Sales and Sales Management Blog

October 27, 2010

Squeezing Boils–A Disgusting Sales Management Post

Filed under: Leadership,management,sales,Sales Management,team development — Paul McCord @ 11:08 am
Tags: , , ,

A recent LinkedIn discussion reminded me of Ted, a sales manager I knew years ago, who mentioned a couple of times that he was dreading going into the office because he had to “go squeeze some boils.”  After his second or third time to mention his need to squeeze boils, I asked—more than a bit hesitantly—what he meant by having to squeeze boils.  He explained that he had some underperforming salespeople who he had to let go before they poisoned the rest of the sales team.  He had to drain the pus before it infected the rest of the body.

In some respects Ted had the right idea; he just wasn’t nuanced enough (my God, I sound like a  Democrat).  Ted treated all underperformers the same.  To him, an underperformer was an underperformer.  A loser.  A waste of human flesh.  If you weren’t performing up to his standards, you were a boil that had to be squeezed and drained out of the sales body. 

Ted understood that there are underperformers who can and will infect other sales team members.  His mistake was believing that all underperformers are the same and consequently they should all be treated the same—summarily get rid of them. 

The result of Ted’s one size fits all death penalty for being an underperformer was a sales team that feared him far more than they respected him.  It resulted in a sales region that was always short of team members–and short meeting quota.  And it resulted in an unhappy, unsatisfied, disgruntled manager.

The problem wasn’t that Ted sought to squeeze the boils and get rid of the poison before it could spread throughout the team.  The real problem was that he didn’t recognize that not all underperformers are boils.  Although all underperformers must be dealt with, not all are full of pus.

Over the years I’ve found that there are basically three kinds of underperformers:

Parasites: Parasites are those team members who are simply hangers on, sticking around because they’ve found something worth milking—salary, draw, benefits, whatever.  They have no intention of ever performing.  They may talk a good game.  They may use every trick they can think of to appear to be a contributing member of the sales team.  Bottom line is they’re going to take advantage of the ride as long as they possibly can—or until something better falls into their lap.

Destroyers:  Destroyers are the true pus filled boils Ted was fearful of.  Destroyers are usually, but not necessarily, underperformers.  You’ll find Destroyers bitching and moaning about how crappy a deal the company is giving the salespeople, how lousy the company’s products are, how unrealistic the sales quotas are, how the only reason that big producer always hits her numbers is because the manager gives her all the call-ins.  Destroyers intend to hurt the company.  They delight in destroying morale.  They find great pleasure in bringing another salesperson over to the Dark Side.

Slow Developers:  Slow Developers are as far removed from Parasites and Destroyers as you can get.  Slow Developers are sellers who have the potential and the desire to succeed but for whatever reason aren’t up to speed.  Maybe they lack the necessary skills such as listening, asking questions, or finding and connecting with quality prospects; maybe they need intensive individual coaching on how to apply what they’ve learned; or maybe they haven’t learned a reliable, effective sales process.  These are men and women who can become, and want to become, great producers but who need more time and attention to mature into the seller you want and need them to be.

Pus Filled Boils Will Kill Your Team
Ted was right to drain the pus from the sales team body.  One of the responsibilities of every manager is to protect the integrity of the company and the sales team. 

Parasites and Destroyers must be mercilessly eliminated immediately upon discovery.  There is no room in any organization for Parasites and Destroyers.  Mercy and compassion has no place in dealing with these men and women.  The idea that letting these folks go is in their best interests should play no role in the decision making.  Frankly, they’re not worth the concern, worry or loss of sleep.  They are sucking the blood from the team.  Why in the world would you lose sleep over letting someone go who is intentionally or even unintentionally destroying you?

In fact, if a manager allows any of these boils to stay that manager should be immediately fired; it is simply too serious, too damaging to the future of the company to allow the sales team to become poisoned, and if the manager won’t take care of his or her team, they are worse than the boils with which they refuse to deal.

Slow Developers Aren’t Boils
Treating Slow Developers in the same manner as Parasites and Destroyers is both morally wrong and a bad business decision.  I’m not saying that you cannot let a Slow Developer go.  You not only might have to let one go every once in awhile; I’m sure you will have to let some go.  But letting a Slow Developer go should be a last resort, not a first.

Obviously the first step in getting a Slow Developer up to speed is to figure out what’s missing.  Hopefully you’ve got a good idea already.  Enlisting the aid of a quality assessment tool would be a wise decision. 

After you’ve identified the area or areas that are keeping the Slow Developer from becoming a valued producer, sit down with him or her and work out a training/coaching/development action plan.  The plan should:

  • Have a realistic timeframe based on your sales cycle and the specific areas to be developed.  Too short a timeframe and you’re not giving the salesperson a realistic opportunity, too long a timeframe encourages a lax attitude and performance
  • The plan must be based on objective, measurable actions, not generalities or mushy goals.  Instead of a goal to “increase daily cold call dials,” put a definite number on it such as “make a minimum of 75 cold call dials per day.”  Instead of a goal of “increasing line items per order,” set a specific goal such as “average 8 line items per order.” 
  • Progress must be monitored with frequent review sessions and specific, measurable progress landmarks.  Reviews should be set frequently enough to make sure the salesperson is staying on track, as well as to identify problems and make necessary adjustments. 
  • The action plan must specify the specific training and/or coaching, as well as who is responsible for the training and coaching and when it will take place.  Leave nothing to chance or some iffy future scheduling.  On the other hand, use common sense when some part of the action plan needs to be changed or rescheduled.
  • The action plan must have a specific outcome:  either the salesperson has met the action plan goals or they will be separated from the company. 

