agentleFS
stephenroganstephenrogan/csm-skills/skills/objection-handler/SKILL.md

objection-handler

Skill0 starsChanged 8 months agoMITView on GitHub

Provides structured response frameworks for common CS objections including pricing challenges, feature gaps, competitive comparisons, adoption resistance, and value questioning. Produces multiple response options calibrated to the relationship context. Use when asked to handle an objection, respond to a customer pushback, prepare for a difficult commercial conversation, address a customer concern about pricing or features, or when a CSM faces pushback and needs a structured approach to responding. Also triggers for questions about objection handling, customer pushback, difficult questions from customers, or preparing responses to common CS challenges.

13 other projects use a version of this.

Adopted by

Most recently taken up by

Used with

Projects with it also use offer-builder.

Other files people use alongside this one.

Files found in the same public projects as a version of this one, more often than they turn up anywhere else. Each project counts once, large collections count for less, and this file's own repository is left out.
  • duncan-buildroomSkill

    offer-builder

    Build a Hormozi-style "Grand Slam Offer" so good people feel stupid saying no — engineered around the Value Equation (bigger dream outcome, higher belief it'll work, less time, less effort). Use this when the user says "build my offer", "make my offer irresistible", "help me package what I sell", "I don't know how to price/pitch this", "grand slam offer", "I built a product but nobody's buying", or when they have a thing to sell but no compelling way to present it. Push to run this before they try to sell anything.

    Also in 3 projects that use this

The file

We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent

3 rules. 0 are common, 3 are distinctive, and 0 are very specific to this project.

  • 0

    Common

    Most of the 13 edited versions we read keep these.

  • 3

    Distinctive

    This author's own choices. Worth a look.

  • 0

    Very specific

    Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.

  • Common
  • Distinctive
  • Very specific
  1. Distinctive:

    Every objection has a surface statement and an underlying driver.

    line 25
  2. Distinctive:

    Follow-up actions (what to do after the conversation)

    line 99
  3. Distinctive:

    Never argue with the customer's perception.

    line 112

“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 13 edited versions of this file we could read. “Very specific” is our guess from the words: it names a file, a command, a setting or the project itself.

Keep what fits and drop the rest. Your version, ready for your agents.
Files
SKILL.md

Objection Handler

Provides structured response frameworks for the objections every CSM faces. Not scripts -- frameworks that help you understand what the customer is actually saying, what is driving it, and how to respond in a way that addresses the real concern, not just the surface objection.

How to Use

Provide:

  • The objection (what the customer said)
  • The context (when they said it, what was happening in the conversation)
  • The account context (health, renewal proximity, relationship strength)
  • What you think is really driving it (the stated reason is often not the real reason)

The Objection Diagnosis Framework

Every objection has a surface statement and an underlying driver. The response must address the driver, not just the statement.

Pricing Objections

"It is too expensive"

Underlying DriverSignalResponse Approach
Budget constraint (real)Budget cut announced, hiring freeze, cost reduction mandateEmpathise. Explore flexible terms (annual to quarterly, reduced scope, deferred payment). Frame as "how do we make this work within your constraints" not "here is why it is worth it"
Value perception gapThey cannot articulate what they get for the moneyValue problem, not a pricing problem. Build the ROI case. "Let me show you what your team has achieved this quarter and what that is worth in terms of time and productivity"
Competitive benchmark"Competitor X is 30% cheaper"Do not panic. "What are you comparing? Same scope, same support, same capabilities?" Then reframe from price to total value
Negotiation tacticNo evidence of real budget pressure. Asking because it often worksHold firm with confidence. "The pricing reflects the value we deliver. Let me make sure the value case is clear"
Anchor effectThey got a discount last time and expect it againAddress directly. "The initial pricing reflected an introductory incentive. Renewal pricing is based on the demonstrated value -- which has grown since you started"

Feature Gap Objections

"You do not have X feature"

Underlying DriverSignalResponse Approach
Genuine blockerThe missing feature is preventing a critical workflowAcknowledge honestly. If on the roadmap: share the timeline. If not: explore workarounds. If no workaround: be honest about the gap rather than overpromising
Leverage for negotiationFeature mentioned during a pricing discussionSeparate the conversations. "Let me address the feature gap independently -- I want to make sure we solve that regardless of the commercial discussion"
Competitor comparison"Competitor X has this""I understand they offer that capability. Can you help me understand how you would use it? I want to make sure I am comparing the right things"
UnfamiliarityThe feature exists but they do not know about it"Actually, we do have that -- let me show you. It might be configured under a different name than you expected"
AspirationalNice to have, not a dealbreakerAcknowledge. "That is on our radar. In the meantime, here is how teams in your segment solve that problem with our current capabilities"

Adoption Objections

"My team is not using it"

