Viral Change
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

In this world of change, the importance of customer value must not

be underestimated or understated. For sales professionals and other
senior executives in companies of all sizes around the world,
harnessing authentic customer value into value propositions which
inform sales propositions is a powerful way of generating better
business.
Our influencers include all our customers, clients and colleagues
who, over the years, have helped to shape and refine our work.
We here express our appreciation to those who supported us,
worked with us daily, and helped bring this book to fruition.
First, extensive thanks must go to Mary Pasby for bringing her
years of experience in marketing, sales and research to bear on our
work. We could not have brought this book to fruition without her.
Paul Waddington was our amazing, patient wordsmith – we’re
indebted, Paul.
Suzi McGhee prepared, corrected and co-ordinated the manuscript
and illustrations. Our thanks go to her for her continual diligence and
perseverance.
Darin De Stefano was our tireless proofreader and insightful copy
editor. Our thanks to him for his patience and tenacity.
Other acknowledgements go to: Alison Carter, Lucy Cooper, Jane
Tennant, Ostii Ananda, Lynn Serafinn, Catherine Martin, Leandro
Herrero, Paul Roberts and Professor Jonathan Smith.
Final acknowledgements go to wonderful social media contacts
and friends – some of whom we know and some we have never met
but each person has been invaluable with their knowledge, help and
support, including: Mike Parker, Neelesh Marik, Rmala d’Aalam,
Charles O’Malley, Laura Martinez Galera, Patrick Andrews, Floris
Koot, John Kellden, Keith Gould, Nadine Hack and Jan Höglund.
Introduction

There is a paradox in business today. Customers have more power

than ever, yet they are less satisfied with the businesses that serve
them. The result is that many businesses, particularly those that are
well established, are losing out to disruptive new competitors.
In our first book, Creating and Delivering Your Value Proposition
(Barnes, Blake and Pinder, 2009), we explored how businesses can
reconnect with their customers by creating a better customer
experience. There are now 600 implementations of Futurecurve’s
Value Proposition Builder™ methodology in organizations around the
world. We have been able to observe it in action as companies use it
to tackle their own particular challenges. What we have seen has
shown that it is a powerful tool for restructuring and repairing
customer relationships. However, its output alone is often not
enough. To really reap the rewards of value proposition work,
companies need to make more profound changes to the way they
work and act. Businesses have had varied degrees of success in
doing this. In this book, we explore their stories.
In particular, we look at one of the key areas where businesses
need to make adjustments: their sales approach. Unless this is
modified to take advantage of a company’s value proposition, many
of the benefits are lost. This is crucial because, without sales, there
is no business.
So why now? What is creating this paradox in modern business?
Many forces have converged to change the face of commerce in
recent years. Driven by technology and the relaxation of trade
barriers, many large companies have become globalized. During this
process, the customer has often been left behind – turned into little
more than a number on a balance sheet. This trend holds true for
business-to-business as well as consumer sales organizations.

Success, ethics and the millennials

Today, there is a rise in ethical business and business practices,
spurred in part by the demands of millennials: those born between
1980 and 1999. This generation has grown up with technology and
is more questioning of business. Millennials use social media and
other peer-to-peer systems to filter out truth from spin. Twitter, for
example, creates a community and a sense of power against big
business and bad practice. This age group – which of course
comprises potential customers and employees – can quickly and
easily find a different supplier or employer.

Making the change

How do companies change to meet the challenges of globalization
and empowered, demanding customers? Realizing that they are not
mechanical entities but collections of people is an important step. As
the world becomes more interconnected and people become more
interdependent on each other, psychological insights will play a
growing role in helping people to understand and navigate the
complex interactions played out daily between employees, customers
and all stakeholders. These insights are a huge part of the value
proposition approach explored in this book.
The approach we advocate is not about fixing one or two parts of
the business: it is a systemic view that examines all key aspects of
the business together. Experience shows that it is never just one
thing that is broken. When most companies try to fix the problem,
the solutions often involve uncoordinated activities that focus on
rational factors at the expense of the emotional and psychological.
As a result, their efforts fail to halt the business decline.
This failure occurs because they reach what we term The Solution
Gap. This phrase describes a disconnection between how a
salesperson sees what they are selling, how the customer sees it,
what they want to buy and how the business supports the sales
process. The Solution Gap can only be bridged using a joined-up
approach that encompasses the whole business and its wider
stakeholders, especially its customers.
Businesses need to integrate the customer into their core business
processes if they want to solve this problem. Selecting and
implementing the best marketing strategy and sales approach is key
to achieving this objective. That is why this book will focus on these
business areas. It will show how the Value Proposition Builder™
approach can be extended to have a long-term, transformational
impact on sales, marketing and the whole business.
Many companies have successfully achieved this holistic approach.
However, others have implemented value proposition designs by only
changing one aspect of their business, without considering the
consequences for the whole organization. Often, they focus on
short-term gain rather than more systemic, longer-term objectives.
Examples of business demise due to short-termism illustrate what
can happen. Remember Blockbuster or, less well known in Europe,
the Joseph Schlitz Brewing Company? Much has been written about
Blockbuster’s failure as a result of new market disruptors such as
Netflix. However, its demise was heavily influenced by the business
tactic of focusing on only one or two key areas to increase revenue,
notably the charging of late payment fines to customers. This
tactical approach left the business blindsided by technological
innovations and new competitors. In the case of Schlitz, the
challenges of meeting large-volume demands while also cutting the
cost of production led it to take shortcuts in the brewing process,
which alienated its traditional customers. Ultimately, it was sold to a
rival. In this instance, Schlitz ignored what its customers wanted – in
the interest of satisfying increasing sales and reducing costs – and in
doing so it lost the whole business.
The business press dissects the corpses of failed businesses to
understand what can be learned from them. Harder to find are those
companies that do play the long game, approaching their businesses
in a systemic way and considering all the areas of change that need
to be tackled. Unilever is a prime example of a company that acts
systematically in all of its businesses, across all of its brands and
supply chain, with a goal of making sustainable living commonplace.
This behaviour is evident in projects such as The Foundry, a global
crowdsourcing platform that looks to solve sustainability issues in the
areas of sanitation, hygiene and nutrition (The Foundry, 2016). The
core belief that runs like a golden thread throughout Unilever is that
it cannot have a healthy business in an unhealthy society. Best-
selling author and thought leader Simon Robinson describes
sustainability as ‘the quality of an organization’s relationship with all
stakeholders’, where those stakeholders are internal, customers,
value chain, nature and the individual (Robinson and Moraes
Robinson, 2014). This view supports the systemic approach detailed
in the pages that follow.
Authenticity, this book and its
readers
This book focuses on selling ethically, authentically and successfully.
Today we are seeing the growth of ethically driven companies whose
values are authentic and underpin their business processes.
Throughout the book, all recommendations will steer readers
towards developing an authentic business. As part of this process,
one important point must be addressed: what is authentic selling? Is
it helping customers or manipulating them? In an authentic
business, sales tools and techniques are used to help customers.
When they sell ethically, the business and its sales staff work with
customers to help them shape solutions and offerings that are of
genuine value to the customer. In this way, the ethical selling
process becomes a win/win situation.
In the groundbreaking book Holonomics (Robinson and Moraes
Robinson, 2014) Simon and Maria Robinson argue that people in
business must adopt a ‘holonomic’ way of thinking, a dynamic and
authentic understanding of the relationships within a business
system, and an appreciation of the whole.