Slow Developers can become some of your sales team’s most reliable producers if given the chance and help in developing their potential.  Although it takes a commitment of time and resources, it is cheaper to cultivate your Slow Developers than to hire a replacement and you have a moral responsibility to work with those salespeople you’ve hired who have the desire and potential to grow into quality producers.

Like Ted, you must drain the pus out of your team before it infects the entire body.  Unlike Ted, you have to recognize that not every underperforming salesperson is a boil on your sales team’s butt.  Unfortunately the most common problem companies have isn’t an overzealous Ted but rather a sales manager who takes the easy route and simply allows the boils to fester and the Slow Developers to fade away out the door—often out of sales completely.

Sales management is a proactive position that, along with its rewards, on occasion requires some hard decisions be made and some unpleasant actions to be taken.  Squeezing boils isn’t pleasant.  Working with your Slow Developers is hard work.  If you’re not willing to take on both, you don’t deserve to retain your job.  If you’re on top of both, you’re in an elite class of managers.  If you haven’t recognized the need to deal with your underperformers, take them on.  It won’t be fun or easy but you’ll shortly find your team’s morale and production increase and your team easier and more pleasant to manage.

September 14, 2010

Making the Sales World a Little Smaller and a Lot More Valuable

Filed under: career development,Leadership,management,sales,Sales Management,Sales Resources,sales training,selling,team development — Paul McCord @ 8:12 am
Tags: , , ,

Sales 2.0 … Networking online … Standing out …  Crystal clear messaging … global business.  So many ways to reach out to prospects and clients and so many pitfalls.  So little time to assimilate the very best practices.

What’s a busy sales professional to do?

Glad you asked. Just this week a dynamic, exciting new (and free) international sales community launched. I’m participating in Top Sales World because it provides the very best support from people like me who are out to help busy people like you achieve greater selling results while deriving greater reward and satisfaction from your own efforts.

We all want to get better what we do. Top Sales World brings together top gurus in the United States and other countries who provide unparalleled information in the form of how-to-guides, one-on-one advice, webinars, articles and much more. Get help on a specific problem. Learn to focus on your goals on a daily basis. See the latest trends. Read about the latest Sales AllStar or Featured Contributor.

Top Sales World evolved from Top Sales Experts and incorporates regular webinars  on everything from “Sales 2.0 and Selling to Big Companies” to “How the Most Successful Companies Develop Their Sales Teams” to “Turn Your Connections into Cash” and “Elevator Speeches that Sing” and “The Dynamic Value Proposition.”

Each event gives you top information and tips you can put to use immediately. Download each presentation  from Top Sales World when it suits your timeframe.

Better yet, new, live webinars are taking place all the time.  On Sept. 16, join Wendy Weiss, the Queen of Cold Calling, for “Cold Calling 2010: What’s Working Today?” Dr. Tony Alessandra presents on “What Exactly is Collaborative Selling” on Sept. 21.  A panel of experts shares “How to Stride into the Final Quarter and Finish the Year Strongly” on Sept. 28.

What’s not to like? I strongly recommend you visit Top Sales World and see for yourself.

September 8, 2010

Guest Article: “Do You Need a Sales–Consultant, -Coach, or -Trainer?” by Christian Maurer

Filed under: Coaching,management,Sales Management,sales training,team development — Paul McCord @ 10:35 am
Tags: , , ,

This is the first time I’ve had the chance to feature an article by my friend Christian Maurer.  Be advised that English is not Christian’s first language–so if a sentence comes across as a little awkward, live with it.  His oral and written English is better than most of us native speakers.

——————————————————————————————–

Do You Need a Sales-Consultant, -Coach or -Trainer?
by Christian Marurer

Is this differentiation necessary when you are looking for help with your initiative to increase sales productivity?

The fact that all three terms are listed on many LinkedIn profiles (mine included) can mean two things. Either, it suggests that the terms are taken as interchangeable and listing them all gives a higher chance to be found depending of the preferred term used by those seeking help. Or, these are three different roles.

I believe these are different roles needed for different phases in your initiative. I have listed them on my profile to indicate that I can assume all three roles.

Consultants
have a deep knowledge of their field. They have tools to diagnose the root causes of sales productivity problems. Based on the diagnosis, they can then design a therapy plan how to eliminate the detected inhibitors for higher sales productivity. They have a methodology how to do this. The therapy plans are based on modules that can be mixed and matched, extended or contracted depending on the diagnosis. Only few sales consultants stop their service offering at this level. Most of them will then also help with the execution of the therapy plan. They will then take on the roles of trainers and coaches.

Consultants are best engaged early in the initiative or when derailed initiatives need to be brought back on course.

Consultants can even help you deciding whether an initiative is needed or not. In this case, both parties must understand that the diagnosis is a free standing separately billable item and that the engagement might end after the diagnosis phase.

It might also be advisable to consider the development of the therapy plan as a separately payable free standing engagement. The customer then has a higher guarantee that the consultant is not just trying to peddle his/her teaching and coaching services and will recommend third parties if this improves the execution of the plan.

The term consultant is also used for people giving you advise how to implement a prepackaged methodology , process or piece of software to improve sales productivity. Their diagnostics are geared to confirm the fit between their solution and a problem. Getting help from this type of consultants in early phases of an initiative bears the risk, that they might see every problem as a “nail”, because the only tool they have is a “hammer” (their particular offering).

