[Note - this article was written in August of 2001 so while the first paragraph is outdated, it still sets the stage for the sales part of the article which begins with the third paragraph.]

The CDC is back focusing on COVID case numbers.  Earlier this summer, Massachusetts was reporting fewer than 100 new cases each day but more 1,000 new cases per day have been reported for the past two weeks.  That particular metric supports the narrative that the Delta variant is spreading but it does not tell the real story that allows us to assess our risk.

For the real story to materialize, we should know how many of those 1,000 cases occurred in vaccinated people, how many vaccinated people with COVID have symptoms, and how many of those cases required hospitalization.  Case numbers support that there is new spread, but a detailed breakdown would help us to understand our reality.

The exact same thing is happening with the sales numbers reported by most companies.

Suppose a company reports that its win rate is 24%.  Does that tell you anything other than they suck?  It doesn't tell us how badly they suck, why they suck, how long they've sucked, who sucks, or whether there is any hope for them to stop sucking.  And even if their win rate is double the 24%, the same questions apply. Let me explain.

How badly they suck depends entirely on the stage in the sales process from which the conversion is being measured.  Win rates are not calculated consistently so a 24% win rate could mean five different things:

• Proposals to closed - if they are only closing 24% of their proposals they are demonstrating the highest possible degree of suck.
• Qualified to closed - if they are closing 24% of their qualified opportunities they suck at qualifying!
• Prospects to closed - if they are closing 24% of the opportunities that move past a first meeting, that could be an acceptable rate.
• Suspects to closed - if they are closing 24% of the prospects they get first meetings with that is something to brag about.
• Leads to closed - if they are closing 24% of their leads they are freaking awesome!

Every company handles this conversion differently but in my opinion, proposals to closed provides incomplete information because we don't know how many companies they were competing against.  Prospects to closed, suspects to closed and leads to closed are inferior because we don't yet know if the opportunities are thoroughly qualified. Therefore, only qualified to closed provides the intelligence to determine how badly they suck.

Knowing why they suck requires that a sales process includes all of the required milestones and the milestones have also been integrated into their CRM.  We need to know how many qualified opportunities failed to meet all of the company's criteria/milestones be be fully qualified.  If you want to know which milestones should be included, watch this ten-minute video on the most popular sales processes and methodologies.

In order to know how long they've sucked, look at win rates over time using the exact same criteria that is being used today for comparison.  What was the win rate last quarter, and each quarter before that?  Are we trending up or down or is it the same as it was earlier in the timeline?

Who sucks? Unless your reporting includes win rates by salesperson, you won't have the ability to see how you arrived at 24%.  You probably have someone who is closing closer to 50% and there is probably someone closing closer to 10%.  Why is that?  What are they each doing that is so different?

Is there any hope that they can improve?  This is the most important question of all.  The other metrics we were discussing report lagging data and won't be of much help.  Improvement must be forward looking and the best forward looking metrics have nothing to do with win rate and everything to do with the pipeline.  Is it larger than last quarter, prior quarters and prior years?  Do the opportunities in the pipeline have a larger value than over the same period of time last year?  Is the quality of opportunities in the pipeline higher than it was over the same period of time last year? 24% of 200 opportunities is better than 24% of 100 opportunities.  24% of \$2 million is better than 24% of \$1 million.  And if the quality is better that would suggest that the win rate will be better than 24%.  That is one way to answer the hope question.

The other way to measure hope is to conduct an OMG (Objective Management Group) evaluation of your sales team. OMG's evaluation is unique in that it will very clearly show why salespeople aren't selling more, the specific sales competencies where the gaps are, who could be selling more, how much more, the required coaching and training to get them there, how long it will take to get them there, and so much more. Most companies feel that the money spent on an OMG Sales Force Evaluation is the best money they ever invested in sales.

You can get a sample of an OMG Sales Team Evaluation here (checkmark next to sales force eval).

You can see data on the 21 Sales Core Competencies here.

Back in the 1960's it made sense for gasoline prices to be discounted down to the nearest 9/10 of a cent because gas prices ranged between 17.9 to 18.9 cents.  But when gas prices are around \$3.00 per gallon, how does 9/10 cent continue to make sense?  Some habits die really hard.