So, who should read this book?

This book is aimed at traditional businesses, new businesses and
entrepreneurs that want to (re)connect to their customers and
provide products and services of genuine value to them. To
implement this change successfully, the reader will most likely be a
senior executive running an entire company, division or large
department.
Any business that sets off on this journey and stays with it will
ultimately find itself with happier, more engaged customers and
employees; solid revenues; a sense of business community; and a
successful sales process. Management – indeed, the whole company
– will feel confident. Everyone in the business will know what they
are doing, why they are doing it and how this contributes to the
customer experience.
However, creating this integrated approach requires special tools
and techniques. The Value Proposition BuilderTM framework uses a
psychology-based approach (a mix of transactional analysis and
phenomenology) to conduct stakeholder interviews. This uncovers
unique rational and emotional insights, enabling businesses to
address both these dimensions when they change how they work,
leading to innovative breakthroughs and integrated processes.
Leading sales expert Dave Brock says: ‘To be truly customer-
centric you need to talk in the customer’s language and from their
perspective. So you wouldn’t talk about the offerings that you want
to sell, rather you would talk about the customer problems that you
are going to solve. You wouldn’t talk about the sales process; you
would talk about the customer buying process.’ We agree
wholeheartedly with Brock. But in this book we are talking primarily
to companies that sell, rather than to their customers, so to avoid
confusion and for the purpose of simplicity we are going to stick with
‘company-focused’ language. For this reason we talk about ‘sales
proposition’ rather than ‘buying proposition’ throughout.