Trainers
have internalized a body of knowledge (best practices) how to improve sales efficiency and/or effectiveness. They transfer their knowledge to their trainees through lecturing, case studies, tests and practical exercises. They do this in classrooms, interactive web based sessions or a blended combination which might also include self paced learning modules. They have their own intellectual property (body of knowledge) or are certified to use the material proprietary to a third party.

Organizations not wanting to use consultants to carry out a diagnosis to help shape their initiative and engaging trainers only and maybe consultants advising on the use of a particular solution, rely on a self diagnosis of the problems. They must accept that the cause for potential failure of the initiative is not always the training. It is as likely that the failure is caused by a superfluously carried out diagnosis or by jumping prematurely to conclusions.

Coaches
have an intimate knowledge what best practice behavior, leading to higher efficiency and/or effectiveness looks like. They observe those to be coached in real life situations or role plays or they review outputs (e.g. plans) and identify gaps between what they observe and best practice. They then advise the person to be coached what behavior changes are needed to get closer to best practice. Coaching is usually an iterative process. The coach will observe how well the advise is internalized and has improved behavior and will recommend further changes if gaps are still significant. This loop will be repeated until gaps have disappeared or have at least reached a tolerable level.

For a coach to be effective, there must be an agreement between the customer and the coach, what best practices had previously been taught and need reinforcement.

Using trainers who taught best practices as coaches,assures knowledge about the best practices to be reinforced. Knowing how to train best practices does though not mean automatically also knowing how to coach best practices. There is a difference in approach. Trainers used as coaches might also earlier come to the conclusion that gaps are so huge that refresher training or re-training is needed before coaching can be effective.

Conclusion
Distinguishing the three roles and understanding which role is needed when in a sales productivity improvement initiative and what the prerequisites are, gives a higher certainty for a successful outcome.

Within each role, there are though also variants to be considered. Ignoring these variants, might also cause the initiative not delivering the expected results.

When you seek help to improve sales productivity, do you make the distinction of roles?

How would you describe these roles?

Do you have experience on this topic you would like to share?

Christian Maurer is a consultant, coach and trainer, who helps B2B sales leaders, who admit performance problems of their organizations, to define and implement solutions based on new thinking. Christian works with Fortune 500 companies as well as with local and regional champions. He conducts business in German, English and French. He is  a frequent speaker in events organized by the Institute for Marketing and Retail of the University of St. Gallen , Switzerland and a member of the visiting faculty of ZfU International Business School in Thalwil, Switzerland.  Visit his blog.

August 10, 2010

Mark Twain Was Right–Numbers Lie

Filed under: hiring,management,recruiting/hiring,Sales Management,team development — Paul McCord @ 10:54 am
Tags: , , ,

I’m a numbers guy.  I break everything in sales and management down to numbers.  I know my numbers backwards and forwards, as I do those of my coaching clients.  I firmly believe that if you don’t know your numbers you can’t possibly make sound decisions about how to spend your time, where to find new business, where to invest your marketing dollars; and if you’re a sales leader, who to hire.

Even though I am a firm believer in numbers, I’ve noticed something of a distressing trend over the past couple of years—an emphasis on numbers to the point that intangibles are virtually ignored.  I see more and more books and hear more and more presentations arguing that numbers should determine every decision, that management and sales can be broken down to a numerical formula. 

I believe that is a huge mistake. 

Numbers are extremely important.  They can tell us a great deal about our company, our customers, our market, our product, and our selves.  They can point out strengths and weaknesses.  They can give us direction.  They can reveal great opportunities and help us avoid great pitfalls.

But as helpful as numbers can be, they ignore one critical factor about management and sales—we are selling to and managing human beings, not machines.  Unlike a machine, humans do things they’re not supposed to.  They don’t always act according to the numbers. 

I can think of no better example of numbers lying than the NFL draft.

Almost all football players are human (there are a few that I really do wonder about).  All the players who are considered for the NFL draft have a long history of playing the game—generally from grade school through at least a couple of years of college ball.  That history can span as many as 12 or more years.  That’s a long time, a lot of football games.

Over that span of years each player has developed habits and expectations.  Some have learned how to win; others how to lose.  Some have learned how to work within a team; others how to perform despite the team.  Some have learned their limitations; others have learned they have no limitations.

Almost all of the players who make the grade to be considered by the NFL come from winning teams.  They all are used to winning, but not all know how to win.  They all enjoy the perks of winning, but not all know the sacrifice required to be a winner.  They all expect to win, but not all are willing to pay the price to win.

They all have a set of numbers.

Those numbers become critical when they show up for the NFL Combine.  The combine is where numbers come to the forefront.  There are numbers for everything: height, weight, speed, agility, vertical jump, quickness.  The NFL has managed to quantify everything.  There are the numbers from the physical evaluations and the numbers from the mental and intelligence evaluation.  Everything is evaluated and every evaluation is put into a number.

The Combine has a tremendous influence on whether one gets drafted or not—and if they are drafted, in what round.  The difference is between tens of millions of dollars and zero dollars; between a career as a professional football player and just an ex-college football star.

Every year teams invest huge sums of money drafting players who blew out the numbers at the Combine; players that had the perfect combination of physical and mental scores, who outperformed all of their competition.  These are players who came from winning teams, who were stars in high school and college, who put fantastic numbers up at the Combine.  And who failed miserably in the NFL.  Who never started a game.  Who were out of the league within three or four years. Nevertheless, they are the ones who made tens of millions of dollars because they had good numbers.

