COMMENTS
And just to add to that i believe you have them in the right order! I am amazed at the negative impact that an "ego" can have on a companies sales strategy - but we see it every day, quite often the egomaniac will try and disguise his ego as something else but in reality that is all it is. Good post!
Dave, I used your Sales Ghost worksheet in our last management/leadership class. Everyone calculated the cost of a turnover and the lowest number in class (out of 44 leaders) was $54,000....and that was a straight commission job!
@Frank - great point about the order!
@Karl - sounds about right - thanks for adding an impartial number to the cost of hiring mistakes!
People have a resistance to change. The desire not to change is masked by the misdirected strategy of blaming. It is easier for them to blame the pool of candidates that are available when they fail. They insist if the candidate has industry knowledge they will be successful. They feel it is the job of the sales manager to determine who is a good candidate.
Spot on Al!
Blaming and misdirecting is how they spin their decisions to ignore best practices and continue to maintain the status quo.
I would put Ego, Fear and Money in that order. Ego for reasons Dave and Frank stated, Fear of getting found out they are the problem and money is always the back stop.Because so few of todays CEO's have had a sales background they defer to the VP Sales and we join the merry go round of Ego Fear and Money. I had the assessment manager of a major HR consultancy who tried to diss the Predictive Validity of 95%, why? because he had never seen a figure that high even after reading the "proof" . He didn't understand or want to understand the difference between Predictive and Concurrent Validity -his ego had gone mad. I particularly like Dave's comment i.e. "Every company pays their worst performer far more than it would cost to get the right process" another Kurlan nugget put so succintly
@Ray - great example of fear and ego - thanks for contributing!
I will have a report ready in a few days addressing why people blame instead of making changes. Here are just a few comments you might hear. If it wasn’t for marketing my sales force could sell more. If we had a bigger budget we could attend more trade shows and my sales people could sell more. If we could lower our prices our sales people could sell more. What do you expect in this economy? Notice how the finger is pointed outward. Have you heard any of these reasons why it doesn’t make sense to evaluate the sales force?
Al's submission raises the unevitable question as to why these people are still in their jobs! Whatever are their bosses doing (unless they are the ultimate boss). It also confirms that when a CEO states his company is lean,mean with no fat they are seriously deluding themselves
Dave
I had a perfect example of your comments just last week. We conducted a salesforce overview for the CEO of a mid sized company late last year which led to the need to find a new Sales Manager. The CEO recruited using the Express Screen and the new sales manager started 2 weeks ago.
At my initial meeting with the CEO and new sales manager, the SM stated that he would be replacing a number of the current sales team but wouldn't be using OMG to screen candidates as he had always used McQuage to evaluate sales people. He also would be doing his own training instead of using us. I later met with the CEO and painted a picture for him of the path that he was once again on with a SM that was egocentric, and a total lack of accountability. The same path that he wanted to escape from when he engaged us.
To his credit the CEO recognised this and established new ground rules that the SM must follow, including the involvement of OMG irregardless of cost. Now it is just a matter of whether the CEO has the strength to stick with this path.
Ray, some of the time the C-Level executive level is not always aware of the real issues of their mid-level managers. I have observed upper management putting in long days and spending a good amount of their time in meetings or putting out fires and being reactive rather then proactive.
I had a conversation with a business owner and suggested he leave the office; go to the local coffee shop with just a pen and paper. He also had to leave his phone in the car. The purpose of his exercise was to get away from the daily activities of the office and just come up with three tasks that would be high performance tasks that would move his company in the right direction. When he returned to the office he was to only focus on the top one of the three and then the next and then the third. He was amazed at what he came up with and what he accomplished that day. Now, he does the exercise every day. In the process I got an assignment to hire two salespeople. Try the three item card system and let me know what the outcome is.
Al, what a great idea, thanks
Ray, you are welcome.Feel free to use it with your clients
Dave,
I love this blog post, not because you mentioned us, but because of the reasons. One year ago I wrote the following in our newsletter regarding talent. You'll see I use the word "discipline". I believe they are saying the same thing, but the word "ego" seems to be a better fit.
"Given the existing research that supports assessments for selection, it begs the question, ‘why aren’t more organizations using a scientific approach to identifying and acquiring talent?’ After visiting and having worked with quality, science based talent organizations, I’ve come to two conclusions:
1. Lack of discipline and naïveté are obstacles to building talent based companies
2. Not all assessments are created equal
Naïveté/Discipline
Never does one argue the need or desire to hire the best talent for the job, but still discussions are held as to the need for the proper “assessment” of talent. Personally, I used to be naïve enough to think third party assessment tools were not necessary, but my foray into sales management taught me differently. When turnover and productivity per person, impact your income and the company’s bottom line, it tends to get your attention. For those who believe and are committed to scientific assessments, the affect can be a decrease in sales turnover by 50% or more and an increase in sales production by more than 10%. Combined, the financial impact is significant.
When the nephew of a friend applies, do you have the discipline to stick to your model? When you are approaching the end of the quarter and objectives are not being met, do you have the discipline to stick to your model? When assessments eliminate the “can’t miss” applicant, do you have the discipline…? While there are always exceptions, the rule is to follow the plan. Develop a hiring model and have the discipline to follow it, and don’t forget to measure the outcomes!"
@Gary - great example of what weaker CEO's tend to do when strong (willed versus skilled) sales managers try to bully them! Nice work straightening things out by the way...
@Bill - great article. Thanks for sharing it here! You're right - I believe we are saying the same thing although Naïveté is a great addition to the list!