I don't know about you but some things just don't make sense to me.  I loved the Leavitt/Dubner series of books on Freakonomics and thought I could share some interesting sales and sales management data that make little sense.

Nearly 50% of salespeople are willing to work on straight commission but only 7% of companies offer such a compensation plan.

Two of the sales metrics tracked most often are margin at 65% and profitability at 51%.  Surprisingly, only 6% of companies track the cost of a sales call.  Why do companies who care about margin and profitability not care about the cost of a sales call?

Only 34% of companies track win rates, 32% track account retention, and 9% track the percentage of meetings that close; yet 57% track the percentage of salespeople under/over goal and 47% track their top opportunities.  Why would they track their top opportunities but not care about meetings that close or win rates?

49% of companies track the number of opportunities in their pipeline yet only 27% track the quality of those opportunities.  That leads to the low win rates that companies are not really tracking and the inaccurate forecasts that drive CEO's crazy!

Salespeople reporting to a manager with strong Coaching skills have 26% more closable opportunities in their sales pipelines while salespeople reporting to a manager with strong Accountability skills have 18% more closable opportunities in their pipelines.  On the other side of the fence, salespeople with sales managers who have weak coaching and/or accountability skills saw 77% of their late stage opportunities moved back to one of the earliest stages of the pipeline!

Sales managers with strong coaching skills are 230% more likely to have elite salespeople working for them!  If that doesn't make a case for developing coaching skills, I don't know what does.

Although they should be spending half their time on coaching, Sales Managers spend around half their time split between coaching, accountability and motivation.  How do they spend the other half of their time?  Does it really matter?  Whether it's spent on personal sales, closing reps' deals, putting out fires, or administrative crap, all of it distracts from coaching.

Salespeople with no sales experience – born to sell – have a sales percentile score of 32 with an average Sales DNA score of 61 and an average Will to Sell score of 60.  They fall into the very weak category.  Compare that to salespeople with 5-10 years of experience – trained to sell – who have a sales percentile score of 58 (182% higher) with an average Sales DNA score of 67 (110% higher) and an average Will to Sell score of 66 (110% higher).  Trained to sell beats born to sell.

All of the salesenomics statistics referenced above are from Objective Management Group's (OMG) data warehouse.  OMG has evaluated or assessed 1,863,494 salespeople from companies in countries.

Would you like to see how salespeople score in each of the 21 sales core competencies?  Click here.

Would you like to check out the most accurate and predictive sales candidate assessment? Click here.

Would you like to discover some more salesenomics?  Check out these articles:

## Discovered - Data Reveals the Biggest Obstacle to Closing More Sales

Have you ever watched a news program where they presented poll results, like the number of people in favor of legalizing marijuana?  The poll shows popular opinion, but not the facts, logic, or impact on arrests, the economy, traffic accidents, unemployment, addiction, death rates, etc.  There is a huge difference between people's often uninformed opinions, versus what the facts might suggest.  That's the problem with the statistics I'm going to share in this article.  The stats show what sales managers are doing but those managers are largely uninformed. They don't know what's good for them, haven't been asked or held accountable to doing it differently, and aren't in any way shape or form following best practices.  John Pattison, Objective Management Group's COO, mined some data on salespeople who report to sales managers.  I was appalled by what I saw.  Check this out!

I reviewed data from 17,000 salespeople who reported to 4,000 managers in companies across more than 100 industries and here are some of the most interesting findings (see how 500,000 salespeople score in 21 Sales Core Competencies here):

Tracking, Reporting and Pipeline:

• Margins are the metric tracked most frequently. 65% of sales managers track that because they need that metric to calculate commissions!
• 3% of sales managers don't track or report on anything
• Only 6% of sales managers track cost per sales call
• Of the 5 pipeline metrics that could be tracked, an average of only 32% of sales managers track 1 or more of them
• Only 33% of sales managers track closing percentage
• Only 41% track average order size

I have news for you.  If you don't track closing percentage or average order size, you can't identify the number of opportunities that are required to be added to the first stage of the pipeline each month!

