Sales Assessments vs Personality Assessments Episode III - The PHD's Strike Back

Posted by Dave Kurlan on Mon, Feb 02, 2009 @ 22:02 PM

Are PHD's more sensitive to criticism than the rest of us?

I heard from a few over the past week and they weren't happy with what I wrote here and here.  I rocked their world and they couldn't cope.

Their problem is that they're so brainwashed by what they'd learned about testing in school that they refuse to see something as obvious as the context for their questions and the relative limitations of their findings.  They simply don't understand that they can't predict how a salesperson will perform without understanding the dynamics of the challenge and asking questions which take place within a sales context.

Do you think a question like, "Would you rather build something or sit at a desk?" will help you predict sales success at any level?   I don't have a PHD, but I have been either selling, training, managing, developing, writing about, assessing or researching salespeople professionally for 35 years.  Who knows more about what makes a salesperson tick?  A PHD or me?  They just don't think that I should have the ability to develop professional assessments.  That's supposed to be their domain.

I have nothing against PHD's.  I have friends and colleagues who are PHD's.  We have resellers who are PHD's.  I have clients with PHD's.  I have a relative with a PHD.  I sit on a Board with a PHD.  It's just that the PHD's in the HR and testing arenas believe that you must be a PHD in order to develop, administer or deliver an assessment.  They become self-righteous about it.

Over the past 20 years, we've helped companies in more than 200 industries.  Of all assessments out there, the only one, which companies seem to rely on more than ours, is Caliper.  Caliper is probably the most reputable personality assessment.  If a client needs to assess a key employee who wasn't in a sales role and wants to know how they would fit into the culture, what they may or may not like and how their personality might help or hinder them, I would suggest that they use Caliper.

However, if I wanted to understand why their salespeople weren't selling as effectively as they should be, the kind of development which they might require, whether they were in the right role, whether they could execute my strategies, whether and how much they could improve, Caliper could not accurately provide that information.  I would use Objective Management Group's (OMG) sales assessment.

That explains why, in a sales recruiting scenario, when companies use both ours and theirs, we get the call that says, "How come Caliper likes this person and OMG doesn't recommend him?"  Or, "Why does Caliper say that he has strong Drive, but OMG says that he lacks Desire?"  Or, Why does Caliper say that one of his strengths is that he is social, but OMG says that his Need for Approval is a weakness?"  Or my favorite from a call last week, "Wow, now I can see the difference. You guys really go out on a limb, don't you!  You actually show what will happen to them in the field and explain why that will either help them succeed or cause them to fail."

The PHD's refer to their years of research, data and validation.  I go back to their inability to be predictive.  The disagreement is not likely to fade soon.

(c) Copyright 2009 Dave Kurlan

Topics: sales assessment, Dave Kurlan, sales, sales force evaluation, recruiting salespeople, sales evaluation, sales development, personality assessment

Exposed - Personality Tests Disguised as Sales Assessments

Posted by Dave Kurlan on Wed, Jan 28, 2009 @ 09:01 AM

Yesterday, I met with a long-time client who, in his previous company, used OMG's Assessments to identify what needed to change in order to double revenue from $30 million to $60 million.  In his new company, which is already about 12x that size, he wants to double revenue again.  He said, "I just wasted two years with the _____ Assessment."  The assessment to which he referred was a personality assessment marketed as a sales assessment.  It could have referred to any personality or behavioral-styles assessment.

Many people are not going to like this article.  I am about to expose the findings in personality-based and behavioral-based assessments which companies have been marketing as sales assessments for the last dozen years.

First, you'll need to read this piece, Personality Assessments for Sales - The Definitive Case Study.  Really, you need to read it first!

There isn't a tremendous difference between personality assessments and behavioral-styles assessments.  Popular behavioral-styles assessments, like the various versions of DISC, produce findings along four dimensions (categories) while some personality assessments, like those using the PF16 as their underlying instrument, can measure traits in as many as sixteen dimensions.

But Personality Assessments and Behavioral-Styles assessments are not predictive of sales performance.  They don't conduct Predictive Validity studies, as we do, because their assessments don't predict.  Instead, they conduct Construct Validity studies which only show to what extent an assessment measures a specific trait and not the traits about which you want to know, but the traits which they actually can measure.