Contrast that with the men who were drafted in a low round—or who weren’t drafted at all but were invited to someone’s training camp for a tryout—and ended up in the Hall of Fame.  These are men who came from winning college teams, who were stars in high school and college, who put up average or worse numbers at the Combine.  Indeed, these are the Combine also rans; the ones who made the early round draftees look good.

Every year the numbers lie.  Every year there are a ton of big number guys who bomb and a number of also rans who become NFL stars.

Sound familiar?  Recognize the same thing in your sales team?  If you’re like most sales leaders, you do.

What’s missing in the Combine evaluation of players?  The intangible.  How do you measure a winner?  How do you differentiate the players who play on a winning team from the player who is a winner? 

How do we recognize the intangible in a seller?  Will an assessment do it?  Can we spot it in a resume? 

We can certainly say what it isn’t. 

It isn’t personality or charisma.  We all have hired charismatic salespeople who flopped—and shy people who have become stars. 

Is it a commitment to hard work?  Nope.  We’ve all hired sellers who work hard all the way to the day we have to let them go.

Is it a sharp intellect?  Not at all.  We’ve all hired incredibly intelligent men and women who didn’t make it.

Is it a hunger for success?  I don’t think so.  Again, we’ve all hired people who desired success more than anything; yet failed.

Is it luck?  Again, no.  I know of some unbelievably “lucky” people who failed at every sales job they had.

Is it being at the right place at the right time?  Naw, it isn’t that either, as we’ve all seen two “equal” sellers go in different directions—one skyrockets while the other dies on the vine, both in the same “right place at the right time” market.

So, what is the intangible that takes the least likely to the top and leaves the shoo-in in the ditch?

I don’t know.  I do know I’m not going to find it in the numbers.

I’m still a numbers guy.  I’m still going to boil everything I can down to numbers.  I’m still going to be using numbers to help make decisions.  But I’m not going to take numbers as Gospel because I know they lie, they’re unreliable on their own. 

I’m looking for that intangible.  I know it exists because I see its reflection in too many salespeople.  If you find a way to discover its existence prior to hiring someone, please let me know.

July 1, 2010

7 Signs Your Sales Team Is In Trouble

Filed under: management,team development — Paul McCord @ 7:45 am
Tags: ,

We all want our sales teams to be happily and enthusiastically engaged in bringing in quality business.  We want to believe that our team has bought into the company vision, that most if not all team members are busting their butts to succeed and that we and the company are respected by all.

That’s what we hope for.  In fact, that’s not reality for a great many sales teams.  What’s the situation with your team? 

Here are 7 signs that indicate you may have serious problems within your team:

  1. Meetings start late because team members wander in when they want.  Is this a sign of a lack of discipline within the team or a sign that the team members don’t care?
  2. Meetings are manager monologues because team members only speak when forced.  Are team members afraid to voice their opinions?  Are they disassociated and don’t care?  Do they feel that their views won’t be seriously considered?  If any of these are the root cause, you’ve got serious problems to deal with.
  3. Your team experiences a significant decrease in sales in a stable or growing market.  A sudden and significant decline in sales in a stable or growing market demands immediate action—but not the shouting, the threats, and the demands for sales which are the actions most managers take.  Instead of ratcheting up the pressure, take a step back and dig for the root cause—which may very well be within management, not the team members.
  4. Cliques and rivalries within the team become more intense.  Small cliques and rivalries occur naturally in every group.  Although we might wish these things didn’t happen, it’s natural for some people to be drawn together while others are drawn into close relationships with other people.  Some individuals prefer to go it alone.  It’s also common for some individuals or groups to develop good natured rivalries with each other.   But when serious issues arise within the team, the cliques become more isolated and the rivalries become more intense, the backstabbing and blaming tends to be more open, and a feeling of hostility pervades the office.
  5. Conversations are short and business oriented only.  When your team members are “too busy” to speak with you other than when necessary but production isn’t increasing, you have issues to deal with.  Unless you are seeing real growth in production to accompany the too busy to talk claims, your team members are telling you they have such serious issues with you that they simply refuse to interact with you unless absolutely necessary.
  6. Team members show little or no respect for company rules and regulations.  As with #1 above, you may simply have chosen not to instill discipline in your team (you’re just asking for big problems down the road but many managers believe they’re making the workplace “fun” and “creative” by running a lunatic asylum).  More likely, you have a team in rebellion and that no longer cares what management thinks.
  7. You need an ice pick to chisel your way through the pack ice to get to your office.  Hard as it may be to believe, some managers don’t even recognize they have serious issues even when the ice in the office is so thick they can’t break through it no matter what.  If your office is coated in permafrost you have a dysfunctional sales team.

Problems don’t arise in the sales team from nowhere.  There is always a root cause—often more than a single cause.  From a dissatisfied, disruptive, corrosive salesperson to new restrictive office rules and regulations to changes in compensation to a dictatorial manager, there is always a catalyst.  But once the disease catches hold, time becomes its ally, making it increasingly more difficult to eradicate the longer it festers.

I’ve worked with sales leaders who have ignored the above signs.  Others have argued that these were nothing more than idiosyncrasies within their team.  In virtually every case they have eventually had to deal with a seriously dysfunctional sales team.

What about your team?  Are any of these signs beginning to appear?  If so, before you do anything, make a close examination searching for root causes.  But whatever you do, don’t ignore them as they become more destructive the longer and deeper they work their way into the heart of the sales team.