Get ready to read

This book begins by examining the current business climate and how
the market has changed forever (Chapter 1 ). It looks at some of the
symptoms of this market shift and how various companies have
responded. The world has changed over the past decade and
continues to change – businesses ignore this shift at their peril.
 Chapter 2 explains why value propositions are central to
navigating these changes, and how they form the foundation for
effective sales propositions and stories.
In Chapter 3 , we cover how to design a value proposition. Does
the business approach align with what it is that customers value? If
not, what does ‘good’ look like? When a business is not aligned (and
many are not), business leaders feel desperate and impotent. In
large businesses, making the necessary changes is like turning
around a large oil tanker: slow and time-consuming. Sometimes, it is
difficult to know where to begin. The Value Proposition Builder™
emphasizes the importance of customer and market research that
treats the customer as someone within, not outside, the
organization’s boundary. Businesses work with the customer; they
are not doing things to them or for them. For many companies, this
needs a mental and behavioural shift. In this chapter, we introduce a
case study that will be used throughout the book to provide a real
example of how a company can move through the whole process of
embedding their value proposition into the way it works.
Chapter 4 explains how to translate the value proposition into a
sales proposition. There are two components to ‘value proposition
selling’: the first is the actual product, service or offering being sold,
while the second focuses on ‘how to sell’ or ‘the sales process’. There
are many misconceptions about selling: often, companies see it as a
single discipline. In fact, there are a range of sales approaches, each
requiring different skills, processes and support from the business.
For the best results, a business should understand what it sells and
then select the best sales approach.
The Value PyramidTM can be used to map customer buying
behaviours for any business against its offerings and help to identify
any adjustments that the organization needs to make. The
customer’s understanding of a business’s offering will be informed by
how the offerings have been positioned on the Value PyramidTM . For
Another random document with
no related content on Scribd:
upon a democratic vote were counting upon the Senator from
Virginia, but I equally believed that they would be disappointed. I did
not believe that the Senator from Virginia was guilty, and I in perfect
sincerity and good faith, so far from arraigning him, intended to
defend him from the foul suspicion, and my honest repulsion of the
insinuation, which was necessary in consequence of what they
expected, was regarded by the Senator himself as an arraignment.
There is an anecdote told in the life of the great minister, Whitefield.
When he was speaking one day in the country to an audience, he
described the enormity of sin and the characteristics of sin; he did it
with wonderful power. When he came out he was assailed by a
gentleman for having made a personal assault on him. “Why,” said
Whitefield, “I never heard of you before; I did not intend any assault
upon you.” He replied, “Well, sir, you told me everything I have been
doing all my life.” I frankly confess I am not a man to dodge. The
papers have justified me in believing, Senators have justified me in
believing, that you are calculating to get the democratic vote of the
Senator from Virginia, whom the whole country has treated as
having been elected as a democrat. I believed you would be
disappointed; I believed that because you would be disappointed it
was wholly unnecessary to delay this organization. I did not believe
the Senator would vote with you, and in vindication of that Senator I
will not believe it yet. He has not said so. He has made the mistake,
because of what the papers say, of assuming that I alluded to him;
but I vindicate him yet. He said if I asserted that he was elected as a
democrat and would be false to his commission, I said what was not
warranted and what was untrue. I am glad he said so. I did not say he
would; but I say you expected it, I say your papers expected it, and I
say it has been calculated on. I vindicate the Senator from Virginia,
and I hope he will vindicate himself by not doing what you expect
him to do. The Senator from Illinois charges me again with criticising
a man for changing his opinion. I distinctly said that every man in
this country has a right to change his opinion. The distinguished
Senator from Illinois has changed his opinion. He says the country is
tired of Bourbon democracy. He ought to know, for he used to be one
of the worst Bourbon democrats this country ever saw.
Mr. Logan. That was when you belonged to the other side.
 Mr. Hill, of Georgia. The first time I ever heard of that Senator
was when I was battling in the South for the good old whig principles
and he was an outrageous Bourbon democrat. That amounts to
nothing. You had a right to change, if you have changed; I do not say
you have.
Mr. Logan. I will only say, if the Senator will allow me, that when I
saw the light I changed for the right. The Senator saw the darkness
and changed for the wrong.
Mr. Hill, of Georgia. Ah, that is not argument.
Mr. Logan. It is true, however, just the same.
Mr. Hill, of Georgia. I hope the Senator will see more light and
change again.
Mr. Logan. I do not think I shall.
Mr. Hill, of Georgia. He needs a great deal of light.
Mr. Logan. No doubt of that. I do not expect to get it, however,
from that side.
Mr. Hill, of Georgia. I object to this style of interruption; it is
unworthy of the Senate. I am not here to indulge in such remarks.
The Senator has a right to change; I have arraigned nobody for
changing his opinion. If the Senator from Virginia has changed his
opinions he has a right to change them; I have not said he has not. I
do not deny his right. I admit that a man has a right also to change
his party affiliations if he is convinced he has been wrong; but a man
has no right to hold a commission which was given him while he was
a democrat and because he was a democrat and given to him as a
democrat, and change his opinions and act with the adversary party.
It is his duty to return that commission to the people who gave it and
ask them to renew it upon his change of opinion. That is all I ask.
Mr. Logan. Will the Senator allow me to ask him what right has he
as a Senator to undertake to dictate to the Senator from Virginia as
to what shall be required in his State?
Mr. Hill, of Georgia. That is incorrect again. I have not
undertaken to dictate to the Senator from Virginia. The Senator from
Virginia can do just as he pleases; but when the Senator from
Virginia acts as a public man I have a right to my opinion of his
public acts, and I have a right to speak of all public acts and their
character. I will not deny his right; I am not dictating to him—far
from it. There is not in my heart now an unkind feeling for the
Senator from Virginia. I would if I could rescue him from the infamy
into which others are trying to precipitate him. That is what I want to
do. I am not assailing him; I am not arraigning him; I am not
dictating to him. I know the proud nature of the Senator from New
York. I know if that Senator was elected to this body as a republican,
although he might have been a readjuster at the time, and if he
should come to this body and the democrats should begin to intimate
in this Hall and the democratic papers should intimate over the
country that he was going to vote with the democrats on the
organization, he would feel insulted just as my friend from
Tennessee (Mr. Harris) justly felt by the allusions to him in the
newspapers. So with any other man on that side. If the Senator from
Virginia was elected as a democrat I am right; but if as a republican I
have nothing more to say.
Mr. Logan. Will the Senator allow me right there? Is it not true
that the democracy of the Virginia Legislature that elected the
Senator now in his seat from Virginia did nominate Mr. Withers as
their candidate and supported him, and was not this senator elected
by the opponents of the democrats of that Legislature? Is not that
true? I ask the Senator from Virginia.
Mr. Mahone. Substantially so.
Mr. Logan. Then if that be true, why say that he came here as the
representative of the democracy of Virginia?
Mr. Hill, of Georgia. My understanding is that the democracy of
Virginia is very much like the democracy of other States, as
Tennessee. We are divided down there in several States on local
questions that have nothing to do with national politics. In Virginia
the democracy was divided between what are called readjuster
democrats and debt-paying democrats, but all democrats.
What was called the republican party it was said, although I must
vindicate many of the republicans in the State from the charge,
coalesced with what are called the readjuster democrats. The late
Senator from Virginia was nominated by what are called the debt-
paying democrats, and the present Senator from Virginia, as I
understand it, was run against him as a readjuster democrat.
Mr. Logan. And the republicans all supported him.
 Mr. Hill, of Georgia. Certainly, because they always support a
candidate who is running against the regular nominee. I suppose the
republicans always go for men who are not in favor of paying debts! I
had thought that republicans professed to affiliate with those who
would pay debts. But I have nothing to do with that question; it does
not come in here. What I say and what will not be denied, and I am
ashamed that there is an attempt to deny it, is, and it is the worst
feature of this whole thing, that anybody should get up here and
attempt to deny that the Senator from Virginia was elected to the
Senate as a democrat; should attempt to evade the fact that he was a
Hancock democrat last year; that he has acted with the national
democracy all the time; and that whatever might have been the local
differences in Virginia, he has been a national democrat every hour,
held out to the country as such. I say I am ashamed that anybody
should attempt to make a question of that fact. He was not only a
democrat, a national democrat, and voted for Hancock, but I
remember the historical fact that he had what he called his own
ticket in the field for Hancock and voted for it. He is just as much a
democrat, sent here as a readjuster democrat, as the other candidate,
the debt-paying democrat, would have been if he had been elected.
Mr. Logan. The difference is, if the Senator will allow me, if the
other had been elected, he would have been in full accord with the
democracy here. This gentleman does not happen to be, and
therefore the criticism of the Senator from Georgia.
Mr. Hill, of Georgia. I do not wish to do the republicans of
Virginia injustice; I do not wish to do any body injustice. There are
some republicans of Virginia for whom I confess, if reports be true, I
have a profound respect. When a portion of the democrats, under the
cry of readjusterism, sought to get the support of the republicans of
Virginia, there were manly republicans who refused to go into a
coalition that would compromise the character of the State on the
question of its debt. I am told there are republicans now in Virginia
who say that if republicanism here means the Senator from Virginia,
and you accept him as a republican, you must give them up as
republicans. I do not know how true it is. But this is unworthy of the
Senate.
I repeat, the worst feature of this whole transaction is that anybody
should get up here and attempt to make an impression that there was
a doubt as to the democracy of the Senator from Virginia heretofore.
That is an evasion unworthy of the issue, unworthy of the place,
unworthy of the occasion, unworthy of Virginia, unworthy of the
Senator, unworthy of his defenders. Admit the fact that he was a
democrat, and then claim that he exercised the inalienable right of
changing his opinions and his party affiliations, but do not claim that
he had a right to do it in the manner you say he has done it.
Once more let me say, the Senator from Virginia ought to know
that by all the memories of the past there is not a man in this body
whose whole soul goes out more in earnest to protect his honor than
my own. I would rather lose the organization of the Senate by the
democratic party and never again have a democratic committee in
this body than have Virginia soiled with dishonor. I do not say that
the Senator is going to do it, but I see the precipice yawning before
him. I see whither potential influences are leading him. I know the
danger just ahead. I would rescue him if I could. He may say it is
enmity; he may say it is an unfriendly spirit; he will live to know the
force of the words I am uttering. Men in this country have a right to
be democrats; men in this country have a right to be republicans;
men in this country have a right to divide on national issues and local
issues; but no man has a right to be false to a trust, I repeat it, and
whether the Senator from Virginia shall be guilty or not is not for me
to judge and I will not judge. I say if he votes as you want him to vote
God save him or he is gone. If he comes here to illustrate his
democracy by going over to that side of the House and voting with
that side of the House, he will be beyond my rescue. No, gentlemen, I
honor you. I like a proud republican as well as I do a proud
democrat. I am conscious of the fact that some of the best personal
friends I have in this body sit on that side of the Chamber, men
whose high character I would trust anywhere and everywhere.
Gentlemen, you know your hearts respond to every word I am
uttering when I say you despise treachery, and you honor me to-day
for making an effort to rescue a gentleman, not from treachery, but
from the charge of it. If the Senator shall vote as you desire him to
vote, he cannot escape the charge.
Mr. Mahone. Mr. President, I want to interrupt the Senator from
Georgia.
The Vice-President. Does the Senator from Georgia yield?
 Mr. Hill, of Georgia. Certainly.
Mr. Mahone. I cannot allow you to make any such insinuation.
Mr. Hill, of Georgia. I make no insinuation.
Mr. Mahone. You did emphatically, and it was unmanly. Now it
must stop. Let us understand that.
Mr. Hill, of Georgia. I repeat, I do not know how the Senator is
going to vote. I believe he is not going to vote as you expect. I believe
he is not going to be guilty of being false to his commission. I will not
charge that he will; I will not insinuate that he will. I have not
insinuated it. The gentleman must be his own keeper; the gentleman
must solve his own questions; but I repeat, I repeat as a friend, I
repeat as a friend whose friendship will be appreciated some day,
that the Senator is in danger of bringing upon himself a charge which
he will never have the power to explain.
Mr. Mahone. I cannot allow you or any other man to make that
charge without a proper answer.
Mr. Hill, of Georgia. Oh, well.
 Senator Mahone’s Reply to Senator Hill