Here's the problem.  Their marketing material usually says something like, "Salespeople must be able to Prospect, Question, Manage Objections and Close.  They must have Product Knowledge.  They must be accountable, have drive, be self-starters and be coachable."  You read those words and say, "Yes, yes. That is exactly what we need."  And the masquerade goes on.

As I wrote in the other article, personality-based sales assessments don't really measure what you need to know.  Instead, they report on what they can actually measure.  In the table below, I'll list some of the most common "findings" in personality and behavioral-styles tests (which are marketed as sales assessments), describe what is really being measured and compare those to what Objective Management Group (OMG) measures and reports.

 Finding  Measures  OMG Finding What OMG Actually Measures
Drive or achievement General need
to achieve 
Desire  How important it is to achieve success in sales  
Resilience  General ability
to cope with
adversity 
Bravery  The sales specific scenarios that will be problematic and the individual's ability to handle them 
Rejection   How the individual
reacts to
generally not
being accepted or
not having their
ideas accepted
 
Difficulty Recovering from Rejection   The impact that getting hung up on or getting a 'no' will have when they close have and how long it may take to recover. 
Emotions   emotional
steadiness 
Ability to Control Emotions  the likelihood that when a salesperson is caught off guard or in an uncomfortable situation they will panic and lose control of the sales call 
Sociable  how comfortable
they feel and how
appropriately they
behave in social
situations  
Bonding and
Rapport   
How quickly they develop relationships with their Prospects  
Confidence  whether they
are a confident
person  
Record
Collection 
The sales specific beliefs that support or sabotage their sales outcomes 
Coachable   whether they
are open to new
ideas 
Trainable  whether they have the incentive to improve their sales competencies 

These are just some of the most common findings.  Since OMG's Assessments are so sales-specific, there are literally dozens of findings covering everything which can possibly happen in sales including, but not limited, to prospecting, closing, qualifying, account management, farming, use of the sales process, ability to handle stalls, put-offs, objections, working remotely, growth potential, development needs and more.  What's most important to understand about assessments is that:

 

  • The personality tests' questions are asked in the context of social settings, not sales settings, so none of the findings are sales-specific.
  • Because personality assessments' findings are not sales-specific, they are not predictive.
  • Personality assessments are generally one-size-fits-all, without regard to your market, its challenges, your competition, your pricing, the resistance your salespeople will face, your compensation plan and how specific selling strengths and weaknesses will impact those conditions.
  • Assessments of your existing salespeople should be useful for development.  If you don't have sales-specific findings, you're only developing them as people, not salespeople.
  • How is OMG different?  Assessments are only a minor part of an effective sales force evaluation.  The most important part is to be able to learn:
    • What impact sales management is having on the salespeople,
    • Whether you've been hiring the right people,
    • Whether your sales force can execute your strategies,
    • Whether your systems and processes support the sales force,
    • How effective is your sales management,
    • If you can develop more of a sales culture,
    • Whether the salespeople can make a transition such as account manager types to hunters and closers; presenters and quoters to consultative sales types; transactional sale to a solution sale, etc.,
    • Who can be developed?,
    • If you're attempting to down-size or right-sales the sales force, who are the individuals with the abilities to help you do more with less?,
    • How much better can they get?,
    • What it will take?,
    • What would be the ROI on development,
    • Why you get the specific results you get,
    • What's the quality of your pipeline?,
    • Etc.
  • When used for Hiring and Selection, an assessment must be an accurate predictor of sales success for a particular sales role in your particular company, calling on your particular market, with its particular challenges and competition.  A personality assessment won't consistently identify the people who will succeed, but OMG's Assessment will, with its 95% Predictive Validity.  We can differentiate between Hirable (they meet our criteria and yours), Hirable - Ideal (they're hirable and will ramp up more quickly than normal), and Hirable - Perfect (they're hirable, ideal and meet additional customized criteria which match up with your most effective producers).

in summary, whether you're using a personality assessment, behavioral-styles assessment, psychological assessment, or psychometric (describes all of the above) assessment, it's the marketing that's sales-specific, not the findings.  Use them at your own risk.

