Home / Archive by category "Play to Win"

4 Company Culture “Must Haves” to Create a Great Sales Process0

The Pipeline Guest Post – Jon Birdsong

A great sales process does not start with fancy workflows and flawless forecasts. Forging a thriving sales process starts with something more integral to the organization: the company’s DNA. Make no mistake, company culture cultivates machine-like sales processes. When it’s done right, the result is admirable and motivating.

The past two years have exposed the Rivalry team to a variety of sales processes and sales cultures. Some are amazing. In certain companies, salespeople enjoy going to work, making progress on their goals, and achieving measurable results. In others, salespeople dread work, make no real advancements in personal or professional improvement, and lost when it comes to goal achievement.

We’ve found consistent patterns in company cultures that foster efficient sales processes efficiency. The following are 4 company culture “must-have’s” to create a great sales process.

Coach Like Phil Jackson – it’s indisputable Phil Jackson has the best profile picture on Twitter. Sales organizations who place a high priority on improving the salesperson’s skills have a significant advantage over the average company. Determining the priority of coaching in your organization is easy: how many hours a day/week does your VP of Sales spend coaching. Sales process Yoda and HubSpot’s VP of Sales wrote an excellent piece on 4 Steps to Metric-Driven Coaching.

Hire Like You’re Donald Trump – watch The Apprentice for one season and it becomes clear the value Donald Trump places on his open job positions. Episode after episode, one ambitious contestant is “fired,” leaving them with nothing but a lonely cab ride home. Intimidating potential hires like Donald may not be necessary, but maintaining high standards for new hires is essential to building a sales team. Insider tip: put new hires through your own hiring process and make sure each one fits with the core values of the company.

Mandate CRM Data-Entry – if you want to be a hard-ass, now is the time . We have not come across one, thriving sales organization that does not have the “if it’s not in Salesforce.com, it didn’t happen” mandate. The secret to making this mandate become the salesperson’s best friend is positioning the “why.” Insider tip: hopefully you’ve built trust with your team, if so, then it is important to communicate that entering data in the CRM helps identify their weakness and places focus on areas where you can coach them to improve.

Foster Friendly Competition: – some people are naturally gifted in sales, others work their tail off, and the rest find a new industry. Producing an environment where certain benchmarks and goals are transparent to the sales organization creates peer-pressure and group requirements. These are good. It sets the standard and focuses attention on who is the best. A great sales culture has an easy way to monitor monthly, weekly, and daily progress, so each sales reps know where they stand and more importantly how to improve their standards.

About Jon Birdsong

Jon Birdsong is the CEO of Rivalry, a sales process management company. You can find him on Twitter and Google +.

Sales Leaders – Manage Your 50% Minority5

by Tibor Shanto – tibor.shanto@sellbetter.ca

In the past I have written about the propensity of sales leaders to accept and live with the Pareto Principle, the 80/20 rule. For example, 20% of your reps deliver 80% of your revenues, I know one team with 9 reps, where 2 sellers are responsible for 71% of the revenue. At one time, in the Shanto Principle I asked the question what if organizations could move the dial to 70/30, what would the impact be?

Companies continue to struggle with this reality, in many instances the 80/20 looks more like this:

20% – Top of the pack, consistently successful, adaptive and responsive to market movements, often spearheading the change in sales that are required to keep and win more business.
55% – Steady players, not always winning, or delivering 100% of plan, but put in a steady (just enough) effort to be in the 70% – 90% of plan zone. Room to improve, but bad enough to fire (although you have to wonder).
25% – Perennial underachievers. Steadily underperforming, while you don’t invest time in them, they are still part of the team. While you know you should fire them, you give in to the voice that says they are better than nothing, while I look for a replacement.

You may think that the above is a variation on the traditional A, B, and C player model, many do, which is a mistake.

I strongly suggest that you look at it more like:

A Players – The top 20%, Group 1

B Players – The top half of the 55%, Group 2

C Players – The bottom half of the 55%, Group 2 X Players – The bottom 25%, Group 3

I have always argued that leaders should focus their time and attention to the A players, show the most love to those you want to lose least. Show no time or attention to the C Players; the lack of attention clearly communicates that they either need to adopt and contribute, make their way up to B status, in order to get attention, or move on to organizations. The B’s need to be put on a path to achieve A status. NOTE: this is once the sales rep has been on-boarded, trained on your systems, and integrated into the process. This could be as little as three months, or as long as a year, but there does come a point where they need to deliver on their own. I still stand by this, but have ratcheted things up a bit, by encouraging you to not waste time, resources or emotion or keep that bottom 25%, the X Players. Rather than pretending that they are C players, suggesting some hope, when in fact they are a toxic waste in your sales organization, meaning you have to dump them ASAP.

