PHONE+ Asks ... Does Exclusivity Pay?

“No. We were exclusive to AT&T for over 10 years – one of their largest agents in the Midwest. In early 2000, we became non-exclusive, and while it was painful to adopt a new model, it was the best thing we ever did. Now, we have credibility with customers who appreciate our ability to survey the entire telecom landscape in search of the correct solution for them.

— Sarah Britton, President, Britton Information Services, Independent Agent/Consultant

“We tend to believe that non-exclusivity is better for our business model. Customers tend to feel more comfortable when we come in and do an analysis and then come back with multiple options, rather than a single solution. This has translated to more closed sales and a larger book of business. Additionally, I would argue that service providers give us MORE attention in a non-exclusive role, because they know we are judging them against their peers on support/response, and not only price.”

— Mark Stackpoole, CEO, Global Telecom Solutions, Master Agent

"You should get a few extra commission points from your top providers and those top two or three carriers should be your primary source of services; there is no reason to sign any sort of exclusivity deal. I believe that one of the main functions of independent agents is to do the leg work for the client and present three to five, apples-to-apples comparisons of a service that meets their specific needs. So, no, exclusivity does not pay."

— James Lockhart, President, Telecom Management Inc., Independent Agent/Consultant

Up Next: Can an agent survive on referrals alone?

Send your answer to Cara Sievers at csievers@vpico.com by Oct. 1 for possible inclusion in the November edition of PHONE+ Asks. Any answer submitted is eligible for publication and may be edited for clarity or brevity.