(c) Copyright 2009 Dave Kurlan 

Click me

Topics: sales assessment, Dave Kurlan, sales force evaluation, Sales Candidate, sales evaluation, caliper, sales profile, 16PF, Trimetric, MySalesAssessment, SalesAssessment.com, SalesAssessmentTesting, SalesForceAssessments.com, SalesTestOnLine.com.com, personality test, personality assessment, DISC

Identify the Perfect Sales Candidate for your Sales Force

Posted by Dave Kurlan on Mon, Jan 26, 2009 @ 09:01 AM

Several years ago I wrote a White Paper that described both the original research as well as the ongoing research that drives our world-class, incredibly predictive, customizable sales specific candidate assessments.

When it comes to our assessments, we strive for excellence, by venturing wider and deeper than anyone else.  We can be aggressive for two reasons:

     1.  Sales Specific - Since it was built for sales we have the data points that other assessment companies don't have.

    2.  Accuracy - Our predictive validity is around 95% - unbelievably high for an assessment.

 

During 2008, we worked to make our sales candidate assessments even more customizable and predictive.   We already had hirable and not hirable recommendations but we wanted to go even further.

We introduced Hirable - Ideal based on this article.

And we introduced Hirable - Perfect based on our ability to identify exactly what would make a perfect salesperson for a particular company.  We have to evaluate the existing sales force first and there have to be bona fide top producers - salespeople who not only produce more revenue than the others, but who are also strong salespeople as evidenced by their assessment results.  Then we can identify the exact requirements for our assessment to filter and produce a perfect candidate.  Pretty Cool!

For one company, our custom settings will recommend perfect candidates that are as good as or better than 96% of their top producers.

For another company, our custom settings will recommend perfect candidates that are as good as or better than 90% of their top producers. 

So it was already pretty cool that we could recommend a salesperson who would end up in the top half of your sales force within a year.  And it got even cooler when we could recommend an ideal salesperson - one who would ramp up more quickly than normal.  And now I think it's super cool that we can even identify the candidate who will rise to #1!

(c) Copyright 2009 Dave Kurlan 

Topics: sales assessment, Dave Kurlan, sales recruiting, Sales Candidate, sales evaluation, sales profile

Personality Assessments for Sales - The Definitive Case Study

Posted by Dave Kurlan on Wed, Jan 14, 2009 @ 10:01 AM

Nearly two years ago, we began development of an exciting new way to evaluate Executive Management Teams.  We brainstormed, conducted surveys, performed research and identified 16 qualities which CEO's wanted their Executive Managers to possess, along with 9 Styles crucial to a Management Team's ability to grow their companies.  These Qualities and Styles are not presented in any other assessment on the market today.

Over a period of eighteen months, a team of PHD's, whose primary expertise is in testing, worked with us to map the formulas, measures and research of a very well-researched, personality instrument (the basis for many familiar personality tests) to our new Management Assessment.  When we were ready to have a small test group take the assessment, the results of round one were not impressive.  The scores were very inconsistent with the findings which we wanted to present.  I was extremely disappointed with our progress.

The project was escalated to two PHD's with even more expertise.  After six more months of understanding the findings which we wanted to provide and the formulas which they had in their "vault", the second round of testing yielded results which were no closer than in the first round.  We were failing to get accurate results, running out of patience and running out of time.

I've had many occasions to speak and write about how personality tests, behavioral-styles tests and psychometric tests (which are all very similar) differ from Objective Management Group's Sales Force Evaluations and Assessments.  As a matter of fact, you can read four such articles right here:

I always have said that personality tests, although they contain several elements which are important for sales, weren't built to predict sales success and, even when modified, can't go wide enough or deep enough to predict likely challenges or diagnose why salespeople get the results they get.  As a result, they cannot be used as development tools and they're very risky and inconsistent as hiring tools.

So, how did we come to go down this path where we were going to use a personality assessment as the instrument behind our new Management Assessment?  After all, weren't we being hypocritical?

We were convinced by a PHD/testing expert that the research existed to map to our findings.

