The Sony PlayStation, Gorilla Glue, Aquafina, and The George Forman Grill were all introduced in 1994. You've heard of those but have you heard of Vamp Nail Polish or KoronaPay? They were also introduced in 1994.
Objective Management Group's Sales Candidate Assessment was also introduced in 1994 and while 35,000 or so companies are raving fans, that represents less than 1% of the potential B2B market. As successful as OMG is, and as legendary as our sales candidate assessment is, the reality is that relative to the potential size of the market, hardly anyone uses it.
Isn't 28 years long enough for us to prove ourselves?
Clearly OMG is not for everyone. Companies that sell at the lowest price, companies that are the brand leaders, and companies that have a transactional sale don't need to hire good salespeople because their salespeople are order-takers. But what about everyone else?
After consistently proving its legendary predictive accuracy making it a no-brainer to use OMG, there are five possible reasons why companies didn't use OMG to assess their sales candidates over the past 28 years:
- They perceive OMG to be an inferior assessment. I have never heard anyone say that and none of our partners have ever heard anyone say that but maybe some people feel this way and keep their thoughts to themselves. In this day and age? Are you kidding me?
Based on all of the awards OMG has earned, its raving fans, and strong renewal rate, I don't believe this is ever the reason.
- Sales Leaders and sometimes even HR Directors, believe their gut instinct, experience, skills and expertise can out-perform OMG. While the science disproves this, it is a common reason as to why companies don't use OMG to hire salespeople. Even worse, some Sales Leaders feel that if they have to rely on a tool to hire salespeople it will make them appear weak. It's an ego problem.
One Sales Leader had turned over 50% of his sales team and the other 50% were underperforming. He had failed to hit forecast for 4 consecutive quarters but instead of blaming it on sales selection and/or training and coaching, he was blaming the company's pricing model and didn't believe salespeople could succeed with the current pricing. While the right salespeople would perform fine with their pricing model, he didn't know how to identify the right salespeople and wasn't willing to spend money on an assessment that would effectively do that.
- "Legal" doesn't allow for the use of assessments. Legal as a reason (LaaR) only occurs in large companies, and because the market is flooded with personality assessments that are not role specific or predictive. Disgruntled candidates, who are not selected, could potentially blame their failure to land a job on a personality assessment, leaving companies potentially vulnerable to a law suit. On the other hand, a role-specific assessment, like OMG, creates no such liability for a company so this line of thinking is very difficult to understand. It's worth noting that Legal doesn't even get involved until either the CEO, HR Director and/or Sales Leader decides to utilize OMG.
One company was having trouble hiring 300 salespeople. They had already hired 500 salespeople but 350 had quickly turned over and only 150 were actually selling for them. They had a huge problem getting sales selection right so they gave OMG the verbal go-ahead but Legal put the kibosh on it. The ill-conceived fear of a law suit outweighed the fact that their revenue generating car had its gears in reverse. I think the weak CEO should have been fired for allowing legal to override his decision-making.
- HR is married to another assessment and feels it would be too difficult to learn a new assessment. As Dave Mantel pointed out, HR is measured on their cost per hire and time to hire; not on sales performance. Unfortunately, these HR professionals believe selecting the most accurate and predictive sales assessment is not as important as their level of comfort, even if it will make their job easier.
Why use a personality assessment to determine if they have the sales capabilities required to succeed in a particular sales role at the company? As Aaron Prickel of Lushin & Associates put it, "You wouldn't give your son a pregnancy test to determine if he's using drugs!"
- A Sales Candidate Assessment is not in the budget. So?
One company was paying their two worst salespeople a $60,000 base salary and those two salespeople were at 50% of quota. In addition to the $120,000 the company was throwing out the window on two losers, they were failing to generate $1 million in revenue! They needed to hire salespeople this year and only had to spend $7,500 with OMG to hire 6 ideal salespeople. Somehow, they didn't have $7,500 to spend, but were OK throwing $120,000 out the window and accepting a $1 million short-fall. Math does not seem to be a strong suit at this company.
Circling back to how the article began, isn't 28 years of helping companies improve their sales selection effectiveness a long enough trial to prove to the masses that OMG is a game changer for sales? Consider these statistics:
Do you see it? 44% more salespeople achieve quota at companies that use OMG compared to companies that use another assessment, and 80% better than companies that don't use an assessment. And sales attrition is 75% lower at companies that use OMG compared with companies that use another assessment and 237% lower than companies that don't use an assessment. So much for gut instinct, experience, expertise and skills.
And this? When a company hires a sales candidate that OMG doesn't recommend, 75% of those salespeople fail within 90 days. When a company hires a sales candidate that OMG does recommend, 92% of those salespeople rise to the top half of their sales teams within 12 months. So much for legal, ego, budgets, and comfort level.
There are 21 Sales Core Competencies, each with an average of 8 attributes, and OMG measures every single one of them. Depending on the role, some attributes and competencies are more important than others.
Put science to work and rely on it to hire your next group of salespeople.
Image copyright 123RF