I’m hearing more and more frustration from both salespeople and sales leaders as the slow economy increases the panic on the part of senior management. Sales are slowing dramatically, profits are down or have completely evaporated, and the pressure is increasing on all levels to produce, produce, produce.
Along with the pressure to produce comes the micro managing of the sales team and its leadership. Managers are having daily pipeline meetings with the members of their team. Increasingly these meetings are getting uglier and uglier with increased threats if sales don’t increase. Middle managers are having daily calls-in some instances two or more calls per day–with the managers under them as they want an accounting for each team member’s activities, including reviewing the sales status of each and every prospect. Management is demanding detailed reports for each prospect. If a salesperson deems a contact to be a non-prospect, managers are demanding the salesperson continue to pursue the contact in hopes of turning them into a prospect.
Each minute of the day must be accounted for. Management is accepting no excuses for not closing a sale-bad credit, not a reason, get them to pay cash; no need, not a reason, create a need for them; want to wait to see what the market will do, not a reason, convince them that now’s the time to buy; cash flow issues, not a reason, get them to factor their receivables to get the cash to make the purchase.
As salespeople get bombarded with threats and each second of their day is micro managed, they resort to discounting and trying to include as many incentives to purchase as they can in an effort to get sales to get management off their back. They quickly discover that even if that creates a sale, it creates a new set of problems as they get a lecture about how the company doesn’t discount and their job is to maintain gross and if they can’t, the company will find someone who will. Many managers resort to writing all proposals for their sales team to insure that they control every aspect of the sale.
As morale declines and sales lag even further, senior management gives more and more directives, demanding greater control and more ‘accountability’ on each employee’s part. When today’s demands don’t create the desired result, they’re added to or changed tomorrow, spiraling in a seemingly never-ending series of demands and threats, each more ominous than the last.
And sales plunge even faster than before.
Once management panics it seems impossible to stop the downhill flow of negative consequences. The more pressure management feels, the more they try to spread the pressure downward, believing they can demand production via force.
The process inevitably produces nothing other than a bigger hole from which the company must emerge.
If micro managing is such a negative force, why do managers resort to it? They surly don’t teach these tactics in the top online MBA programs or top ranked campus program. The root cause may be panic, but the belief they need to micro manage their team is based squarely in a distrust of their employees-a belief that their salespeople and managers aren’t working hard enough, that the sales team doesn’t care enough, that their team is intrinsically lazy and is only looking for the low hanging fruit, not willing to get dirty and dig for the hard to find business.
If sheer force and threats don’t work, what can the management team do to stabilize-or maybe even increase–sales during this time of economic stress?
1. Don’t panic. Of course, this is easier said than done. But panic leads to overreacting and bad decisions. We need look no further than the US government over the past 6 months to see the consequences of panic-squandered opportunities, a diarrhea of ineffective spending in an effort to ‘do something now’ with little regard to the future, and a massive list of decisions that upon reflection many-even those involved in the initial decision making process-wish had never been made.
2. Make an honest evaluation of the situation and communicate it to the entire team. Employees are not stupid. They are aware of the economic situation and they not only wonder what impact it has on the company, they speculate–and most often their speculation is far worse than the truth of the actual situation.
Employees-and in particular the sales team-perform best when they know and understand the company’s goals and objectives and the obstacles standing in the way of reaching those goals and objectives. The more clearly each sales team member understands the company’s needs and concerns, the more clearly they can not only understand where they fit in, but what they can-what they must -do to help address those needs and concerns. If team members sense that the company isn’t communicating honestly with them, they begin to retreat into themselves, resisting the company’s entreaties and even the most dire threat falls on deaf ears.
3. Formulate a comprehensive and workable plan that includes participation by all parties to address market conditions. History is replete with examples of monarchs and generals who when faced with tough opposition retreat into a bunker mentality. They become increasingly overwhelmed with circumstances, they become delusional, they begin to distrust even their closest friends and companions. In short order they are totally isolated. Their plans and orders have little to do with reality.
This same phenomenon happens in the executive suite. When faced with potential crisis, senior management will often retreat to their own mental concrete bunker. Rather than seeking the wisdom and cooperation of their employees, they barricade themselves in, shouting orders through the barred door.
In our current economy where quality prospects are difficult to find and sales must be fought for, gaining the cooperation and commitment from staff is critical. Senior management cannot survive on their own. If they and the company are to survive, it will take the active participation of all the work force. Consequently, the more ownership in the solution to overcoming the company’s obstacles each member of the team feels, the more committed to the solution-and to their individual contributions to the solution-each will be.