Well, the research does exist, except their findings aren't the same as what we wanted to provide.  As with a sales assessment, they're identifying findings which they can measure (like emotional steadiness) and saying that they can provide a score for that.  Well, they can, except like nearly all findings from personality tests, the findings were out of context.  The questions have nothing to do with selling or managing, and someone, who might control their emotions quite well socially, might not be equally effective in a sales or business setting.  This example holds true over nearly every finding and the questions which they target to drive those findings.  And so, the findings which show up in most personality assessments are not necessarily what you need to know.  They are simply what these assessments are capable of measuring!

So back to the story.

We realized that we had gotten away from one of our core competencies - our ability to identify the right questions to uncover the data which would provide accurate, predictive, job-specific findings.  So, we wrote the questions, resumed the beta and went about the engineering required to complete the development of this very powerful, very different assessment.  As I reviewed the descriptors (the specific traits which we would "measure" to reveal our findings), I realized that over the last several months, the PHD's at the personality testing company had gradually and subtly modified the descriptors enough so that we too would report what they were capable of measuring, rather than what we wanted to measure.

Believe it or not, our in-house team was able to accomplish in about one week of intensive work, what the team of PHD's couldn't complete in the last year and a half!  Test answers in our third round appeared to be coming in exactly where they should have been and all questions were accurately driving the desired findings.  Exciting stuff!

So now, when I explain why a personality assessment (which wasn't built for sales), isn't predictive or sales-specific enough (even when modified for sales), I can now say that we have an eighteen-month research project which details, demonstrates and proves, once and for all, that a personality assessment doesn't measure much more than the various dimensions of personality or predict much more than some basic human behaviors.  They just don't measure the concrete, job-specific skills, competencies, capabilities and behaviors which we really need to understand about a salesperson's, sales manager's or Executive Manager's abilities.

Final Word - stay tuned for the March launch of what will be the most useful assessment to date for your Executive Management Team.  I think you'll love it as much as I do.

(c) Copyright 2009 Dave Kurlan


Click me

Topics: sales assessment, Dave Kurlan, sales evaluation, Management Assessment, personality test, personality assessment

Right Sales People in the Right Roles and the Right Seats

Posted by Dave Kurlan on Sun, Jan 11, 2009 @ 22:01 PM

I was on site at a client's last week to kick-off their training.  At the end of the kick-off I asked each salesperson for their three biggest lessons learned.  One salesperson had difficulty coming up with anything of substance.  It turned out that he was new to sales and when we assessed him two months earlier, our assessment indicated that he was not trainable.  The client wanted him in the program anyway because he had a hunch it would work out.  "Not trainable" manifests in different ways but usually has the same outcome - salespeople don't improve.

There were a number of other salespeople who weren't included in the program because the assessment indicated they weren't trainable either.  After the kick-off the client revealed that those salespeople were, as I predicted to him, relieved not to be included except for one who did want to take part.  The one?  The assessment indicated that this particular salesperson is trainable but the client did not want to include him.

Trainable salespeople behave differently than salespeople who are not trainable.  This provides a nice little glimpse into how they are different.  You can develop trainable salespeople but it's very difficult to develop those who aren't.  Trainable salespeople usually offer very little resistance to training and coaching efforts, while those who aren't trainable either don't care enough to participate, or they offer so much resistance that they ruin it for everyone.

By now you've read Jim Collins' book Good to Great.  The concept everyone takes away from the book is having the right people in the right seats.  With our assessment we not only have the ability to put the right salespeople in the right roles, but to put the right ones in the right training seats too.

(c) Copyright 2009 Dave Kurlan

Topics: sales competencies, sales assessment, Dave Kurlan, sales training, Sales Coaching, improve sales, sales evaluation, Good to Great, Jim Collins, sales profile

Tale of Two Assessments - Comparing Value

Posted by Dave Kurlan on Wed, Dec 17, 2008 @ 20:12 PM

A potential client wanted to know how Objective Management Group could justify the cost of a our license (unlimited candidate assessments for one year or until the specified number of salespeople are hired) versus what seemed at face value to be a lower cost for DISC assessments.

There are several factors here but they are all worth noting.