in Extra Senate Session, March 28th, 1881.

Mr. Mahone. Mr. President, my profound respect for the wisdom
and experience of my seniors in this Chamber compels me to renew
expression of the reluctance with which I so soon intrude upon its
deliberations. Senators and the country will concede that to this
seeming forwardness I have been provoked.
If I do not challenge generous consideration from those who would
appear to have found pleasure in their unjustifiable assaults, I do not
doubt that I shall command the respect of the brave and independent
here, as I know I shall command that of my own people. I shall not
complain of the intolerance and indirection which have characterized
the allusions of some Senators to myself. Doubtless they comport
entirely with their own sense of manly deportment and senatorial
dignity, however little they do with mine. Virginia is accustomed to
meet occasions where the independent spirit of the Anglo-Saxon is
required to assert itself; Virginia has ever met, with fortitude and
dignity, every duty that destiny has imposed, always, however, with
much contempt for small party tactics where principles were
involved to which her faith and her honor were committed.
With absolute confidence in my loyalty to her and my devotion to
every interest of her people, I shall not relax my purpose to repel
every impeachment of the constituency which sent me here with
clearly defined duties which they and I comprehend. I was elected to
the Senate of the United States to do their will, not to a caucus to do
its petty bidding. Virginia earned her title of the Old Dominion by the
proud and independent action of her own people, by the loyalty of
her sons to the instincts of independence, without help at the hands
of those who would now interfere with her affairs.
However feebly I may assert that spirit against the gratuitous and
hypocritical concern for her of strangers to her trials, her sacrifices,
and her will, I feel that the spirit of my people inspires me when I
scornfully repel for them and for myself ungracious attempts to
instruct a Virginia Senator as to his duty to them and to himself.
Senators should learn to deal with their constituencies, while I
answer to mine.
To him who would insinuate that my action in respect to the
organization of the committees of this body and the proposed
election of its officers has been governed or controlled by impure
considerations—and I am loth to believe that any honorable Senator
has so intended—in the language of another, I say:
If thou saidst I am not peer
To any lord in Scotland here,
Lowland or highland, far or near,
Lord Angus, thou hast lied!