Accepting the Status Quo, (yes, we do it too), is riskier than many sales leaders want to pretend, and here is why. Any way you slice it, the majority of the sales team is missing quota. It is true that more sales teams collectively are making quota, even while most individual contributors are not. What is the take away for those on the team who continuously are missing targets? Sales teams are like any other collective of people, there is a perception of majority rule, and if the majority is not making quota, then that soon becomes the norm. Not something sales leaders should encourage or tolerate, but by not acting quickly and strongly to end that, it soon becomes the norm, and worse.

If more than 50% of the team is not making quota, rationalizing becomes easy; “it’s not me, it’s the product”, “it’s the price”, “it’s the whatever”. “After all, look at all the people who are also in the same boat, it can’t be me”. Those few that are making quota, well they become the anomaly, the pack will stick together to comfort their own, and ostracise the others.

One of the top priorities of a sales leader, and their managers, has to be to ensure that at the minimum, more than half of the team exceeds their quota. This needs to be done across the whole organization, and by each front line manager locally with their teams; having a patch quilt of teams that do and don’t is not acceptable. While ultimately we want everyone to make their goal, this is a start; 50% plus of each team, and 50% plus of the whole organization.

How do you do that, a simple upward rotation is a good start. Not only do you heavily reward success, you simultaneously punish failure. Start with the of 10% rule, every year fire the bottom 10% of each team, not just the entire sales organization, but on each team managed by a front line manager; and if they have two teams, fire the bottom 10% from each team. Many are often reluctant to do this, telling me they can’t afford to have a vacant territory, if you ask me, the opposite is true, you can’t afford having territories run by these X Players. You can’t afford having your clients be attended to by these X Players. By the way, you don’t have to wait for the end of the year. If they are not executing the activities required to win, it will not take a year to realize things. One company I know fires those who are in the bottom 10% three months running. They are transactional, and can tell early, you may need to wait the year, or not. You just need to ensure that the period you choose allows for slumps and temporary factors that you can address and correct.

As this pruning takes place, especially as it becomes the declared policy, you’ll find that those in the middle of the pack begin to self-correct and do things that drive them ahead, realizing that as the bottom is lopped off, they either move higher or face being the next to go. This upward rotation pays dividends across the team, the C’s and B’s begin to move up, and the A’s realize they have company, and their personality trait kicks in, and they improve their game to maintain the gap with the B’s. Lifting your results to higher and higher levels. You may even find after a few years of this approach that you do more with less players; alternatively, expand products and markets with a more qualified and talented team.

Once you get to where more than 50% of the organization is making goal, the dynamic switches. Rather than people rationalizing why they are not making quota, after all those who are not are now in the minority, people look for ways to make and exceed quota, and begin to share their best practices. Majority rule! If you do find yourself in an enviable position where all you reps are making or exceeding goals, may still be a viable way of ensuring continuous improvement and growth.

This may seem a harsh route, but as leaders, that’s why we get the big bucks, for big decisions and big differences. Any way you look at it, it will never be as harsh as having to explain the alternative to the executive committee.

What’s in Your Pipeline?
Tibor Shanto

You Do It Now – They Can Talk Later – Sales eXchange 2010

By Tibor Shanto – tibor.shanto@sellbetter.ca

Last Wednesday May 15th, I had the opportunity to be on the Charles Adler show. We look at the potential fallacies in long term predictions, this on the heels of a piece I did for the Globe and Mail Report on Small Business, regarding the need for execution in sales, not long term predications, and the fact that in BC, the elections did produce a majority government, but not by the party everyone was “predicting” would form the government.

Have a short listen, then let us know how you’ve found action and results to be of more value than predictions.

What’s in Your Pipeline?
Tibor Shanto

Stop making sales predictions and start executing0

by Tibor Shanto – tibor.shanto@sellbetter.ca

As some of you may be aware, I have a monthly column on the Globe and Mail’s, usually the third Tuesday of each month. These pieces are unique from what I usually post here on The Pipeline. I will post links to these posts as I think they will be of interest to regular readers of this blog. As always, I invite you to share and comment on the articles on the Globe and Mail site, here, or both.

Enjoy: Stop making sales predictions and start executing

What’s in Your Pipeline?
Tibor Shanto

Conditions Are Not Objections (#video)0

By Tibor Shanto – tibor.shanto@sellbetter.ca

In the heat of a sale, it is sometimes easy to confuse a condition to the sale with an objection. The key is to understand what you are really dealing with, and respond accordingly. Done right, it could solidify the sale and the resulting relationship with the buyer.

Take a look, then download the Objection Handling Handbook, and let me know your thought.