  1. Actual Use.  Using best practices, and by properly using the assessment, you would assess candidates as their resumes arrive using our simple automation process.  Our data shows that you would assess at least 20 candidates per hire.  Don't know where you would find 20 candidates per hire?  We provide more than just the use of a great tool; we also help you build a process that impacts the quantity and quality of the candidate pool.  If you follow our process the candidates will come!
  2. Predictive ValidityObjective Management Group's assessment was built for sales and is only used for sales.  As such it is highly predictive of on the job success with a predictive validity around 95%.  92% of the candidates we recommend that are hired move to the top half of their sales force within 12 months while 75% of those we don't recommend who get hired anyway (clients who are smarter than we are) fail within 6 months.  Behavioral Styles assessments (like DISC) are not predictive of on the job performance.  But suppose the DISC was predictive.  How much more predictive would our assessment have to be in order to justify a higher price? If we were only one candidate more predictive it would more than justify the difference.
  3. Case Histories.  More than one company has asked us to assess their top producers.  If they were applying for a job, our assessment would have recommended 90% of their top producers.
  4. Intended Use.  Behavioral Styles and personality assessments were designed to show how people are different.  That's essentially their purpose.  Today they show the different ways in which people communicate, and how they might behave in different scenarios, given their tendencies and traits.  Objective Management Group's assessment was built to predict sales success in your company and industry, selling into your market, against your competition, with your pricing strategy, expectations, sales cycle and challenges all factored in. Ours isn't a one size fits all sales assessment.  Could you imagine using the same selection criteria for selecting a route salesperson selling Leggs to convenience stores as well as a salesperson selling 6-figure custom designed capital solutions?  That's how DISC and others like them are used.
  5. Price Comparisons. - If one is to compare prices, it should be on the exact same assessment from different sources; comparing the price of DISC to the price of an OMG is like comparing the price of a Kia to the price of a Lexus!
  6. Summary. I'm biased. I developed OMG's assessments nearly twenty years ago and continue to enhance them to be more even more predictive with every passing month. What is the cost of a single sales hiring mistake? And what is the upside to getting it right by selecting a strong, successful salesperson - each and every time?  Use the right tool within the right process and you'll avoid the mistakes that most companies make.
(c) Copyright 2008 Dave Kurlan

Topics: sales assessment, sales hiring, sales recruiting, Sales Candidate, sales evaluation, sales profile, sales selection, personality test, DISC

Timid Sales Managers Fearful of Confronting Salespeople

Posted by Dave Kurlan on Thu, Nov 20, 2008 @ 22:11 PM

Two things are very clear from my post earlier this week on ultimatums.

  1. All the readers who observed that ultimatums are not necessary if sales managers are doing the right things are correct.  But Objective Management Group's data from tens of thousands of sales management evaluations show that fewer than 15% of all sales managers come anywhere close to spending enough time and having the required skills to consistently coach, develop, motivate, inspect, measure, train and hold their salespeople accountable. So yeah, in theory, ultimatums aren't necessary and you can rely on the myth that salespeople are self-starters who don't need to be managed.  Tell that to the sales manager with 12 remote salespeople. In reality, the ultimatum is a powerful weapon that allows a sales manager to gain back some degree of control over performance.
  2. Those of you who commented also approach the ultimatum with the same degree of comfort that you might have for embracing a skunk ready to cover you with some of the most long-lasting stench of a liquid known to man.  You would sooner put up with or terminate an under achiever than put yourself through the discomfort of an ultimatum.

Next we are going to perform some algebra. Do you remember expressions like 40 is to 8 as x is to 5 where x = 25?  Then ultimatum is to x as confront is to deal with issues.  The words ultimatum and confrontation scare the shit out of most of you but, in reality, an ultimatum is simply a conversation with an underperforming salesperson where you reset expectations and let them know the consequences for failing to meet those expectations. Confronting is when a salesperson deals with issues created by their prospect or customer.

Now how do you feel about ultimatums?

(c) Copyright 2008 Dave Kurlan

Topics: sales assessment, Sales Coaching, Salesforce, Sales Force, sales motivation, sales evaluation, Sales Accountability, overachievers, how to improve sales

Is Your Selling Model Effective? Know your Salesforce's ABC's

Posted by Dave Kurlan on Sun, Nov 16, 2008 @ 20:11 PM

Every company, with or without a salesforce, has a selling model.  I know of one company whose model is "we don't believe in sales". It works for them, but it won't work for many others.