And now, Mr. President, permit me to say that Senators can no

more realize my regret than they can measure my amazement that
my colleague should have felt it incumbent upon him to join the
assaulting column in this Chamber. He first introduces the
consideration of my political consistency, and he next introduces me,
with the eighty-odd thousand of his fellow-citizens who sent me here,
to this honorable body as a repudiator of public obligations. The
sense of justice of fellow Senators renders it unnecessary for me to
apologize for noticing my colleague’s criticisms on the one hand and
his perversions on the other. However much he and his friends may
endeavor, by the chop-logic of the attorney, to demonstrate what I
ought to be, I know by my convictions and by my sense of duty what
I am. In this particular I have largely the advantage of my colleague;
for if I take him by his record, diminutive as it is, he neither knows
what he was, what he is, or what duty he came here to perform. A
very brief recital of Virginia political history, covering but a decade,
will give a clear view of the Virginia situation as it is represented on
this floor. My colleague gave the first page, and then, like the lazy,
truant school-boy, skipped many pages, or, like the shifty lawyer,
read only so much of the authority as suited his case. I am duly
grateful to him for the small meed of praise he would deal out to me
for the humble part I bore in the great liberal movement of 1869,
which was undertaken to return our State to her normal condition in
the Union.
 I am the more grateful because the organs of the faction he
represents here have recently published columns to prove that I was
breathed into political existence subsequently to that momentous
period. Not being sworn, my colleague thought it was sufficient for
him to tell the truth without the usual obligation to tell the whole
truth. It is now my privilege, as well as duty, to supply all
deficiencies. The views I entertained then I still adhere to, and
though, as far as my information goes, we had no material assistance
from him in that severe and trying ordeal of 1869, I do know that
after his election to this body he confessed himself in entire accord
with all that had been done by Virginia as a condition precedent to
her restoration, and with the zeal of a new convert expressed the
hope that other States of the Union without the same propelling
cause should do likewise. In a letter addressed to the then governor
of Virginia (Walker) he wrote as follows:

JOHNSTON TO GOVERNOR WALKER IN 1869.

Believing fully not only that we in Virginia could not prosper, but that our
continued exclusion from the Union interfered with the business of the whole
country, I have been anxious for an early compliance with the reconstruction laws,
and that the State should itself inaugurate some movement similar to that which
resulted in your election for the purpose, and not wait, like Micawber, “for
something to turn up.”

The fifteenth amendment, which I trust will soon be adopted by States enough to
make it a part of the Constitution of the United States, will end a question which
has agitated the country for half a century. I entirely approve of the principles of
that amendment, and as we have invested the freedman with the right to vote, let
us give him a fair opportunity to vote understandingly. He has civil rights, and it is
our interest he should know their value.

