# SCAMMPERR Framework

A structured brainstorming tool for repositioning a stalled deal without defaulting immediately to a price concession or standard escalation. Adapted from Michal Michalko's creative thinking methodology; applied to deal-level sales innovation in _The Challenger Sale_ (Chapter 8).

Use this in the **Create** step of the innovating mode — after Investigate has surfaced what is actually blocking the deal.

---

## How to Use It

Work through the prompts with the rep. You do not need to answer every row. The framework is a forcing mechanism to expand the universe of options before converging on a solution. Each row opens a different angle on the deal.

| Letter | Lens | Prompting Question |
|--------|------|-------------------|
| **S** | Substitute | What element of our offer or process could we replace with something different? What if we substituted a different stakeholder, a different product scope, or a different commercial structure? |
| **C** | Combine | What could we add to this deal or combine with it to make it more compelling? Could we pair this with a service, a pilot, or a complementary offering? |
| **A** | Adapt | What approach has worked in a similar deal elsewhere that we could adapt to this customer's specific situation? What has another team, region, or rep done to move a similar obstacle? |
| **M** | Modify / Magnify | What could we change about how we are presenting this deal? What if we made one element larger, more prominent, or differently framed? |
| **P** | Put to other uses | Is there a different use case, department, or entry point at this customer that could get a faster decision while the main deal moves through the process? |
| **E** | Eliminate | What if we removed a component that the customer finds risky or complex? Could a smaller scope get an initial signature, with expansion planned separately? |
| **R** | Reverse | What if we changed the sequence? Instead of asking for a decision before showing value, could we show value first? Could we flip who is taking the risk in the transaction? |
| **R** | Rearrange | What if we restructured the entire commercial arrangement — payment terms, duration, stakeholder sequence, or pricing model — to fit how this customer actually makes decisions? |

---

## Applied Example

**Situation:** Enterprise deal stalled because purchasing is resisting a price increase for services the rep has been delivering for two years.

Working through SCAMMPERR:

- **Substitute:** What if we substituted the standard service package with a performance-based contract — customer pays for outcomes, not inputs?
- **Combine:** Could we combine the renewal with a small pilot of our new capability, giving purchasing a reason to approve now in exchange for preferred pricing on the pilot?
- **Adapt:** We've moved past similar pricing objections with [other company] by showing the productivity ROI at the site level. Can we adapt that same business case for this customer's plant manager?
- **Modify:** What if we modified the frequency rather than the price — same annual cost, delivered in smaller monthly increments to match their budget cycles?
- **Eliminate:** What custom packaging are we providing that they do not actively value? Removing it might offset the increase without reducing perceived value.

The rep and manager do not need to use all eight lenses. Two or three strong options discovered through this process are enough to generate a creative path forward — and prevent the default of offering an immediate discount.

---

## When to Use vs. PAUSE

| Situation | Use |
|---|---|
| Rep has a known behavior gap (not executing Teach, Tailor, or Take Control consistently) | PAUSE coaching |
| Deal is stalled and neither manager nor rep knows why or what will move it | Investigate → Create → Share + SCAMMPERR |
| Rep is new to a pillar and needs skill building | PAUSE coaching |
| The obstacle is deal-specific (legal, budget cycle, consensus, procurement) | Investigate → Create → Share + SCAMMPERR |

Key distinction: SCAMMPERR is for deal obstacles, not rep skill gaps. Do not use it to diagnose a rep's Challenger behaviors — that is what the Appendix A pillar questions are for.