May 14, 2010

Guest Article: “Build a Sales Team Your Customers Love to Buy From,” by Colleen Francis

Filed under: management,sales,Sales Management,selling,team development,Uncategorized — Paul McCord @ 11:14 am
Tags: , , , ,

Build a Sales Team Your Customers Love to Buy From
by Colleen Francis

When customers enjoy working with you, you improve your chances of making a sale. Here are seven skills CEOs and business owners should insist on developing in their sales teams to create a more positive customer experience:

1. Show empathy and compassion

You have to care about your customer (no matter how good an actor you are, faking it won’t work). Ask questions, take notes and lean in to show that you’re engaged.

2. Make eye contact

Eye contact lets people know you’re interested in their well being. Make eye contact when you walk into a room full of strangers, and especially after you get to know people – it helps cement existing relationships. So few salespeople ever look their prospects directly in the eye. By simply smiling and making eye contact, you can set yourself apart.

3. Give first

Don’t expect prospects to give you their business without you giving them something first. This doesn’t mean that you should give away free product in the hopes they will buy more. Rather, look to give away things that increase your value. Perhaps they need a referral to a partner; perhaps you can solve their business problem by sharing an idea you heard from someone else.

4. Express your true intent

Tell customers upfront: “I don’t know if there’s a fit between what you need and what I have right now, but I’m hoping we can explore that in more detail during this meeting. Then we can mutually decide if there is a reason to move forward.” This advice runs counter to 90% of the approaches used in the field today, but you’ll be pleasantly surprised by the response you get.

5. Don’t rush the client

All too often, salespeople jump way ahead of their prospect’s buying curve. When the sales person is trying to close while the prospect is still evaluating options or determining risk, trust is broken, the prospect feels pushed and the sale can disappear. Get approval from the customer to move ahead in increasing increments. The first approval might be just to agree to speak openly with each other, as outlined above. The second could be an agreement on a follow-up call or meeting date. The third might be gaining agreement on the decision-making criteria, then a commitment to have the “big boss” present at the demo, followed by an agreement to a purchase decision date.

6. Be colloquial

When you use simple language, people respond better and trust you more. Never try to impress prospects with your extensive vocabulary – you may end up just sounding fake.

7. Use people’s names – in good measure

There are just two rules to follow. First, be aware of whether your client is most comfortable with first name only or title plus last name. Second, never overuse their name – this only sounds corny and false. Although Dale Carnegie said, “nothing is so beautiful to a person as the sound of their own name,” you have to use your discretion.

Selling is about results! As the President and founder of Engage Selling Solutions, Colleen Francis has succeed in building Engage from an idea to company that delivers focused, customized programs to 100′s of sales teams internationally. Companies such as Semiconductor Insights, General Dynamics, Future Electronics and the Government of Canada have improved their sales processes by implementing Engage’s Selling System.

May 7, 2010

Guest Article: “Nine Barriers to Coaching a Sales Team,” by Keith Rosen

Filed under: Coaching,management,sales,Sales Management,selling,team development,Uncategorized — Paul McCord @ 7:21 am
Tags: , , , ,

Nine Barriers to Coaching a Sales Team
by Keith Rosen

For any executive sales coaching initiative to be effective and long-lasting, there are important obstacles that a manager or internal sales coach needs to address.

Barrier One: No Coach the Coach Program

One of my clients recently called me with questions about building an internal coaching program. It seems the person who was spearheading the initiative was having a difficult time putting the processes and procedures together as well as getting the managers to embrace the new philosophy and approach. Since the company felt they could build the internal coaching program on their own, they didn’t hire an outside expert or consultant. The person in charge of the initiative wasn’t even a coach but someone in HR. Without a coach training program to develop coaching skills and competencies, you can change your managers’ titles, but not their essence, their thinking, or their skills.

Barrier Two: Coaching Is a Choice—Not an Obligation

The coaching relationship is a choice, not an obligation. The relationship between the coach and the people who are coached is a designed alliance, a collaborative partnership, and more. As such, remedial or sanctioned coaching is often met with resistance rather than with open arms. How is coaching being offered to your team or to your employees? As a perk, an incentive, an option, an obligation, or a remedial response to under performance? Are you offering it to your entire team, to a select few, or to just one person?

Barrier Three: Surrender Your Agenda When Coaching

What if your boss walked up to you today and said, “Your career, your bonus, your position in this company, and your salary will depend on how well your team performs. That said, I want you to start coaching all the people on your team, one on one. Hold them accountable and be unconditionally supportive, while surrendering your agenda and maintaining objectivity.” Could you do it?

My clients consist of a myriad of companies and professions, all shapes and sizes, selling products and services in practically every industry and profession. Yet, the one truth I share with them is this: “When you work with me as your coach, this will be the only relationship you have where it will always be 100 percent about you.”

If you’re an internal coach, this may be a stretch to fully surrender any agenda or attachment to your sales team’s performance, especially since their performance directly reflects on you. In such cases, there’s an inherent challenge for you, as the business owner or manager, to separate your agenda from theirs and have no personal expectation from the relationship other than your unconditional commitment to their continued growth and success. It’s going to take some adjustment on your part to develop an unconditional and authentic relationship with your salespeople.

Barrier Four: You’re Coaching People, not Changing People

There’s a big difference between coaching people and changing people. However, for executives or front line managers who are commissioned to hit some aggressive sales numbers, coaching is the last thing they want to talk about. The real distinction is that coaching is a process of discovery. A coach cannot push for results or attempt to change people overnight. The traditional scenario to facilitate change is typically a stressed-out manager who lays the same stress on his salespeople that his boss dumped on him. “Work harder; get focused; our jobs can be on the line; just bring in some more business.” This hollow approach seldom drives change.

