Unpacking Seller Success: My Journey at the Emblaze Revenue Summit 2025

By Matt Slonaker

I’ve been in sales for over a decade, and I thought I’d heard every pitch, tried every tactic, and attended every training program promising to boost conversions. But my experience at the Emblaze Revenue Summit 2025, marked by the hashtag #revsummit25, turned my perspective upside down. The summit wasn’t just a conference—it was a revelation, packed with data-driven insights and practical strategies that have already started reshaping how I approach selling. Let me walk you through my journey, slide by slide, and share how these lessons, including a deep dive into active listening, are transforming my work.

The session started with a provocative question on a massive screen: “Do Sellers Really Sound Different… in 2025?” The slide featured a 2x2 matrix evaluating customer perceptions of sellers, with axes measuring whether a seller’s message was “Important to the Customer” and whether “Everyone Says It” or “Only This Seller Said It.” The numbers hit me like a ton of bricks: 55% of seller messages were unimportant and generic, 25% were important but common, 15% were unimportant but unique, and only 5% were both important and unique. That 5%, highlighted in green, became my obsession. It showed that only a tiny fraction of sellers were delivering messages that truly stood out. I realized that to win, I needed to be in that 5%—delivering value that’s both meaningful and distinct.

Next, a slide titled “Sales Training Has a Lot to Do With It…” showed a scatter plot of 478 companies, comparing sales training expenditure to performance relative to the industry average. The key insight? Companies spending below the average on training saw a much steeper performance drop than the gains seen by those spending above the average. I immediately thought about my own team. Were we investing enough in training? I jotted down a reminder to review our budget as soon as I got back to the office.

The presentation then shifted to a slide that felt like a game-changer: “Learning From ‘North x Northwest’.” It revealed that top-performing companies were 5.2 times more likely to include training on competitive intelligence and differentiation. I reflected on my own sales calls—how often did I fall back on generic value propositions instead of highlighting what truly sets us apart? This data was a wake-up call. Differentiation isn’t just a buzzword; it’s a skill we need to teach and practice.

A key takeaway followed: “Takeaway #2: We Have to Account for Competitors More in Sales Training and Enablement Initiatives to Break the Stalemate.” I nodded in agreement. Too often, my team and I focused on our own product without fully understanding the competitive landscape. I thought about a recent deal I lost because I didn’t anticipate a competitor’s counterargument. This insight pushed me to prioritize competitive enablement in our training programs moving forward.

The methodology behind these insights was laid out in a slide titled “Study 1 Design.” Participants watched videos of four sellers pitching financial services, then rated them on tactical competency (execution of fundamentals) and tactical differentiation (how distinct they were from each other). The analysis focused on the correlation between these factors. I appreciated the rigor—it wasn’t just theory; it was grounded in real buyer perceptions.

The results from Study 1 were sobering. A slide labeled “Study 1 Results” showed scores for tactical differentiation (0.371) and competence, which ranged from 0.179 to 0.388 across skills like opening the meeting, needs identification, solution presentation, objection handling, and gaining commitment. Even the highest scores were below 0.4 on a 0-1 scale, showing how much room there was for improvement. I realized that my team and I weren’t just competing on product—we were competing on execution. I started brainstorming ways to coach my reps, especially in areas like opening meetings and handling objections, where the scores were lowest.

Next, “Study 2a Design” focused on product perception. Participants watched four sellers pitch payroll services, with the products designed to be nearly identical. They rated each seller on service quality, value, needs alignment, and innovativeness. The results, shown in a bar chart titled “Study 2a Results,” were striking. Despite the similar products, two sellers consistently scored higher across all categories, earning gold stars. It proved that how you sell shapes perceptions of what you sell. I thought about my own pitches—could I do more to influence how prospects perceive our product, even in a crowded market?

This led to another powerful takeaway: “Takeaway #3: ‘Good + Different’ Selling Creates Perceptions of Better… Products?” The emphasis on “good + different” resonated deeply. I’ve always focused on being good—hitting quotas, following the process—but I hadn’t prioritized being different. The idea that differentiation in selling could make buyers perceive the product as better, even when it wasn’t, was something I couldn’t wait to test in my next sales cycle.