4. Commit the company to giving the needed support to accomplish the goals and overcome the obstacles. When panic sets in, the cost cutting butcher knife comes out. Management looks at every expense as a waste. Can we use a shorter, less expensive screw here; can we make that piece of metal a little thinner? Do we really need that much money in our marketing budget? Slash sales training, its never done any good anyway.
As the butcher of the executive office is in the midst of a budget-cutting orgy, critical resources for sales stability-much less sales growth-are apt to be gutted also. While belt tightening is necessary when business slows, a finely honed scalpel is necessary, not a meat clever.
Creating sales takes money. Salespeople need the same resources in slow times to create sales as they do during hot markets. Certainly gratuitous expenses such as client dinners and games of golf may be legitimate areas for trimming, but training, travel, clerical support, and other expenses that lead directly to or support the closing of business are not to be cut indiscriminately. In fact, when it comes to training, prospecting, lead generation, and client retention expenses, the slower the economy, the more funds should be directed to those areas.
Times are tough. That doesn’t mean that it is time for a management meltdown.
There are solutions to slowing sales.
Resorting to micro management and threats won’t produce anything other than disgruntled employees and slower sales. However, gaining the trust, cooperation, and commitment of your team to address the issues facing the company-and by extension, themselves-can give your company the coordinated effort by all to weather this economic downturn.
Great post. I agree panic and distrust are the primary cause of micro management, but there are a couple of more benign causes as well. Assuming you’re a good upper manager, during tough times you want to make things better. Coming up with solutions requires information, so more time and resources are spent gathering information than before. This looks and feels like micro management, but it’s something that’s necessary if change is going to happen.
Also, during tough times good managers want to contribute. It’s easy to scratch that itch by jumping into the work flow, renegotiating deals, etc. It’s not distrust, it’s wanting to “help”.
Comment by Kevin Kleen — February 27, 2009 @ 8:21 am |
Kevin,
Your point is well taken that there is a real difference between management’s desire to jump in and help the sales team and needing additional information in order to make things better and trying to micro manage each action taking place in the company.
Management’s effort to serve is not only admirable, but also necessary in our current economy. And, of course, management needs as much information as possible in order to make positive change. Both of these activities have a very different texture than micro managing–and can be easily recognized for what they are.
I am certainly not arguing against either of these moves on the part of senior management, nor am I seeking to minimize the necessary accountability on the part of salespeople and sales leaders. Management must hold each sales team member accountable for their actions and how they spend their time.
Comment by Paul McCord — February 27, 2009 @ 9:55 am |
Paul: Great post! Couldn’t agree more with the terrible impact of micro management on the organization. You address the key issues, one other thing I have seen is an adverse impact on time available to spend with customers.
Micro management, constant review meetings, etc detract from people’s time in the field with customers–just when they need to be spending more time with customers.
I have a client where senior management mandates daily pipeline reviews—each review taking about 2 hours—multiply that by the several hundred sales people and managers–think of the lost opportunity. Even sillier–the sales cycle is 6-9 months—what help does a daily pipeline review provide other than demonstrating management’s panic?
Great post!
Comment by Dave Brock — February 27, 2009 @ 6:28 pm |
Excellent topic. The pressure grows, and the less actual sales experience the senior leaders have, the less they understand that micro managing high skill/high will people is going to hurt sales results. Knowing which sales people need coaching is vitally important. You have to vary your leadership style with each person according to their need. Very good post Paul!
Comment by gregdeming — February 27, 2009 @ 6:53 pm |
Unfortunately this goes way beyond just Sales people, but has a negative impact on Company Sales regardless of the segment of the company it happens with. Panic and fear never have good results. Neither does sudden micromanaging. Coaching and support are a lot different from micromanaging.
Comment by Job Search — March 1, 2009 @ 6:44 am |
Very true and relevant to all jobs! #1 Panic is wasteful. Take the worst situation possible, you’re trapped in a building and it’s on fire. What’s the first thing you’re told about escaping fire? “Don’t panic!” (It’s also written on the cover of the The Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy, but that’s an entirely different matter). The thing is, though, in that building some people are going to calmly find the exit and help people out and others are going to scream and run around in circles. I don’t think that economic challenges bring about micro managers. I think those who are micro managers just become worse under such conditions. Those who “don’t panic” may require more information/feedback than before (as Paul replied to Kevin above) to find better ways to move forward, but I don’t think they will suddenly evolve into micro managers. Micro managers are famous for using fear and threats to get results from employees, but smart managers know that those results are very short-term and cause more harm than good. Over time, employees will look for ways to get around these methods — even by cheating or faking results. It’s just bad business and hurts the company overall. The question is, if someone is a micro manager and reads this post, will they see it in themselves and be able to change or take the advice? No one likes to work for someone like this and the Post is wonderfully informative — but I wonder if it just preaches to the choir? Can a panicker choose not to panic? Can people change? Who knew that the subject of micro management could have such deep, philosophical roots?