Barrier Five: Connection—It Has to Be the Real Thing

In coaching it’s critical for unrestricted, honest communication in the coaching relationship. It’s extremely challenging to connect with your salespeople at a deeper level, the type of connection necessary between the coach and the person being coached. Many employees are afraid that if they disclose too much, it will be held against them in the future. So they limit their vulnerability level to what is absolutely needed to perform their job function. This restricts safe and open communication, limiting the chance to connect with your people in a way that allows coaches to get to the real issues and barriers;—barriers that are preventing improved performance.

Barrier Six: Confidentiality and No Judgment? Sure, Boss!

Lets get right to what you’re thinking. Your role as supervisor or boss presents some inherent problems with coaching that need to be addressed head on.

Given the parameters, guidelines, and principles necessary to be a masterful coach, trust is critical to make the connection. After all, if your employees can’t trust you as their manager, forget even trying to coach them. Coaching requires an elevated level of trust that transcends the superficial trust between employees and management.

And what if some of your salespeople already have a problem with you as their boss and now you’re going to try and coach them? How does that get handled? Do you think any of your employees are going to just come out and say that? Think again.

As a result, this relationship could quickly turn into more of a mentoring rather than a coaching relationship. This is a major reason why companies bring in an expert coach from the outside who doesn’t have any direct ties to the company as a manager would.

Barrier Seven: Anyone Can Manage, Not Everyone Can Coach

“I’m really not cut out to be a coach.” The hard fact is there are managers who want to be coaches, managers who need to be coaches, and managers who shouldn’t be coaches, and probably shouldn’t be managers, either.

Companies that force all managers into a coaching role make a costly assumption that all of their managers would actually make great coaches, just like every college athlete should automatically make the pros. The rules work the same. Desire, attitude, ability, and skill will always be the formula for becoming a successful coach, or athlete. Then there is the mistake of pushing managers to do something they don’t want to do. Managers can easily sabotage their own coaching efforts, and in the end, corporate may learn the wrong lesson: “I guess our internal coaching program didn’t work.”

Barrier Eight: Full Accountability

If you want to become powerful, hire a powerful coach. It’s a simple, yet highly effective strategy. If you want your salespeople to be powerful, you need to be a good role model for them. As you evolve, so does your team. Consider this truth: Your team is a reflection of you. If you’re not prepared to be 100 percent accountable for the success and failure of your team, if you skirt accountability in any way, if you lack professionalism or proficiencies in certain areas, your team will reflect these weaknesses. If you choose to evolve, so will your salespeople. If you want a world-class sales team, you have to become a world-class executive sales coach.

Barrier Nine: Competitive Managers

The most effective leaders develop other leaders. They encourage their people to perform as well as they do—even better. That is the sign of a true master and the real testament of a great manager. But what if the manager perceives his coworkers and subordinates as a threat? What if the manager is driven strictly by ego, the need to prove himself and his worth? What if this manager thinks he has survived only by keeping a competitive distance from his peers and salespeople? I’ve known managers who don’t share their tools and best practices with their salespeople for fear their salespeople will outdo them. These are likely to be inferior managers who will seek to selfishly leverage the coaching relationship in a way to better themselves and their position rather than for the betterment of their sales team.

Now that we’ve listed the barriers that can get in the way of implementing an effective internal coaching program, do not be disheartened. With greater awareness comes choice. The good news is, you possess the power to make a difference.

Keith Rosen is the executive sales coach that top managers, sales professionals and executives in many of the world’s leading companies call first. As a prominent, engaging speaker, Master Coach and well-known author of many books and articles, Keith is one of the foremost authorities on assisting people in achieving positive, measurable change in their attitude, in their behavior and in their results.  Visit his website

April 21, 2010

Is This How You “Discipline” Your Sales Team?

Filed under: sales,Sales Management,Sales Meetings,selling,team development,Uncategorized — Paul McCord @ 10:14 am
Tags: , , , , , ,

A couple of weeks ago I wrote a post on why sales meetings are a waste of time.  My complaint about most sales meeting is they waste the sales team’s time because most managers don’t really have a good reason for holding the meeting and even when they do, so few managers thoroughly prepare for the meeting so that it runs smoothly, have value for the attendees, and everyone gets out quickly.

I received many emails and calls from readers saying how much they appreciated the post—but I also received several letting me know that I really had no clue what to use sales meetings for.  Here is one sample:

“I agree with much of what you say but I cannot begin to tell you how disappointed I was with your article about sales meetings.  I don’t know of anyone in my company that would even begin to consider canceling a meeting just because we didn’t have time to prepare or because according to you we didn’t have a good reason to hold the meeting. 

First, our meetings are for more than just relaying company information or doing some light training.  We use them to help discipline our salespeople. 

We hold meetings every Monday and Friday morning at 8AM sharp and everyone must be in the meeting room on time or they get fined.  They show up on time, they pay attention, and they come prepared.  If they are late, if they are not prepared, or if they’re caught not paying attention, they’re fined. 

I can assure you that our sales team knows what’s expected and the consequences. 

Maybe you haven’t tried using it, but sales meetings are an excellent tool for instilling discipline in the troops, and discipline is critical in sales.  And they are here at the company’s pleasure; the company isn’t here at theirs.”