That we are apparently so near to the consummation of reconstruction we are

greatly indebted to President Grant’s kind offices. The State was in a dilemma; it
wanted a constitution; but the one made for it has at least two very objectionable
features. We felt that we were suffering in all our material interests by staying out
of the Union, and yet to go in under the constitution with all its provisions would
have been worse.
 The Gordian knot was happily cut by the President’s first message to Congress
and the prompt response of that body. Up to this time the conduct of the
administration has been liberal, and if the same policy is pursued hereafter it ought
to have the hearty support of this State. If we cast dead issues behind us and look
only to that line of conduct which shall restore quiet and confidence, and
encourage enterprise and industry, we shall even see the country richer and more
prosperous than it has ever been.
This movement in 1869 accomplished the restoration of our State under the
expurgated constitution and gave us representation here in the persons of my
colleague and ex-Senator Lewis. We were relieved of military government, became
rehabilitated in our sovereignty, with entire control of our local autonomy. Thus,
for a period, Virginia seemed to be enjoying the full freedom of her long-deferred
hope for peace.
In the curious panoramic exhibition of my colleague I next appear as a candidate
for governor in 1877. To be a candidate in Virginia is a privilege which every
qualified voter may constitutionally exercise, and in that year there were three
prominent candidates other than those named by the Senator. Two of them had
been major-generals and one a brigadier-general. What an omission! Shades of
departed glory defend us! when a United States Senator of the Bourbon persuasion
can omit imposing titles in detailing events with which they were intimately
associated. ’Tis true I was not nominated, lacking forty votes of a certain majority
of a convention composed of over fourteen hundred delegates against a
combination of five candidates, one of whom my colleague preferred, that
preference perhaps being based upon motives as unselfish as are usual in veteran
politicians and office-holders.
Mr. President, I can scarcely hope, in the presence of this body,
where my colleague has served for many years, and where the
altitude of his statesmanship frowns contemptuously down upon all
who would aspire to reach its summit, to attain the awful diffidence
with which I should undertake to correct any of his statements. He is
one of the conscript fathers of the Senate, old in all its ways and
usages; and long absence from his constituency and perpetual service
to the national democratic party in helping to organize its numerous
defeats make him forgetful of recent events in Virginia. Hence the
necessity of my attempting to inform him as to certain matters of
recent history at home.
“The next event,” says my colleague, “was that the readjusters
separated themselves from the democratic party;” and after treating
this at some length he says, “This brings us down to what is called
Mozart Hall convention,” in which, he adds, “I spoke of the
conservative party as though I belonged to it.”
 Mr. President, I confess my inability to understand all this curious
mixture of the odds and ends of my colleague’s scrap-book. He
parades his facts in curiously-contrived array. He empties his ill-
assorted jewels of information and “chunks of wisdom,” and seems to
rely upon Senators to give them that consecutive arrangement as to
fact and date which they have, possibly, in his own great mind. But,
sir, the fact is there was no remarkable incident in Virginia politics
between the election of 1877 and 1879, the month of February of the
latter year being, the date of the assembling of the Mozart Hall
convention. Certainly until February, 1879, there was no change in
the status of parties in Virginia within that period. There was no
organization of readjusters until February, 1879, and there was no
declared democratic party until 1880.
This brings me, Mr. President, to a period when I propose to do
more than follow my colleague in his half-way candid and nearly
always inaccurate statement. It is at this juncture, he says, that Mr.
Riddleberger and I are so much identified that he cannot separate us.
It is at this point the organization of the readjusters begins; and it is
at this point he appears to seek to make an impression wholly
unwarranted by any act of the readjusters in Virginia. It is at this
point, too, Mr. President, that I am constrained by a sense of duty to
my people, my State, and myself to treat the question of our State
debt as it presents itself in Virginia. In doing this, I wish it distinctly
understood that I hold this to be a matter belonging exclusively to
the State of Virginia, and I should repel any Federal interference with
this as I would with any other question of mere State concern. I shall
presume upon the indulgence of Senators because they have heard
but one side, and that more than once, and I know they will be
willing to hear a defense of Virginia against unjust attacks from those
who ought to be her defenders.
Sir, there is not a fact upon which to base any one of the
statements or arguments of my colleague. Instead of the Mozart Hall
convention being held to effect a repeal of an irrepealable contract, it
was a body of people assembled on a call of members of the General
Assembly opposed to what is known in Virginia as the “brokers’ bill.”
They assembled before that bill had passed either House of the
General Assembly, and, coming fresh from the people, expressed
their unqualified disapproval of that measure. It was apparent the
measure was to pass, and organized opposition began. But, Mr.
President, this is neither the beginning nor the end of this question.
It was in 1871 that the first funding bill was enacted, and this we
know in Virginia as the first contract.
I will not go into the details of this measure, as I shall ask the clerk
to read a review of all the Virginia funding acts before concluding my
remarks. It is my purpose now only to notice the speeches of
Senators, notably that of my colleague, in this Chamber. It will be
news to Senators to hear to-day that the readjusters never repealed
either of the funding contracts. That enacted and only partially
executed in 1866–’67 was in effect repealed by the Assembly which
passed it, and the work of repeal was consummated by the
Legislature that enacted the more obnoxious measure of 1871. This in
turn was repealed by the Assembly of 1872, the propounder of the
repeal measure being the present lieutenant-governor of the State,
subsequently in full fellowship with the alleged debt-payers. Indeed
this measure was so obnoxious that Governor Walker, who was
conceded to be its author, subsequently urged that the Federal
Government should assume the debts of the Southern States.
Mr. President, I might pause to inquire if that is a part of the
doctrine of my colleague and the Senators who co-operate with him,
when they stand here to represent the party for which Governor
Walker then spoke, the pretended debt-payers of Virginia? It was
this repeal bill which the Virginia court of appeals held to be
unconstitutional, and here the matter rested until the State had
accumulated interest arrears to over five million dollars, beside
diverting one and a half million dollars which was dedicated by the
constitution to the public free schools.
In 1877 what is known as the Barbour bill was proposed and
passed, not a few of the latter-day self-styled debt-payers being
among its most zealous supporters. Although this did not repeal in
terms the original funding bill, it was nevertheless vetoed by the
governor.
Such was our condition at the succeeding election—schools
reduced 50 per cent., length of sessions abridged, asylums sustained
by money borrowed from the banks—after exhausting every possible
expedient even to a reduction of judicial salaries, that a Legislature
was returned pledged to a resettlement of this debt.
 That settlement came in the form of the brokers’ bill, for which my
colleague stands at home and here the champion, aided and abetted
by distinguished gentlemen on this floor. I commend the virtuous
democracy of this Chamber to read that bill, and then tell this Senate
whether there ever was a more undemocratic measure than the bill