Coaching Environment

The data shows that it's more important that sales managers believe their salespeople trust their intentions, and have strong relationships with their salespeople than what the reality might be.  When sales managers believe there is mutual trust and a strong relationship, it is 300% more likely that their salespeople will be strong or elite.  That's because sales managers with these beliefs coach more frequently, coach longer, and coach more effectively.  See this article for the data that shows that how sales managers who coach frequently and effectively see a 27% increase in revenue.

If you want to become super effective at coaching salespeople, register to attend my Sales Leadership Intensive on March 19-20.  If you want to attend, use DKSLIMAY17 at checkout to receive a \$100 discount.  Seating is extremely limited (only 20 seats remaining). If you're like the hundreds of other sales leaders that have attended this event over the past 8 years, you'll quickly recognize that it's the finest training you've ever received.

Speaking of sales leadership and coaching, order Keith Rosen's terrific new book, Sales Leadership, from Amazon.com.  You won't be disappointed.

The first is about my award-winning Blog.  It seems that readers stay with an article for an average of only one-minute or so.  That means that most readers don't finish the article, fail to get to my summary, and often don't read long enough to get my point.  Basically, everything that comes after the fourth paragraph is not being read.  This could also be good news.  It could mean that I can actually write shorter articles and that would be great for me!

The other piece of bad news relates to my award-winning sales training company, Kurlan & Associates.  I reviewed 5 years worth of statistics on opportunities that weren't closed and it seems that prospects were 6 times more likely to do nothing than to do business with a competitor.  We don't lose very often and I can count on two hands the number of opportunities I have personally lost in the past 5 years.  But it's one thing to rarely lose, and another to learn that 6 times more often than not, a company failed to act.   But these statistics are very misleading. Let me explain why.

Our business is not one where companies always purchase from somebody and it's only a question of from whom (think network copier).  It isn't a given that companies will follow through on training, coaching, sales process, recruiting, evaluating, assessing, sales enablement, consulting, etc.  A few don't have the appetite to spend the money (too late for them).  Some don't believe they really need the help (ego).  Most aren't willing to do the work (change) to achieve results.

Still reading?  Oh, you're the one who stays past one minute and the fourth paragraph!

These two crappy statistics are connected in that both are related to attention and engagement.

The one-minute stat is an average.  Some people stay on an article for 5 minutes to thoroughly digest an article while others exit after reading the title or seeing that I am the author.  They must hate me.  It means that there is enough readership so that the average time on page doesn't even matter.  It's a meaningless statistic that might cause some people to find a solution and improve the number.  Not me.  The average is the average and I don't care about averages.  I write for the people who read my articles, not for those who don't.

The same is true for those who in the end, don't buy from anyone.  It means that we are filling the pipeline and the natural attrition in our pipeline is as it should be.  It says that we are qualifying effectively but even that requires some digging to be certain.  Do these opportunities pass through all four stages of the sales process, including a proposal, before the prospects decide to live with the status quo?  Or, are we recognizing their lack of commitment earlier in the sales process and disqualifying the opportunity at that point?  Fortunately, it's the latter.  We usually move on from them before they have a chance to move on from us.  The more meaningful statistic is that we rarely lose!

Are you paying attention to stats like these?  Are they telling you a story about sales effectiveness or lack thereof?  Are the stats suggesting that you need to do things differently?  Do the stats suggest that you stay with an opportunity too long?

We use a scorecard just like the ones we customize for our clients.  The scorecard keeps us on the straight and narrow and prevents us from chasing opportunities that score below 65 points.  It helps us disqualify very early in the sales process.  Do you have a scorecard that is predictive like ours?

The reality is that there are no bad statistics.  There are statistics that tell a story and those that don't.  There are statistics you can learn from and those you can't.  There are statistics that are forward looking and those that are lagging and that means that there are statistics that are predictive of something and those that aren't.

When was the last time you looked at some of your statistics to determine what story is being told and the changes you need to make?

This is a perfect topic to begin the New Year!  While others will be talking and writing about goals and resolutions, we'll be discussing the things that really make a difference.  Sure, having goals is important, but having them in writing, with an achieve by date and a plan is exponentially more likely to have an actionable outcome than only having goals.  And if you really want results, accountability is to goals as the accelerator is to the automobile.  They both cause immediate action.  Here's what I mean.