I might have thought this email was something of a joke, except I received a couple of more in a similar vein.  And before you guess that the manager who sent the email works in some high pressure, one-time close sweat shop, he doesn’t.  He is a manager for a mid-sized firm that sells a fairly sophisticated service to businesses in the healthcare industry.

Sales meetings as a discipline tool? 

Now, I’m not naïve; I know sales meetings are used by many managers as a tool to ensure salespeople show up on time and to try to keep them in line.  But the idea that there are people who believe it actually works is amazing to me, although I guess I really shouldn’t be   

The last line in the portion of the email I cited above is the key to understanding the management philosophy that would see sales meetings as a disciplinary tool—salespeople should be grateful the manger is gracious enough to let them come in and toil for the company.  Salespeople aren’t human beings, they are things, just as the copier is a thing, to be used to produce an end result and if they don’t, they’re tossed in the trash, just as the copier would be if it failed to live up to expectations. 

Is this a sales force problem or a management problem?

If the problem really is the salespeople (which I sincerely doubt), the root problem is that the company is hiring the wrong people.  If you have to drag people in the office twice a week to insure they get to work on time, if you have to fine your salespeople to get them to pay attention during a meeting, if you feel compelled to micro-manage your team members, there is a chance you have hired the wrong people.

Chances are great, however, that the root 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 issue. 

More to the point, managers who feel the need to discipline, who view salespeople as cogs in their sales machine, who must resort to fear and intimidation certainly aren’t sales leaders, but they aren’t managers either.  They are little despots who rule with an iron hand and who will likely face a general uprising within the ranks at some point.  Like any good despot, he or she will try force to put down the uprising and if that doesn’t work, resort to bribes and milk and honey.  With luck, they’ll put down the insurrection but will have learned nothing from the experience—other than they were just too soft, too nice, too accommodating.  The iron fist comes down even harder.

Sales leaders lead by example and by empowering their sales team members to excel, to thrive, to reach their goals.  They know and trust their team members, just as their team members trust them.  Discipline, fines, and cogs in the machine aren’t part of the sales leader’s world.

Sales meetings can be important not just for what they can do to help build and strengthen your sales team but what they can tell you about yourself as a manager.

What is the purpose of your sales meetings?  If you’re using them to insure your team members show up; if you’re having to threaten and fine because they don’t pay attention or come unprepared; if feel compelled to micro-manage, you need to examine not your team members but yourself because the deficiency is probably with you, not them.

April 16, 2010

Book Review: The Zero-Turnover Sales Force, by Doug McLeod

Filed under: Book Reviews,management,Sales Management,team development — Paul McCord @ 9:36 am
Tags: , , , , , ,

If you are looking for a purely objective review of The Zero-Turnover Sales Force: How to Maximize Revenue by Keeping Your Sales Team Intact
by Doug McLeod (AMACOM: 2010), this probably isn’t the review for you.  Seldom does one read a book and think “wow, I could have written this” because the author’s train of thought is so close to your own.  Well, Doug McLeod is apparently my long-lost identical twin.

The Zero-Turnover Sales Force doesn’t promise zero-turnover, of course, but it lays out a strategy to radically decrease turnover in the sales force to the point that it may be effectively zero-turnover. 

How does one go from a 20, 30, 40% or more turnover rate to almost none?  And what is turnover costing you? Eliminating turnover isn’t easy, says McLeod, but it can be done IF sales management and the CEO both buy into the appropriate actions that will eliminate the primary reasons salespeople leave.  And with a simple exercise he demonstrates just how much turnover is costing you and taking away from your bottom-line.

McLeod first addresses the underlying question: why salespeople leave.  He argues it isn’t money; it isn’t a lack of advancement opportunity; it isn’t a quest for change.  It’s—well, the way McLeod puts it is “they don’t quit the job, they quit YOU.”  Salespeople quit because management isn’t giving them what they need.  In other words, turnover isn’t salesperson induced, it’s management induced.

Not exactly what most of us managers want to hear.

The issue starts, according to McLeod, during the hiring process.  Management doesn’t probe to discover what the prospective seller is really looking for in a company or a sales position.  McLeod says we have to ask questions and keep asking until we have at least some idea of what the potential employee is looking for—and if we can meet their expectations.  It’s those unfulfilled expectations that ultimately lead to turnover.

Equally necessary and as likely not to happen is probing to find out why our salespeople leave us.  Seldom does a manager ask a seller who resigns why they’re leaving.  The why they leave is just as important as the why they start.

McLeod discusses what he calls “The 12 Assassins of Sales Force Stability” which are:

Weak Recruiting
Straight Commission
Cold Calling
Unfocused Training
Sales Meetings
Fuzzy Goals and Unrealistic Expectations
Inattention to Top Sellers
Hesitation and Impatience with Young Salespeople
Disorganized Ride-Alongs
Unrest in the Trenches
Time as an Enemy
A Website That Doesn’t Sell

I’m sure that you’ll agree with some factors on the list, maybe question others, and adamantly disagree with still others.  However, before taking exception to any of the factors McLeod identifies, I’d encourage you to grab a copy of The Zero-Turnover Sales Force and listen to his arguments because he lays out a case that can be well argued and defended.  Most of us, however, will have experienced for ourselves the deadly impact of many, if not all, of these issues on salespeople.

And McLeod’s solutions?