What happens when you force yourself into a model?  My wife did that with her company.  She is a very driven, gifted, caring, giving, talented, brilliant, effective, successful leader, entrepreneur, philanthropist and marketer.  Because of that rare combination of attributes and talents, she is in demand as a speaker, board member, fund-raiser, volunteer, and champion.  In addition to being the CEO of her company, she is also the chair of the non-profit she founded, the incoming chair of a non-profit on whose board she sits and the vice-chair of the local chamber of commerce board.

She is a terrific wife and mom to our son, who is frequently mentioned in this Blog. When you add up all of those important responsibilities and learn that she is also the only salesperson for her company, how much time do you suppose that leaves for selling?  Exactly.  So her selling model is a combination of self-imposed time limitations, along with a strong need to be selective and effective.  When she meets with a potential client, there is business to be done!

What happens when you compare a model like Deborah's - if you're gonna go hunting you'd better come back with dinner - with a model that has its salespeople making 3 sales calls per day, or around 60 per month? Do you think those salespeople come back with 60 new customers or orders per month?  No chance! They probably sell 10.  That's why they're on so many calls. 

What would happen if you told those salespeople that you only wanted them to go on 30 calls per month, but you want them to be a lot more selective, and you expected them to close 50% instead of 10%?

I'll tell you what would happen, your A players would close 50% of them and your B's would probably get 33% (the original 10 deals with half the work and half the resources). Your C's?  Same as today - they'd still fail to get the 10 you needed.

You need to develop your B's and replace your C's.  The only problem is that you aren't really able to identify who your A's, B's and C's are.  You think you can but you're measuring them by the dollars they produce, the worst possible measurement of potential, because the dollars are not necessarily the result of their efforts today as much as the dollars may be the result of their previous efforts or the efforts of others over time.

If you want to learn how to truly learn your ABC's, engage me, send me an email or leave me a comment.  We'll talk.

(c) Copyright 2008 Dave Kurlan

Topics: sales competencies, sales assessment, sales model, selling, Salesforce, Sales Force, closing percentage, improve sales, sales evaluation, FLIC, sales personaility, PENTA

What Really Creates Sales Excellence?

Posted by Dave Kurlan on Thu, Nov 13, 2008 @ 21:11 PM

If you are like me, you're receiving email invitations to attend webinars at the rate of 10 to 20 per day.  And you're getting the exact same invitations every single day from the exact same companies.  And some of them promise the solution to all of your sales problems - sales excellence solutions.  Take a look at the invitations I received today alone!

  • IDC - Sales Advisory Service (they provide research reports and hold seminars where they report on their research and provide sales enablement advice)
  • Savo Group (their tag line is "never sell alone" - they tap into your sales teams' knowledge and make it available on demand)
  • Xactly (they have online applications that optimize compensation and incentives)
  • Landslide (they have the best sales workstyle management application so that your salespeople follow your process and enter the appropriate sales cycle information to produce the reports you need to see)
  • Avitage (they provide central storage for and an application for taking the visual and audio nuggets and putting just the right message together so that your salespeople deliver the email/web message that you want them to)

I may not have their messaging the way they want it but it's my sense of what they do. But their webinar announcements all promise to improve sales effectiveness.  Can they?  Do they?  What do you think of when you hear that you can increase or improve sales effectiveness?

What they can't do is make your salespeople any more competent, although Savo and Avitage might disagree.  They can't make your salespeople any more motivated although Xactly might disagree.  And they can't make them any more effective, although Landslide might disagree.

All of these applications are systems which optimize and improve efficiencies, standardization, attention to details, access to information, and how to use the information you get. They don't train and develop your salespeople and the only way to make them better is through evaluation, training and development.  Evaluation identifies all of the people, systems and strategy issues that need to be addressed.  Training is the process by which skills are transferred while development is the process by which their strengths are developed and weaknesses overcome. If you train and develop your people and then utilize these services then yes, you'll improve sales excellence.  These application are far more effective when you've already worked with a sales force development expert, developed a sales process and developed your salespeople.  Then these applications can be aligned with true best practices, as opposed to the practices in place prior to development.

