Ask what it would take
Turn "not now" into conditions the buyer names and send them back as the plan. If their answers start defending how things work today while you argue, stop arguing and ask.
Evidence: studies from another field. Studies in other fields, such as psychology or negotiation, back it. The library applies them to sales.
What it is.
"Not now." Or the deal has disappeared into procurement, legal or a security review, and you are guessing at what is in the way.
Hand the question back. Ask what it would take to get this done. They answer with conditions, and the conditions are theirs, not yours. Write them down and send them back as the plan.
A second version puts a number on it first. Ask how important the change is to them, or how confident they are that it can happen, from 0 to 10, and then ask what would move the number up. The number is not the answer. The follow-up is.
While they answer, listen to which way the talk runs. Some of it points towards the change. Some of it defends how things work today, which counsellors call sustain talk. If the defending grows while you are making your case, your case is producing it. Stop arguing and ask.
The listening comes from motivational interviewing, the counselling method William Miller and Stephen Rollnick set out in their textbook.
What it looks like.
Zoe Chance's magic question is four words: what would it take? On NPR in February 2022 the Yale professor gave examples of the same shape: what would it take for that never to happen again, and, to a child, what would it take for you to put your clothes in the hamper. In Yale's interview with her she gives three reasons it works: it is respectful, it produces answers you could not have predicted, and a person who hands you the roadmap has in effect committed to the outcome. Her book lists it among its techniques. None of these has a sales example.
The two rulers. Miller and Rollnick's one-page handout asks how important it is for the person to do the thing, from 0, not at all, to 10, extremely, and how confident they are that they could do it if they decided to. Ask both, because they measure different things. A teaching post from the University of North Carolina gives the follow-up in order: take the number, ask why they are a six and not a two, then ask what it would take to go from six to nine. Do not ask why they are a six and not a ten. That invites them to list the reasons they cannot move.
How counsellors sort the answers. The coding manual by William Miller and colleagues defines change talk as "any language that moves in the direction of change", and sustain talk as language moving away from it. Its examples split single sentences in two: "I could quit (+), but I don't want to (-)". A companion manual scores the counsellor instead, and marks them down for drawing out arguments for the status quo, for instance by asking for reasons against change.
The nearest sales question asks for something else. Colleen Francis calls her third discovery question the magic one: why are you not getting the result today, or, as one of her clients puts it, what is the limiting factor? That asks for the obstacle, not the conditions. No sales source publishes the conditions question in the words a seller would take into a stalled deal.
A warning about the wish version. Wes Kao argued in 2017 that the magic-wand question, what would you fix about your business with a magic wand, mostly returns the hard problem everyone in the field already has. The conditions question avoids that only if it asks what would have to be true for this purchase, not what the buyer wishes were different.
Where it has been tested.
In B2B sales
Nobody has measured the question. No study compares sellers who asked the buyer to name the conditions with sellers who did not. The only published figure on a buyer's status quo language is Gong's search of 140,566 sales opportunities for "I need to think about it" and a dozen close variants. Deals where the phrase appeared won slightly more often, but took 173% longer, and the wait for the next meeting was 55% longer. Gong sells the software that did the counting and publishes no method. On win rate, the result runs against the idea that status quo talk predicts a lost deal.
In other disciplines
The method the question comes from works, modestly. Brad Lundahl and colleagues pooled 119 studies of motivational interviewing in 2010, on drinking, diet, exercise and gambling. It helped a little, and the help lasted, compared with doing little or nothing, and it did no better than other active treatments. That is the whole method, not the question on its own.
Which way the talk runs predicts behaviour, weakly. Molly Magill and colleagues' 2018 review of 36 studies found that counsellors using the method drew out more talk towards change, and also more talk defending the status quo. More change talk in the mix went with slightly less risky behaviour later, and more status quo talk with slightly worse outcomes. Their 2019 follow-up found the same small link between status quo talk and more of the behaviour later.
The persuader can produce the resistance. William Miller, Gayle Benefield and Scott Tonigan randomly assigned 42 problem drinkers in 1993 to a confrontational checkup, a client-centred one, or a waiting list. The two styles did about equally well on drinking overall, but the confrontational one produced more resistance, the resistance predicted worse outcomes a year later, and the more the therapist confronted, the more the client drank. Timothy Apodaca and colleagues' coding of 92 alcohol interviews complicates it: status quo talk came more often straight after open questions and reflections, the moves the method teaches, and less often after giving information or asking closed questions. Affirming the person was the only behaviour that raised change talk and cut status quo talk at once.
Caveat.
The evidence comes from counselling one person about their own drinking or health, not from a buying group in a procurement queue, and the talk findings are correlations between what people said and what they did later. No trial has compared asking the question, or listening for the answers, with doing neither. A buyer's answer tells you what they believe the conditions are, which is not the same as what the conditions are.
Takeaway.
Ask what it would take, write down what they say and send it back as the plan, because the conditions are now theirs and on record. Aim the follow-up at movement, why a six and not a two, not at the gap to ten. If the buyer starts defending how things work today while you are arguing, stop arguing and ask. None of this has been tested in a B2B deal, and in counselling the link between that talk and later behaviour is real but small.
Sources.
Recommended by
- William Miller and Stephen Rollnick clinical psychology · Motivational Interviewing: Helping People Change and Grow (fourth edition) · 2023 · book
Miller and Rollnick's textbook sets out motivational interviewing, a counselling method that includes the importance and confidence rulers and listening for talk that defends the status quo. The card's listening half comes from it.