propounded in Virginia by the party whose cause they espouse.
That settlement came in the form of the broker’s bill, as I have
said, and this was the last repeal of the original contract. Yet my
colleague would say the readjusters of to-day disregard the court
decisions. Surely he has not forgotten that he was upon the hustings
in Virginia advocating each of the successive measures repealing the
“irrepealable” contract, while in every instance the readjusters
proper opposed the new measure.
But here again I am called upon to answer the charge of personal
inconsistency. My colleague cannot ascertain that I opposed the
funding scheme of 1871—a measure which, I assert without the fear
of contradiction, not only repudiated but forcibly repudiated what
my colleague understands to be one-third of the debt of Virginia. I
suggest to my fellow-Senators on the opposite side to take care of
that contamination of which they have warned the country in respect
to the readjusters of Virginia.
My colleague adverted to the Richmond Whig, and proclaimed it
as my mouthpiece. Mr. President, nobody speaks for me; I speak for
myself. Why not have ascertained from the same source how I stood
on the funding bill of 1871? Senators will not find that I ever
supported the measure of 1871.
Passing over what appears in my colleague’s speech as extracts
from newspapers, to whose misstatements he has contributed a full
share, I come now to notice his animadversions on the Riddleberger
bill. If his criticisms were based on fact and a proper understanding
of that measure, they would be unanswerable. He says that “the
‘Riddleberger bill’ has been substantially pronounced
unconstitutional by the Supreme Court of the United States.” I ask
him in what particular? Is it in this—that it does not recognize the
interest that accrued during the war? If so, will my learned colleague
inform me upon what principle of right he last summer sustained a
measure which repudiated one-half of the interest that has accrued
since the complete restoration of our State? Does he not know that
that measure of forcible readjustment absolutely repudiated one-half
of the accrued and unfunded interest, while the Riddleberger bill
provides for paying it dollar for dollar? The difference is simply this:
that since 1871 we have denied the right of the creditor to exact war
interest and proposed to pay him all else in full. Our adversaries
would and did fund that war interest and proposed to repudiate one-
half of that which we are in honor and in law bound to pay.
Is it unconstitutional in that it pays but 3 per cent.? The only
measure ever passed by the Virginia Assembly to pay as much as 4
per cent. and the only one under which one-third of our creditors
have received a penny of interest, was introduced and patronized by
Mr. Riddleberger. The first time that our Legislature ever voiced 3
per cent. was when they passed the brokers’ job, the pet scheme of
my colleague, so ably re-enforced in his advocacy of it on this floor by
distinguished gentlemen on the other side, the Legislature then
themselves admitting and declaring in the preamble of their bill that
this is all the State can pay for ten years “without destroying its
industries;” and last winter every legislator of their party voted to
run the 3 per cent. for the whole time.
Is it unconstitutional in that it does not exempt the bonds from
taxation forever, as the brokers’ bill attempted to do, a feature
peculiar to that measure for paying the debt of Virginia which my
colleague advocates here? If so, I would respectfully refer my
colleague to his State constitution, which says that all property shall
be taxed equally and uniformly; that no one species of property shall
be taxed higher than another, and that only such property as is used
for religious, educational, and charitable purposes may be exempt
from taxation. My learned colleague, who so unkindly characterized
the patron of that bill as a county court lawyer, cites only Hartman
vs. Greenhow as the case which holds this bill unconstitutional. That
case decided no principle that this bill infringes. The Riddleberger
bill imposes no tax upon bonds held either in or out of the State. It
simply does not exempt any. By what authority, I would ask my
colleague, can such a tax be made and collected? He must answer to
the party which he undertakes to represent here for doing an
unconstitutional act: to tax bonds of the State of Virginia held by a
non-resident. The Riddleberger bill does not tax them. Whenever the
General Assembly, carrying out the Riddleberger bill, shall endeavor
to tax bonds held out of the State, it will be time for the Senator to
renew the test in the Supreme Court of the United States and cite the
precedent of Hartman vs. Greenhow.
Is it the much-discussed fourteenth section which is
unconstitutional? If so I would remind my legal colleague that it is a
verbatim copy of a statute passed by the State of Tennessee,
adjudicated by the Supreme Court of the United States, and not only
held by that high tribunal to be constitutional but proper legislation
for the protection and maintenance of government. Is it
unconstitutional in what is called its force feature? If so it has
precedent in the bill of ’71, which forbade the payment of any interest
to a creditor who did not accept a reduction of one-third. It has
precedent in the brokers’ bill, which provided tax certificates to
compete at a reduced price with the receivable coupon, and both of
these measures found a hustings advocate in my colleague.
But he would imply that our debt was ascertained at a certain sum
in pursuance of the State Constitution, which he says was
$29,667,304.76.
Mr. President, if there is any man in the party which my colleague
represents who agrees with another member of that party in Virginia
as to what the debt of that State is, we have yet to find the
concurrence; it is with one leader this figure, with another leader
another figure; by one report of their officers one sum, and then by
another report of other officers a different sum. Grant that sum to be
the true one; but let the Senator state that our constitution
recognized no specific sum. It says there shall first be a settlement
with West Virginia, which has not yet been had, and commands
payment of what Virginia shall owe. That is the language, that is the
instruction of the constitution of Virginia; that, after a settlement
with West Virginia, covering one-third of old Virginia’s territory,
shall have been arrived at by an adjustment of their relative
proportions of the public debt, Virginia will provide for her share.
Now I would like the Senators from West Virginia in this cry against
readjusters as repudiators to tell the country what answer they have
made to their obligation for one-third of the debt contracted by the
old Commonwealth of Virginia. Will they tell the country where they
have ever made a proposition to pay one stiver of their share of the
public debt of that State to maintain the honor and the dignity of
their own Commonwealth? Let them answer.
It was the party of my colleague, that repudiated the settlement of
1871 by the passage of the brokers’ bill in 1879, and in turn
attempted to repudiate the latter by unanimously indorsing what is
known as the “Ross Hamilton bill.” I suppose it would not suit my
colleague to tell this audience who Ross Hamilton is. Yet, I beg
Senators to take notice that the party of my colleague, after a winter
spent in the vain effort to find a leader capable of devising means to
overthrow the popular will, discovered such, as they supposed, in the
person of Ross Hamilton, a colored republican member of the
Legislature from the county of Mecklenburg, and blindly followed
him to defeat. Hamilton’s bill, which was thus unanimously
supported by my colleague’s party, not only in effect repealed their
pet scheme, the brokers’ bill, but all other acts in respect to the
public debt of Virginia.
I come now to perform a duty—the most unpleasant in one sense
and the most agreeable in another. It is to repel the charge flippantly,
I hope inconsiderately, made on this floor that we are repudiators
and our proposed measure dishonorable. To the first I reply that my
colleague’s party in eight years of administration of our State affairs
paid 2 per cent. installments of interest on ten millions of our public
debt just six times, or 12 per cent. in all; 6 times 8 would be 48 per
cent. Instead of that they paid 12 per cent., and that is debt-paying!
