Why does “low-hanging fruit” get a bad rap. Why shouldn’t every business-to-business sales organization be totally focused on low-hanging fruit? Answer: They should. In my world (the world of sales training), low-hanging fruit is defined as the following:

• A business that has a problem that they are totally committed to admitting and fixing, and they don’t need a salesperson convincing them that they should do something about it.
• A business organization that has the funds to devote to solving the problem. (In other words, they have the budget and/or will spend money to fix it.)
• A company that is open-minded and looking for outside help in solving of inside problems. (Some companies aren’t, and if you’re an outsider then ditch them and move on.)
• A client who doesn’t see you as a vendor—but sees you as a provider of a valuable solution that will improve the wellbeing of the people at the company. (The instant you get into you vs. 10 other bidders, get out.)
• A company that gives you access to information and people. (They don’t hide the CEO, the CFO or the COO because there’s a policy that they don’t see salespeople.)

Believe it or not, there are companies around that have these characteristics. And if you define these as low-hanging fruit, then have at it. I would suggest that if any one of these elements is not in place, then you have to reach too high, which will take more time, which will cost more money, which will rob someone else in the market of your value.