What’s in Your Pipeline?
Tibor Shanto

It Is Personal0

By Tibor Shanto – tibor.shanto@sellbetter.ca

One questionable piece of advice sellers are given is not to take “things personally”. While I understand the sentiment behind it, encouraging sellers to not go down a dark hole, there is something wrong with telling professional sales people, in fact professionals of any type, not to take it personally. The reality is that part of successful selling is conviction, not just in your ability to add value to the buyer, but and in how you sell. It is hard to have that and not be passionate about selling, and as soon as passion is involved, it also becomes personal.

Certainly there are parts of the sales cycle that you can remove yourself somewhat from the emotions of the sale, usually during the prospecting stage, especially if you are a proactive rather than a passive prospector. When you first reach out to a potential buyer they don’t know you from Adam, and the goal is to get them engaged. Initial rejections are more situational than directed; meaning that they are not rejecting you as an individual, but what you represent, an interruption. But as you get engaged and are working through the sale, you get more emotionally involved, things do become a lot more personal.

It is that emotional involvement that often allows you to go deep with a buyer. Passion and enthusiasm are contagious, and it’s something you want your buyers to catch. After all, we are constantly reminded that people buy on emotion, then rationalize their decision, so it only helps if you are going to connect with the buyer on that level as well.

A more workable and realistic goal is to understand that you do need to get involved on a number of levels, that it does get personal, and that you need to be able to deal with and manage the outcomes whether they go your way or not. The ability to step back, assess the circumstance, and move on to the next sale. No different than the expectation and practice in professional sport.

By assessing the outcome you achieve a number of positives that help with the personal aspect. First you can evaluate how well you did execute you plan and process and understand why perhaps you lost the deal. I say perhaps, because there isn’t always a clear answer all nicely wrapped, if the result of the assessment is ambiguous, you will still have to deal with the outcome and move on.

But if the analysis of the deal and outcome are not ambiguous, then you are in a great position to learn, both what you want to repeat and to accentuate moving forward, and what to avoid and improve. While this may not take away the sting of a lost deal, it does help you benefit in some way, cope, and have a reason to give it another go with your new insight.

It is very much the emotion we bring at sellers that helps us win deals where most all other things are equal. It is precisely then that you need to go deep, and leave yourself open to disappointment, and yes it does become personal precisely because of that; and given the opportunity I would advise you to get emotionally involved and deal with the outcome win or lose. After all, they only give you the advice about it not being personal when you lose, it seems they are OK with it being personal when you win.

What’s in Your Pipeline?
Tibor Shanto

What’s A Better Seller? – Sales eXchange 1990

By Tibor Shanto – tibor.shanto@sellbetter.ca

Last Wednesday I had the pleasure of discussing sales and selling with Charles Adler, Canada’s Boss of Talk. Charles had read my piece in the Globe and Mail on the difference between a blue-collar approach to selling and the white-collar approach. We explored other aspects of sales and successful people, take a listen, and let me know or Charles (@charlesadler), know what you think.

What’s in Your Pipeline?
Tibor Shanto

Can Technology Undermine Trust?14

By Tibor Shanto – tibor.shanto@sellbetter.ca

Had an interesting discussion with a rep Jim, last week around the area of trust. He works for smaller company, they use various technologies to help them with lead gen and nurturing. Two specific apps enable him to track who has opened his e-mails, and the other lets him know who has visited his company’s web site, right down to specific pages. As you can imagine, with the right content, laced with specific links, a seller can gain some great insights.

Having worked with the team, I know that they are diligent about avoiding and or removing objections. Jim was on the phone with a potential buyer who asked that Jim send him some info before committing to an appointment, Jim tried everything we put in our Objection Handling Handbook, but in the end had to send some info. As per the teams SOP, he only sends e-mail, chock full of links, and scheduled a follow up call to review. Over the next few days Jim saw the prospect read the e-mail, both in the office and on his mobile device. He saw the footprints on the website, hitting critical target pages, Jim was ready for the call back.

The Objection Handling Handbook, instructs sellers to continue taking away objections on call back, encouraging sellers to start the call by saying: “Hi Mr./Ms. Prospect, this is Jim calling back, following up on the information I promised to forward, you probably haven’t had a chance to read it, have you?” Thus taking wary the obvious and common dodge.

Feeling confident as a result of technology, Jim skipped the take away, and left himself open, and disappointment by asking the buyer if he had reviewed the e-mail, and letting the facts get in the way of process, he assumed the buyer would lead with the fact that he did read the note and visited the website.

Well guess what, yup, the buyer took a left turn and you know it, “Jim, I am up to my eyeballs in alligators, and just have not had a chance to get to it, leave it with me and I’ll get back with you as soon as I have”. Jim, got back and program and managed to secure a face to face appointment with the buyer, and the cycle is progressing.

Jim was upset for two reasons, one he could fix, specifically the approach and methodology. By executing the follow up call according to plan, regardless of whether he knew if the prospect had read his e-mail, or visited the desired pages on the company web site.