The solutions to most of the issues are contained within the issue themselves.  Unfocused training demands an analysis of the training the manager and company provide and revamping it to make sure it is both focused on real needs and is consistent with sales process of the company.  Disorganized ride-alongs require the manager carefully plan each ride-along and utilize the time wisely.  Cold calling demands that the company find more effective and productive ways for the sales team to find and connect with quality prospects.

With each issue McLeod identifies the solution—change training from unfocused to focused—and gives specific action steps to take to make sure you’ve not only eliminated the problem but have turned it into a company positive.

You’ll never reach zero-turnover.  But you can radically reduce your turnover by recognizing where the real turnover issue lies—with the management team—and constructively and positively addressing and eliminating the management created issues.  McLeod shows you how to get on track to putting a ton of money back on your bottom-line.

The Zero-Turnover Sales Force: How to Maximize Revenue by Keeping Your Sales Team Intact

February 16, 2010

Hey, Sales Leader, How Are You Taking Care of Your Customers?

Filed under: Leadership,management,Sales Management,team development — Paul McCord @ 1:55 pm
Tags: ,

Over the years I’ve asked hundreds of sales leaders that question. 

The answers are enlightening.  Most of the time, the response I get is about how the sales leader participates in taking care of the company’s customers.  Every once in a while I get a response that takes a very different view of who the sales leader’s customer is and the conversation centers on how the sales leader addresses the wants and needs of upper management.

Once in a blue moon I have a sales leader who interprets the question to be about how he or she services the needs of their sales team.

As sales leaders shouldn’t our primary focus be on serving the needs of our primary customer—those sellers who look to us for guidance and support—the sellers who create our success or failure?  Why do so few sales leaders recognize their team members as customers to be served rather than servants to serve?

 I’ve heard many a sales leader make cracks about how lucky their salespeople are to have a job, how expendable and replaceable they are, or how underworked or overpaid there are.  I’ve also noticed how many companies have extremely high turnover within their sales team which is often attributed to just the nature of the beast.

 But maybe the high turnover is a result of poorly supported salespeople, of low morale, of undertrained sellers who are looking to move somewhere where management supports them, gives them the training and the tools they need to be successful, and where they feel wanted and respected.

Maybe some—maybe a lot–of the low performance, tardiness, lack of focus, and low drive within the sales team are our fault.  Maybe the way we treat our team members is reflected in their actions—or non-actions.

Certainly there are salespeople who no matter what we do will fail, who lack drive, who don’t have the discipline and desire to develop the necessary skills, who will whine and complain no matter what.  Those are the applicants we must do a better job of not hiring by learning to interview better and by using well designed assessments to help weed them out before they ever get hired.

But do those salespeople account for all of the frustration, failure, and underdeveloped skills we see in the sales team?  That certainly isn’t the case with most of these situations that I’ve seen over the years.

In fact, a good many of the team issues I’ve witnessed have emanated directly from management.  Most often when I find a situation where turnover is excessive, an inordinate number of salespeople are struggling with basic selling skills, and/or morale is low, the fault lies with the team’s managers.

Although some companies have excessive turnover and low morale by design (the churn and burn operations), many managers I speak to seem blind to their role in the situation. 

How can we effectively address this? 

To start with, it isn’t rocket science. 

Simply recognizing that the members of our sales team are our most immediate and important customers is a great start.  But recognizing that is one thing, managing as a servant is another.

Uh, oh.  That word servant probably isn’t sitting well with some.  But the definition of a servant is “a person working in the service of another” or “a person who labors or exerts himself for the benefit of another.”  Now certainly in common usage we think of a master/servant relationship where one is in mandatory servitude to the other.  That’s not my meaning here.  Servant here is more along the lines of a public servant, one who voluntarily does service for the betterment of the group.  Or to paraphrase Plato, you can’t be a good master if you aren’t a good servant.

What are our servant or customer service responsibilities to our sales team members?

Training:  We ask our team members to do a very difficult job—find and connect with quality prospects and then sell our goods or services to those prospects.  For many sales teams, if they aren’t successful in making sales, they don’t eat.  Even for those who are supported with a salary, in most instances the salary is designed to be only a percentage of their income.  We’re asking these men and women to make a very real investment in the company with the expectation of earning an income that will justify that investment.  We must justify their investment by giving them the training they need to be successful.  Whether through in-house personnel or from outside trainers, every member of the sales team deserves to be given proper training.  Anything less is dereliction of our duty to them.

Coaching:  Training without coaching is a waste of time and money.  The information salespeople get from training must be turned into action.  Turning information into action requires not only implementing the necessary actions but also working through the missteps and overcoming the problems encountered during the implementation stage.  In other words, coaching– and few salespeople are capable of coaching themselves to success.  Again, whether the coaching comes from an in-house coach or from outside the company, giving them real world guidance and feedback as they learn to turn training into action is paramount to helping our team members become successful sellers.

Support:   The members of our team expect and deserve more from us besides training and coaching—they expect us to be their go-between with senior management, to fight and advocate for them when necessary, to hold them accountable for their actions, and to demand the best from them at all times.  Unfortunately, some sales leaders offer little support of any kind yet still expect their team to produce results.  Most sellers seek only to be treated fairly and with respect.  If we as leaders can’t do that, we have no business in a leadership position.

Our job as sales leaders is to nurture and grow out sales team.  Our company depends on us getting the most from our team members.  In order to accomplish that task we must recognize our customer service–that is servant–responsibilities to our team members and work for their success because it is by demonstrating our servant-ability that we earn our leadership position.

« Previous Page — Next Page »

Theme: Rubric. Blog at WordPress.com.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 4,396 other followers