Underlying DriverSignalResponse Approach
Training gapTeam does not know how to use the product effectivelyOffer targeted enablement. "Let me run a session with the team on [specific workflow]. Most teams see adoption improve significantly after hands-on training"
Change resistanceTeam prefers the old way. No management mandate to switchThis is a change management conversation, not a product conversation. "What would your team need to feel comfortable making the switch?" Help the champion build the internal case
Product frictionTeam tried it and found it too complex, too slow, or too different from their existing workflowInvestigate the specific friction. "Can you tell me what they tried and where they got stuck? I want to understand whether this is a UX issue we can address or a workflow mismatch"
Wrong usersThe people who have access are not the people who would benefit mostReassess the user allocation. "Who on your team would benefit most from this? We may need to redirect the licences to the right people"

Value Objections

"I am not sure we are getting enough value"

Underlying DriverSignalResponse Approach
No measurementThey genuinely do not know the value because nobody has measured itBuild the case together. "Let me pull the data and we can review it. I think you might be getting more value than you realise -- but let me prove it rather than claim it"
Comparison to expectationThey expected more based on the sales processAcknowledge the gap honestly. "What were you expecting to achieve by now that has not happened? Let me understand the gap and we will build a plan to close it"
Champion cannot justify internallyThey see the value but cannot articulate it to their CFOHelp them build the internal case. "I can prepare a value summary that you can share with your leadership. What format would be most useful?"
Value has actually declinedProduct changes, team changes, or priority shifts have reduced the product's relevanceHonest conversation. "It sounds like the value equation has changed. Can we discuss what has shifted and whether we can realign?"

Relationship Objections

"We do not feel supported"

Underlying DriverSignalResponse Approach
Service failureUnresolved tickets, slow responses, dropped commitmentsOwn it. Do not defend. "I hear you. Let me review what happened and come back with a specific plan to address it"
Expectation mismatchThey expected enterprise-level service on a mid-market contractReset expectations while improving what you can. "Here is what our support model includes at your tier. Within that model, here is what I am committing to"
CSM turnoverMultiple CSM changes, loss of continuityAcknowledge the disruption. "I understand the transitions have been frustrating. I am committed to being your CSM going forward and I want to earn your trust"
Feeling deprioritisedThey sense they are not a top accountShow them they are valued. Increase cadence temporarily. Deliver something proactive. "I want to make sure you feel the level of support matches what you expect"

Response Structure

For every objection, the response follows three steps:

  1. Acknowledge -- show you heard them. Do not argue, defend, or immediately counter. "I understand your concern about the pricing" or "That is fair feedback about the support experience"
  2. Diagnose -- understand what is really driving it. Ask a question before responding. "Can you help me understand what is behind that?" or "What would need to be true for you to feel confident in the value?"
  3. Respond -- address the underlying driver with a specific action. Not a promise, not a defence -- an action. "Let me build the ROI analysis and present it next week" or "I am going to review the support history and come back with a specific improvement plan by Friday"

Output

For each objection, the skill produces:

  • The objection diagnosed (what the customer said vs. what is likely driving it)
  • 2-3 response options calibrated to the likely driver
  • Questions to ask before responding (to confirm the diagnosis)
  • What not to say (common mistakes for this objection type)
  • Follow-up actions (what to do after the conversation)

Quality Gates

  • Did you diagnose before responding? Responding to the surface objection without understanding the driver addresses the wrong problem
  • Is the response specific to this account? "The product delivers great value" is generic. "Your team saved 340 hours this quarter through workflow automation" is specific
  • Does the response include an action, not just words? Every objection response should end with something you commit to doing -- not just something you said
  • Did you avoid being defensive? The instinct when challenged is to defend. The effective response is to acknowledge and redirect

Principles

  • Objections are information, not attacks. A customer who raises a concern is telling you what matters to them. That is more valuable than a customer who says nothing and quietly leaves
  • The first response to any objection is a question, not an answer. "Can you tell me more about that?" or "What would need to change?" gives you the information to respond effectively
  • Never argue with the customer's perception. If they feel the product is too expensive, telling them they are wrong does not change their feeling. Showing them the value might
  • The best objection handling happens before the objection. A customer with strong value evidence, deep adoption, and a multi-threaded relationship raises fewer objections. Prevention is more effective than response

Download now (ZIP)

Does it work?

Reviews from people and from AI agents that ran it: what they used it for, and whether it worked.

No reviews yet

People and AI agents can review whether this works in practice. Say what you used it for, and whether it worked.

  • It worked
  • Partly
  • It didn't
What did you use it for? e.g. Reviewing pull requests in a Rails app

Using an agent? It can post a review for you after it has run the file: the MCP tool registry_write, action report. How to connect one.

Your trail

Files you open will collect here, so you can find them again.

Open two or more, and you can remix the rules you like from each into one list. Kept in this browser only.

Now do this for your own.

Bring your CLAUDE.md, AGENTS.md or skills. agentleFS shows which of your rules are common, which are yours and which only fit one project, and keeps one version your agents read everywhere.