The final slide of this segment, “Top Takeaways,” summarized the key lessons:

1. We’re enabling a stalemate in the market by not differentiating enough.
2. We need to teach “good + different” in sales development programs.
3. “Good + different” selling creates perceptions of better products.
4. Being “good + different” creates better conversions.
5. Most importantly, “good + different” is a uniquely human endeavor.

That last point hit home. In an era of AI and automation, the human element—our ability to connect, empathize, and stand out—remains our greatest strength.

The session then transitioned to a new topic that caught my attention: active listening. A slide announced a research keynote by Carmen Simon, Chief Science Officer at Emblaze, titled “The Dark Side of Active Listening: What Sellers Need to Know.” I leaned forward, intrigued. Active listening is a skill I’ve always prided myself on, but the idea of a “dark side” made me question my approach.

Carmen’s first slide, “Neuroscience Study Setup,” outlined a fascinating experiment. Two sellers were compared: Seller 1 used probing questions (e.g., “Who is it impacting?” “When is it happening?”), while Seller 2 used active listening techniques like elaboration (“What is the benefit of fixing it?”), affirmation (“What is it costing you?”), empathy (“What would happen if you did not fix the problem?”), and insight (“What solutions have you considered?”). Both concluded with a summary (“What I think I heard you say”). The study aimed to uncover how these approaches impacted the buyer’s experience. I was eager to see the results—had I been over-relying on probing without balancing it with deeper listening techniques?

The next slide delivered a profound insight: “Listening is a shared experience but not a shared feeling.” I felt a pang of recognition. How many times had I thought I was listening well, only to miss the emotional undercurrent of what the buyer was saying? This slide challenged me to think beyond the mechanics of listening and focus on the emotional connection—or lack thereof—that my listening created.

Carmen then presented a slide that hit even harder: “When an insight lands, it can last…” Accompanied by an image of an elephant, the slide quoted a participant: “The most memorable part would have to be when Keith mentioned the fact about retaining vs bringing in new customers.” The insight was that memory retention peaks after 48 hours. I thought about my own sales conversations—how often did I deliver a memorable insight that stuck with the buyer long after the call? I realized I needed to be more intentional about crafting those “aha” moments.

The session continued with practical advice in a slide titled “Deliver what the moment calls for.” It outlined three guidelines, illustrated with grocery bags:

• Guideline 1: Microdose your active listening. Don’t overdo it—use listening techniques sparingly to keep them impactful.
• Guideline 2: Guide their mind, not just their mood. Use insight, elaboration, affirmation, and empathy to steer the conversation meaningfully.
• Guideline 3: Listen while you’re talking. Pay attention to the buyer’s reactions as you speak, not just when you’re silent.

These guidelines were a game-changer. I thought about how I often went overboard with active listening, parroting back everything the buyer said without adding value. Microdosing my approach and focusing on guiding their mind felt like a smarter way to build trust and understanding.

The final slide in this segment was a gut punch: “Why are you not listening to others?” It featured a group of people with thought bubbles revealing their inner doubts: “I don’t have the emotional capacity,” “Intellectual capacity,” “Too negative,” “Annoying voice,” “Afraid of intimacy,” “Too sugary,” “I don’t really care.” I saw myself in some of those excuses. How many times had I tuned out a prospect because I was distracted or overwhelmed? This slide forced me to confront my own listening barriers and commit to being more present in every conversation.

Reflecting on the summit, I left with a renewed sense of purpose. The insights on differentiation taught me that being “good + different” is the key to standing out in a crowded market. But Carmen Simon’s session on active listening added another layer—being truly present and delivering what the moment calls for can make or break a connection with a buyer. I’m already implementing these lessons with my team: revamping our training to include competitive intelligence and differentiation, coaching on specific execution skills, and practicing microdosed active listening in my own calls. The Emblaze Revenue Summit 2025 was a turning point, and I’m excited to see how far these strategies will take us. In sales, it’s not just about what you say—it’s about how you listen, how you stand out, and how you make the buyer feel. And that’s a challenge I’m ready to tackle head-on.