The second was a bit more problematic for Jim, while not being naïve, he was looking to establish trust with the buyer and felt that the buyer had undermined that opportunity. While he will continue to engage with the prospect, and will continue to be honest, straight forward and ethical with the buyer, he says he will always have a hint of doubt as to the integrity of what this buyer will tell him, and by extension other buyers.

In the end technology does not replace human interaction, and with any interaction there is some give and take. I pointed out to Jim that the buyer may have had some reasons for not being straight with Jim, including bad experiences with other sellers, perhaps looking to see what kind of rep Jim is, or any number of reasons. Trust is not instantaneous, it takes time and familiarity, which why I am surprised when some pundits talk about being able to establish trust right out of the gate, or even on a voice mail.

More importantly, technology is there to support the effort, not replace it, had Jim stuck to the program, he would have been able to respond to the situation more effectively, but he had painted himself into a corner, not the technology.

Having said that, it does raise the issue of how fragile trust is, and how easily it is undermined by technology. While the buyer may argue that they were being spied on, they should also be aware that there are no secrets on the internet, and any time you click a link, you have company.

What do you think of Jim’s dilemma, and whether technology can in fact undermine trust?

What’s in Your Pipeline?
Tibor Shanto

A Reactive and Bad Way to Deal with Objections (#video)1

By Tibor Shanto – tibor.shanto@sellbetter.ca

There are times when an objection is not what it seems, but by treating it as an objection we could inadvertently create a scenario and situation that is risky when it didn’t have to be. Often, prospects’ questions at critical points in the sale sound like objections, when they are just the buyer thinking out loud.

Sellers need to slow down, step back assess, then deal with the situation, statement in a way appropriate for that situation.

Take a look at what I mean. Then download the Objection Handling Handbook.

What’s in Your Pipeline
Tibor Shanto

Time To Grow Up – Sales eXchange 1980

By Tibor Shanto – tibor.shanto@sellbetter.ca

When my kids were young and they would wish for something not real, or as a way to avoid a task, like “I wish I didn’t have to clean my room”, “I wish I could grow up to be a princess”, their grandmother always responded by saying “If wishes were horses then beggars would ride”. It’s interesting how that expression has great significance and application to many sales people and sales advisors, all now grown-ups.

I am speaking specially of advice doled out by some sales pundits that serves more to placate and patronize readers than help them improve their selling skills and success, delivering clichés and politically correct feel good myth, instead of proven and practical road tested advice based on experience. While we all want to make our audience feel good, I think it is more important to provide pragmatic advice that yields measurable results, even when it requires effort on the part of the reader and will often force them from their comfort zones. I for one do not see a problem in challenging readers and sellers, and do not apologize for creating some discomfort in helping them succeed. Much better than some of the sugar coated buzzword riddled schmaltz others seem to be peddling in an effort to make sellers feel good and allow them to rationalize their lack of effort, inventiveness and results. But as we all know sugar highs don’t last.

If you are wondering why I am on about this, it’s because once again I have someone taking a shot at my often debated, never disproven voice mail technique, not because it doesn’t work, it does, but because it does not appeal to their “sensibilities”, a sensibility that leads to no returned calls. As usual the technique is misrepresented, making it easier to cast in a questionable light, they then schmear a load of subjectivity mixed with value judgment, and raising but not speaking to the specifics of words like “trust” or “ethics”.

The reality is that there are no absolutes in sales, nothing works all the time, every time, most things don’t work most the time, so when you have a technique that proves to be 30% – 50% effective, you have something worth adopting. What’s more, while the technique may seem counter intuitive at first, those who try it, report back a consistent success rate. Recently there was a debate in a LinkedIn group, there were many who questioned the technique, who once they tried it, liked it, mostly because it got them call backs and appointments.

Most recently, the technique was again misrepresented, and labeled asinine. I bet I can find some internal memos at most record companies dating back to 10 years ago that called iTunes an asinine way to sell and consume music. I bet there were some Blockbuster folks who called Netflix asinine. Interestingly few are willing to challenge it head on. One challenger was invited to debate the technique on “This Week In Sales” webcast, but declined, I wonder why; not the worst thing, I had the whole show to myself.

As an industry, “sales enablers”, we keep highlighting the fact that only 50% of B2B reps make quota, well what is our role in that? If we do not push them to better themselves by trying, new, alternative, and yes at times outlandish but effective methods. We should challenge our audience, not just dust off the edges of tired techniques that play to the emotion of the reader even while ignoring the fact that what is being peddled are just retreads with new labels.

In the end it is down to the reader, our consumer, they choose how they want to make or not make quota. In the end the readers are like we the pundits, some know what is Shinola, and what’s not.

What’s in Your Pipeline?
Tibor Shanto

1 2 3 … 9 Next »