- Zoe Chance, interviewed by A Martínez behavioural science · Yale professor teaches influence and she says it's your superpower (NPR Morning Edition transcript) · 2022 · post
On NPR, Chance gives the question in four words, what would it take, with everyday examples such as a child's clothes and the hamper. It is where the card's question appears in her own words, though none of her examples comes from sales.
- Zoe Chance, interviewed by Yale News behavioural science · Making influence your superpower: A conversation with Zoe Chance · 2022 · post
In Yale's interview, Chance gives three reasons the question works: it is respectful, it produces answers you could not have predicted, and handing you the roadmap commits the person to the outcome. They are the reasons the card sends the buyer's conditions back as the plan.
- Zoe Chance behavioural science · Influence Is Your Superpower · 2022 · book
Chance's book on influence lists "what would it take" among its named techniques. It is the published home of the question this card is built on.
- William R. Miller and Stephen Rollnick clinical psychology · Importance and Confidence Rulers (Guilford Press handout) · 2002 · post
Miller and Rollnick's one-page handout gives the wording of the two rulers: how important the change is to the person, and how confident they are that they could make it. The card's second version, putting a number on it first, comes from here.
- UNC Center for AIDS Research, Social and Behavioral Science Core clinical psychology · Motivational Interviewing: Conversations about Change: Using the Importance Ruler · 2020 · post
This teaching post gives the follow-up in order: take the number, ask why it is a six and not a two, then ask what it would take to go from six to nine. The card takes the sequence from here, including the warning never to ask why not a ten.
- William R. Miller, Theresa B. Moyers, Denise Ernst and Paul Amrhein clinical psychology · Manual for the Motivational Interviewing Skill Code (MISC) Version 2.1 · 2008 · book
The coding manual defines change talk as language that moves towards change and sustain talk as language that moves away from it, with examples that split single sentences in two. It is how the card tells which way the buyer's talk is running.
- Theresa B. Moyers, Jennifer K. Manuel and Denise Ernst clinical psychology · Motivational Interviewing Treatment Integrity Coding Manual 4.2.1 · 2015 · book
This companion manual scores the counsellor instead of the client, and marks them down for drawing out arguments for the status quo. It is the check the card turns on the seller: if the buyer's defending grows while you argue, your case is producing it.
- Colleen Francis · The Magic Question (Engage Selling) · post
Francis's magic question asks why the buyer is not getting the result today, which asks for the obstacle, not the conditions. It is here to show that the nearest sales question is a different one.
B2B sales research and data
- Devin Reed, Gong Labs vendor · How to Respond When Buyers Say "I Need to Think About It", According to Data · 2020 · vendor data
Gong, which sells the software that did the counting, found that deals where the buyer said "I need to think about it" won slightly more often but took much longer. It is the only sales figure on a buyer's status quo language, and on win rate it runs against the idea that such talk predicts a loss.
From other disciplines
- Brad W. Lundahl, Chelsea Kunz, Cynthia Brownell, Derrik Tollefson and Brian L. Burke social work and clinical psychology · A Meta-Analysis of Motivational Interviewing: Twenty-Five Years of Empirical Studies (ERIC record EJ875284) · 2010 · paper
This review of 119 studies found that motivational interviewing helped a little, and lastingly, compared with doing little or nothing, and no more than other active treatments. It measures the whole counselling method the card borrows from, not the question on its own.
- Molly Magill, Timothy R. Apodaca, Brian Borsari, Jacques Gaume, Ariel Hoadley, Rebecca E. F. Gordon, J. Scott Tonigan and Theresa Moyers clinical psychology · A Meta-Analysis of Motivational Interviewing Process: Technical, Relational, and Conditional Process Models of Change · 2018 · paper
This review found that counsellors using the method drew out more talk towards change and also more talk defending the status quo, and that the balance weakly predicted later behaviour. It is the measured version of the listening the card asks for.
- Molly Magill, Michael H. Bernstein, Ariel Hoadley, Brian Borsari, Timothy R. Apodaca, Jacques Gaume and J. Scott Tonigan clinical psychology · Do what you say and say what you are going to do: A preliminary meta-analysis of client change and sustain talk subtypes in motivational interviewing · 2019 · paper
This follow-up review found the same small link between talk defending the status quo and more of the behaviour later. It shows the signal the card listens for is real but weak.
- William R. Miller, R. Gayle Benefield and J. Scott Tonigan clinical psychology · Enhancing motivation for change in problem drinking: a controlled comparison of two therapist styles · 1993 · paper
In a trial with problem drinkers, a confrontational counsellor produced more resistance, and the more the counsellor confronted, the more the client drank. It is the evidence behind the card's advice to stop arguing when the buyer starts defending how things work today.
- Timothy R. Apodaca, Kristina M. Jackson, Brian Borsari, Molly Magill, Richard Longabaugh, Nadine R. Mastroleo and Nancy P. Barnett clinical psychology · Which Individual Therapist Behaviors Elicit Client Change Talk and Sustain Talk in Motivational Interviewing? · 2016 · paper
The authors coded counselling sessions and found that talk defending the status quo came more often after open questions and reflections, and that affirming the person was the only move that both raised change talk and cut the defending. It complicates the card, because asking can draw out the very talk you are listening for.
Who says do not