I can tell you first hand how good Landslide is - I use it and recommend it to all of my clients.

I can tell you first hand how insightful Lee Levitt, the  IDC Sales Advisory practice Director, is. I have met Lee and read his articles.

I met Jim Burns from Avitage and saw his demo but haven't used the application yet.

I spoke with someone from Savo Group and saw their demo but haven't used the application yet.

And I haven't met or spoken with anyone from Xactly yet.

What really creates sales excellence?  No one thing - ever. A combination of things - always.

(c) Copyright 2008 Dave Kurlan

Topics: sales competencies, sales assessment, sales process, sales training, selling, Salesforce, Sales Force, sales excellence, sales evaluation, sales compensation, sales system, Xactly, Avitage, Savo, IDC, sales effectiveness, Landslide

Stimulate the Economy - Get Your Salespeople Selling!

Posted by Dave Kurlan on Wed, Nov 12, 2008 @ 23:11 PM

I was interviewed on two different radio shows today.  Jim Lobaito interviewed me about the impact that the economy is having on sales on his weekly business show and David Leopold interviewed me for his live Internet radio show, Let's Talk Small Business.

I agree to these interviews and post often to the blog because I believe that in this economy we need to constantly raise expectations, set the proper, positive mindset, provide increased coaching, step up our accountability and upgrade our sales forces.  It is our responsibility to do what we can to fire up the economy by getting our salespeople to sell more effectively and stimulate the flow of money.  Are you doing your part by turning others onto this blog and others like it?  Are you sharing?

I've been interviewed dozens upon dozens of times and Leopold's interview was the best.  His great questions got me talking about things I don't usually get to talk about.  unfortunately, when I clicked the link to the show, it was the most amateur presentation I've seen to date. There was a video of a partially obscured David Leopold, sitting in a chair, holding the telephone up to a microphone.  It's an extremely low quality, low volume, difficult to hear recording, yet it's some of the best 40 minutes you'll hear of me! If you want to give it a look/listen you can find it here.  Today (11/12/08) it's the first listing on his site but if you're finding this post at some point in the future you'll have to find it down the list which is sorted by most recent.  Let me know what you think...

(c) Copyright 2008 Dave Kurlan


 

Topics: sales assessment, sales, selling, Sales Coaching, Sales Force, sales motivation, sales performance, sales evaluation, Sales Accountability, salseforce, Economy

Subscribe via Email

View All 1,800 Articles

About Dave

Best-Selling Author, Keynote Speaker and Sales Thought Leader.  Dave Kurlan's Understanding the Sales Force Blog has earned medals for the Top Sales & Marketing Blog award for eight consecutive years. This article earned a Bronze Medal for Top Sales Blog post in 2016, this one earned a Silver medal for 2017, and this article earned Silver for 2018. Read more about Dave.

Email Dave

View Dave Kurlan's LinkedIn profile View Dave Kurlan's profile

Subscribe 

Receive new articles via email
Subscribe
 to the Blog on your Kindle 

 

 

Most Recent Articles

Awards

Vendor Neutral Certified 100 SalesTech Vendor Objective Management Group

Sales & Marketing Hall of Fame Inductee

MVP2018_badge_winner_SPC

Leaading Sales Consultants 2018

2019-Silver-BlogIndi
9 Consecutive Years!

Top Sales Awards 2018 - Article/Post -  Silver


2019-Gold-AssessTool
9 Consecutive Years!

Top Sales & Marketing Awards 2015 -  Bronze - Thought Leader

2016 Top Sales & Marketing Podcast - Gold

2016 Top Sales & Marketing Webinar - Gold

Top Sales & Marketing Awards 2015 - Bronze - eBook/White Paper

Top 50 Sales & Marketing Blog 2019

Dave Kurlan Top 50 Sales Influencer 2015

Sales Pro Insider Blog

Top 50 most innovative sales bloggers

Top100Strategic

Top100SalesInfluencersOnTwitter



Hubspot Top 25 Blogs

 

Free Tools

Sales Process Grader

Sales Candidate Assessment Free Trial

Sales Ghost Calculator

Sales Force Grader

Sales Hiring Mistake Calculator

FREE Recruiting Process Grader