Let this suffice. But when Senators apply the word dishonorable,
they do not know either whom or what they characterize. Two things
they have endeavored to demonstrate, and one is that I received a
majority of the white conservative vote of both branches of the
Virginia General Assembly. Proudly do I proclaim the truth of this.
Every one of those who voted for me to come to this Chamber gave
an unqualified vote for the Riddleberger bill. Are they dishonorable
men? Scornfully do I repel the charge that any one of them is capable
of dishonorable action.
Were it true, what a sad commentary it would be upon those
honorable gentlemen whom it is said I am not representing here. Mr.
President, my colleague comes from what we call in Virginia the
great Southwest, a noble and prosperous section of Virginia. Fifteen
white Conservative counties compose his congressional district, and
though the ablest of the orators of my colleague’s party canvassed it
thoroughly against me and the views set forth in this measure, but
two delegates and no senator of the gentleman’s party came to the
Legislature. To a man they supported the Riddleberger bill. Every
senator and every delegate from my colleague’s own congressional
district, save and except two delegates, supported me for the Senate
and the Riddleberger bill as a measure for debt-paying. He would do
well to spend a little more time with his constituents!
Whatever our differences on this question, it seems to me those
people should have had a defender in him against such foul and
slanderous accusations as have been made—that they are
dishonorable men. O Shame! where is thy blush? Dishonorable in
Virginia to beg the privilege of paying every dollar she borrowed—
that is, her rightful share, instead of not only paying that but also the
share of West Virginia—dishonorable to pay every dollar she
borrowed, only abating the war interest! Dishonorable, too, in the
opinion of the gentlemen who represent States on this floor and
municipalities which have by arbitrary legislation reduced their
indebtedness from $243,000,000 down to $84,000,000!
Dishonorable in Virginia not only to assume her full share of her
public obligations, as measured by her territory in this division of it,
but offering to tax her people to an extent threatening the
destruction of her industrial interests! Is that dishonorable in that
people? If so, what have you to say of this tier of Southern States
whose public indebtedness, whose plighted faith, whose sacred
obligations—as sacred as are those of my State of Virginia—have
been reduced from $243,000,000 by one or another method of
repudiation, upon one or another excuse, down to $84,000,000,
with a reduced interest rate upon the curtailed principal, and only
proposing to pay interest in some cases at 2 per cent. and in others 3
and in others 4 on the reduced principal? Is it dishonorable in
Virginia to assume $20,000,000 of the debt of the old State and then
to tax her industries within the verge of endurance to pay on that
sum the highest rate of interest? Let Senators who assail unjustly the
conduct of Virginia in this respect put their own houses in order. I
want, Mr. President, the Secretary to read from the International
Review the measures of readjustment in the Southern States that
Senators may know how fashionable readjustment had been in that
section of this great country on which northern democrats rely in a
presidential election.
The Chief Clerk read as follows:
Fluctuation of the Debts of twelve Southern States since the year 1842.
States. 1842. 1852. 1860. 1870.
West Virginia
Virginia $6,994,307 $13,573,355 $31,779,062 $47,390,839
North Carolina None. 977,000 9,699,000 29,900,045
South Carolina 5,691,234 3,144,931 4,046,540 7,665,909
Georgia 1,309,750 2,801,972 2,670,750 6,544,500
Florida 4,000,000 2,800 4,120,000 1,288,697
Alabama 15,400,060 8,500,000 6,700,000 8,478,018
Mississippi 7,000,000 7,271,707 None. 1,796,230
Louisiana 23,985,000 11,492,566 4,561,109 25,021,734
Texas 5,725,671 None. 508,641
Arkansas 2,676,000 1,506,562 3,092,624 3,459,557
Tennessee 3,198,166 3,776,856 20,896,606 38,539,802
Kentucky 3,085,500 5,726,307 5,479,244 3,892,480
Totals 73,340,017 64,499,727 93,046,934 174,486,452
 States. Amount of debt
Date after the war
repudiated bet. period
when debt reached 1880.
wh. highest & June,
highest.
1880
West
No debt.
Virginia
Virginia $47,390,839 $29,345,226 $18,045,613
North
29,900,045 3,629,511 26,270,534
Carolina
South
24,782,906 7,175,454 17,607,452
Carolina
Georgia 20,197,500 10,334,000 9,863,500
Florida 5,512,268 1,391,357 4,120,911
Alabama 31,952,000 11,613,670 20,338,830
Mississippi 3,226,847 379,485 2,847,362
Louisiana 40,416,734 12,635,810 27,780,924
Texas 5,782,887 5,782,887
Arkansas 18,287,273 5,813,627 12,473,646
Tennessee 41,863,406 25,685,822 16,177,584
Kentucky 3,892,480 180,394 3,712,086
Totals 273,205,185 113,967,243 159,237,942
Mr. Mahone. There is no mere readjustment there; I will not say it
is repudiation. “Repudiation” is honorable, perhaps; “readjustment”
dishonorable.
Oh, Virginia! It was for this you bared your bosom to soldier’s
tread and horse’s hoof. It was for this you laid waste your fields. It
was for this you displayed your noble virtues of fortitude and
courage, your heroic suffering and sacrifice. It was for this you
suffered the dismemberment of your territory and sent your sons to
the field to return to the ruins where were once their homes. It was
for this you so reluctantly abandoned your allegiance to a common
country to be the last to make war and the last to surrender. O
Ingratitude, thou basest and meanest of crimes!
And now, Mr. President, at the time of my election who constituted
my opponents? Already, as you have been advised, another
representing distinctly the Bourbon democracy of Virginia and the
so-called democracy of this Chamber, another representing distinctly
the republican party of Virginia—these were the candidates before
the Legislature which elected me to this body. I received not only a
majority of the so-called democratic readjusters but of the so-called
republican readjusters. And now what were the efforts, known there
if not here to gentlemen, to defeat me? Were not combinations
sought to be made? It is known of all men there at the capital of my
State, if not here, that every influence from whatsoever quarter it
could be adduced, whether democratic or republican, was brought
together at Richmond for the purpose by combination of defeating
my election, of defeating the sovereign will of the people of that
Commonwealth as expressed on the 4th of November, 1879.
There was a democracy which sought to secure the election of an
orthodox, simon-pure, unadulterated republican, but of that kind
called Bourbons in Virginia—a democracy which was not only willing
but ready and anxious to send here in the place I have the honor to
hold a republican whom they would otherwise profess to despise.
What for? For the consideration well known there, that they might
elect certain county judges and control the State offices, and by that
means prevent the disclosures which have subsequently followed
since the readjusters have gotten possession of the capitol. That
democracy which like Cæsar’s wife would stand “above suspicion,”
were ready to trade a seat in the United States Senate so that a few
county judges might be preserved, that the offices in the capitol at
Richmond might be retained in their control; I say in order, perhaps,
that the disclosures which have followed the advent of the party I
represent might have been longer concealed; moreover that control
of the ballot-box in the State might continue where it had been; so
certainly I believe; and all this by those who professed to represent
the party which had declared in national convention for a full vote, a
free ballot, and an honest count.
Such were the considerations, such I say were the inducements
which prompted that democracy to its efforts to send to this
Chamber a republican beyond question since these many long and
weary years. If that is the democracy that the gentlemen on that side
love, I proclaim my inability to co-operate with them.
I supported neither of the candidates for Congress in my district,
and emphatically declared that purpose on more than one public
occasion, because one was a candidate of that party, the Bourbon
reactionists, and the other a Bourbon republican with
accommodating views on the debt question.