Comment by Lynn M — March 2, 2009 @ 2:27 pm |
Lynn,
First, let me congratulate you on your fine taste in literature. Highbrow works such as The Hitchhiker’s Guide have taught me much about human nature, not to mention the fine dining experience one can have watching the universe come to an end.
Secondly, you raise a good question–can one’s behavior change or is one doomed to be ‘what they are?’ Do out of control circumstances trigger a latent tendency to micro manage on the part of some, or is it simply they don’t know any other way to deal with the situation than to try to force their will on the situation? I don’t know, although I wouldn’t be surprised to find it some of each. Either way, for the rest of us, especially if we are caught in the situation, having some understanding of what is going on may be of help. For others, possibly a recognition of the danger of both panic and micro managing may at least cause them to think about their actions.
Comment by Paul McCord — March 2, 2009 @ 2:55 pm |
Micro-managing is just plain awful and counter productive. I’ve seen it in more than one context (engineering projects that were behind schedule, for example), but whatever the situation, micro-managing indicates poor leadership. I expect that experienced sales leaders trust their team and their tools — what is the point of daily pipeline reviews — they should have tools and processes in place that can tell them how the pipeline looks and what to do as changes take place. Tough times are here, but sometimes the essence of good leadership is to take a step back, not indulge in frenetic activity.
Comment by Bob Johnson — March 3, 2009 @ 11:48 pm |
[...] problem isn’t with your team members but with you and the management philosophy of the company. Micro-management is a management disease, not a salesperson [...]
Pingback by Is This How You “Discipline” Your Sales Team? « Sales and Sales Management Blog — April 21, 2010 @ 10:14 am |
I’m a business owner and Managing Director. We’re in melt-down, and I’m panicking. Panic is a natural human Darwinian response that safeguards, not endangers life.
And I’m so yes, as predicted in this article, I’m micro-managing.
When I started the business, there was just me to manage – I did it all, and understood microscopically what to do. Those were the years we made big profits. During the good times, before the recession, we got sloppy, and managers (including me) weren’t managing micro, or otherwise. We just had a jolly time.
That’s why we had the banking crisis, and the present crisis. Not enough micro-management.
This article is just a well-constructed con, based on a knee-jerk reaction. It’s like my wife saying that ‘all men are the same – they only want sex.’ It gets a cheap laugh and a grimace of recognition. But without sex, the human race would die out, no matter how irksome it is to some women.
Similarly micromanagement can be used as a derogatory term by the ignorant, but if it had been applied earlier, none of us would be in this mess. Great businesses that are surviving (McDonalds anyone?) micromanage as a religion. I’ve read they have a 3-page manual on how to clean lettuce. BP didn’t micromanage and look what that cost.
And may I say as someone who previously made a good living from corporate recovery, micromanagement is exactly what’s needed now. Every cost, every process, every overhead, every opportunity has to be re-examined, rechecked, reinforced or rejected. Those lower down the chain aren’t necessarily going to like this, hence the “managers are idiots” jeering. It’s a long hard road ahead, and only the dishonest, the very lucky or the micromanaged business will make it.
Comment by Fred Robbins — April 13, 2011 @ 12:15 pm |
Yes, Fred, it does sound like you’re in full panic mode. I suspect your company’s problem isn’t that you didn’t micromanage, but rather as you say, you simply didn’t rode the wave because it was easy and things got out of control. There is a difference between managing and micromanaging and when you don’t manage, you end up in crisis as you are. Instructing employees on how to do something–such as the proper way to clean lettuce isn’t micromanaging–it’s called training and that’s what well managed companies do, they give the proper training and guidance to their employees, they don’t freak out when things have gone to hell in a hand basket and then try to blame it on not micromanaging.
Comment by Paul McCord — April 13, 2011 @ 1:41 pm |
Dear Paul
We could exchange on this forever. As the philosopher Joad used to say, in ancient radio programmes before my time actually, but frequently quoted to me when I was a kid, “it all depends on what you mean by micromanagement”.
The thread has caused some interesting debate amongst my management team. (You may be interested that in order not distort this debate, my name is anything but Fred Robbins.)
And if I may mollify my earlier (and possibly unnecessarily abrasive) comments, though I disagree with your conclusion, I am very appreciative of you raising the issue, and stirring the debate (and a re-calibration of my own behaviour) very thoroughly.
Best regards
Fred Robbins
Comment by Fred Robbins — April 16, 2011 @ 9:34 am |