【2025 Latest ○○】Cost Comparison: In-Person vs. Remote

basic information

By clarifying the cost structure of face-to-face and non-face-to-face interactions, it becomes possible to reduce unnecessary expenses and improve operating profit margins. Since costs can be compared in relation to sales effectiveness, strategic decision-making can be made regarding which sales methods to allocate resources to. By optimizing the ratio of non-face-to-face sales, which significantly reduces travel costs, sales budgets can be utilized more efficiently. With the ability to compare costs based on the latest market data, companies can objectively evaluate their sales costs and build competitive advantages. Evaluations of face-to-face and non-face-to-face sales representatives can be conducted fairly using data, leading to an increase in motivation across the entire organization. It becomes possible to select methods that yield optimal cost-effectiveness at each phase of sales activities, thereby streamlining the entire sales process. 【Strengths and Features】 ■ Cost comparison and ROI analysis of face-to-face and non-face-to-face interactions based on the latest data ■ Development of hybrid strategies to reduce sales costs ■ Mechanisms for visualizing cost-effectiveness through SFA/CRM integration

Price information

Is your company's sales cost optimized between "in-person and non-in-person"? 'PROBiZZ' is currently offering a free resource based on the latest data comparing costs of in-person vs non-in-person sales. We thoroughly explain the secrets of cost optimization, including hybrid strategies that dramatically reduce sales costs and specific methods to enhance ROI. Let's transform your sales into an organization that generates **maximum profit at minimum cost** with this resource. Download the material and eliminate waste in your sales costs based on the latest data right now.

Delivery Time

Applications/Examples of results

- An IT company that was struggling with rising travel costs for face-to-face sales implemented a strategy to switch initial visits to non-face-to-face based on cost comparison data under the guidance of 'PROBiZZ', resulting in a 20% reduction in sales costs while maintaining the number of business negotiations, optimizing sales costs. - A manufacturing company that was unable to objectively evaluate the cost-effectiveness of face-to-face versus non-face-to-face interactions and had ambiguous budget allocation executed a strategy to implement ROI analysis linking cost comparisons and conversion rates with the support of 'PROBiZZ', increasing budget allocation to the more effective non-face-to-face interactions as part of strategic budget allocation. - A service company that was uncertain whether the activity costs of sales representatives were being wasted established a system to compare face-to-face and non-face-to-face activity data using SFA under the guidance of 'PROBiZZ', identifying inefficient activities, reducing unnecessary visits, and improving cost-effectiveness, thereby enhancing activity efficiency.