The Presell
Resolve influential objections one-on-one before the decisive group pitch.
- Difficulty
- Moderate
- Time to result
- ~weeks to results
- Steps
- 6
- Confidence
- 96%
The Presell treats stakeholder alignment as work completed before the formal pitch rather than during it. First, map the attendees and identify the skeptics, supporters, and people whose opinions carry unusual weight with the ultimate decision-maker. Meet likely skeptics individually, explain the idea, and explicitly invite hard feedback. The private setting creates enough time to understand objections, answer concerns, and let stakeholders shape the solution. Incorporate valid input into the final presentation and prepare direct responses where disagreement remains. This is not a covert exchange of favors or an attempt to silence opposition; it is transparent due diligence. By the time the full group meets, the idea is familiar, major objections are already addressed, and the decision-maker is not unexpectedly forced to reconcile a room full of dissent.
Origin
Extracted from Marketing Against the Grain, where Kipp Bodnar and Kieran Flanagan describe preselling as the overlooked “secret sauce” behind successful high-stakes internal pitches.
Core principles
- 01Do not let the main meeting become the first exposure to a consequential idea.
- 02Seek the strongest objections before presenting to the full group.
- 03Prioritize stakeholders whose opinions decision-makers value.
- 04Use private conversations for genuine feedback, not political trades.
- 05Let collaborators influence the solution.
- 06Address concerns in the final pitch rather than suppressing dissent.
How to run it
- 1
Map influence
List the formal decision-maker, meeting attendees, likely supporters, likely skeptics, and trusted advisers whose views will shape the outcome.
Pro tip Pay special attention to the person whose opinion the final decision-maker consistently values.
Watch out Do not assume job title alone determines influence.
- 2
Prioritize the skeptics
Choose the people most likely to challenge the idea and request individual conversations before the formal meeting. Explain that you value their perspective and want the final proposal to address their concerns.
Pro tip Approach the hardest credible critic early enough to make substantive revisions.
Watch out Avoid framing the conversation as a request for loyalty.
- 3
Run the real pitch
Give each stakeholder enough of the genuine argument to react meaningfully. Ask what they oppose, what evidence they need, and what would make the solution workable.
Pro tip Use open questions and allow silence so concerns surface fully.
Watch out A vague teaser will not expose the objections that could sink the final meeting.
- 4
Invite solution input
Let affected stakeholders influence how the problem is solved. Separate shared agreement on the problem from negotiable details of implementation.
Pro tip Record which suggestions improve the idea and which reveal deeper principle-level disagreement.
Watch out Do not promise every requested change.
- 5
Revise and rehearse
Update the presentation to address valid concerns and simplify the responses to unresolved objections. Verify that the proposal remains coherent after incorporating feedback.
Pro tip Show stakeholders where their input materially improved the final version.
Watch out Do not bolt contradictory concessions onto the proposal merely to manufacture consensus.
- 6
Enter with no surprises
Before the formal pitch, know who supports the proposal, who still disagrees, and why. Use the meeting for a decision and final debate rather than first-time discovery.
Pro tip Speak again with any pivotal stakeholder whose position remains unclear.
Watch out Do not claim unanimous support when genuine disagreement remains.
In the wild
An operator plans to pitch a new acquisition model to ten leaders and expects five to be skeptical. Over two weeks, she meets each skeptic, asks for direct criticism, and learns that data ownership and sales handoff are the main concerns. She revises the operating model, credits the contributors, and explicitly addresses the remaining trade-off in the group presentation.
→ The decision meeting focuses on the known trade-off instead of fragmenting into multiple surprise objections.
Common mistakes
Showing the deck for the first time
When influential people first encounter a controversial proposal in the decision meeting, predictable objections can create visible dissent and derail the decision.
Trading favors for support
A quid-pro-quo “drug deal” manufactures political backing without improving the idea and creates future organizational risk.
Trying to eliminate all disagreement
The purpose is to understand and address objections, not pressure every stakeholder into pretending to agree.
Is it for you?
Best for
It is best for high-stakes internal ideas requiring support from several influential leaders or cross-functional partners.
Not ideal for
It is not ideal for trivial decisions, secretive coalition-building, or attempts to trade favors for artificial support.
From the transcript
“the pre-sell is the secret sauce of selling in big ideas.”
“go do your due diligence.”
“what most people actually want is to have input on a solution more than anything else.”
From the episode
How To Sell Big Ideas.