Let's assume that the salespeople who read this blog are a little smarter and more dedicated to sales success.  If that resonates with you, then let's also assume that they have a strong will to succeed in sales.  If you're still with me, then it's safe to assume that they gave their all and tried to get 2015 off to a good start in the first quarter of last year.

We are going to compare the year over year results of 5 randomly selected salespeople with the only difference being that in 2016 they will be accountable, whereby in 2015, they were not.  Oh sure - they worked for someone, but that is not the same thing as being accountable.

To begin, I'll need 5 volunteers.  Here are the requirements:

• You must be willing to have me use your real name and company.
• You must have and provide your goals and actual metrics/results from the 1st quarter of 2015.
• You must be willing to provide me with your 2016 metrics/results every day during the 1st quarter of 2016.
• You must be willing to allow me to periodically write about your progress and results here in my blog.
• You must be willing to take part in a video interview before we begin and after we finish.
• You must allow the videos to be shown online.

I guarantee that the five people who are selected for this program, despite not getting coached, will experience their best years in 2016.  We know how powerful good coaching is, but I want to show how powerful effective accountability can be all by itself - especially when there is positive peer pressure.

Will it be you?

Will it be someone who reports to you?

If you or someone you care about would like to apply, just send me an email, state that you are willing and able to abide by the 6 requirements listed in the January 4 blog article, and I'll be in touch.

What are some of the things we can compare to last year?  They include, but aren't limited to:

• Pipeline Quantity
• Pipeline Quality
• Pipeline Acceleration
• Sales Cycle Length
• Call to Meeting Rate
• Attempt to Conversation Rate
• Milestones Achieved in Sales Cycle
• Suspect to Prospect Conversion Rate
• Prospect to Qualified Conversion Rate
• Qualified to Closable Rate
• Win Rate
• Average Sale
• Average Margin
• Number of Referrals
• Archived Opportunities
• Percentage of Decision Makers Reached
• Demos Scheduled
• Demo to Win Rate
• Compelling Reasons Uncovered
• Compelling Reasons to Win Rate

Of course, if we don't have the specific metric from last year at this time, we can't run a comparison on that metric.  So how many of these metrics are you tracking?  Most companies track no more than 5 of these!  What would happen if you started to track all of them?

Yeah, just in case you didn't get that, I'll lay it out for you.

In a recent mining of Objective Management Group's data from June of 2013, there was a huge increase in the number of salespeople using social sites like LinkedIn, Twitter, Facebook, Spoke, Plaxo and Reachable for selling.  The graph looked like this:

I was impressed with this development...but...there is a huge problem with this.  For all the attention that these sites get, for all the salespeople who now spend their evenings perfecting their profile, adding people to their networks and asking for introductions, what hasn't changed for the better are these key metrics:

• Calls-to-contact ratio is now over 10:1 - worse than ever before.
• Contact-to-meeting ratio is worse, not better.
• Sales cycle length is longer, not shorter.
• Closing percentages are lower, not higher.

Weren't the social sites supposed to help with those metrics?

Not really.  These sites help salespeople connect - in the slightest of ways.  Do you even know half of the people in your network?

Your network is like your neighborhood.  You know that they are there, you recognize them as they go by, in their cars, on their bikes or while walking their dogs.  But, you are only friendly with a small percentage of them.  How likely is it that salespeople could improve their effectiveness because of their neighborhood?  Well, the same is true of their networks.  And the online networks don't work any better than the real networks that they belong to in their home towns.  You know the ones I'm talking about.  The chamber, the business networking groups, the peer groups, the resource groups, etc.  In theory, they're all great, but in reality, how often do they produce measurable business from people who aren't your friends?

Networks provide the framework to connect, but nothing happens automatically.  Salespeople must still be effective enough, when reaching out, to convert that connection to a call, meeting, opportunity and sale.  And sadly, we just aren't seeing any improvement in the selling capabilities of the global sales population.  It's almost exactly the same as it was 10 years ago!

It's time that we stop expecting sales to increase as a result of CRM, social selling tools and email.  They are great tools, but none of them replace actual selling, and even worse, all of them serve as distractions, false safety nets and busy work that must be completed before salespeople are caught up and can get on the phone.

Regular readers know I'm a baseball guy, but that doesn't mean I ignore football.  Sunday, the New England Patriots needed 30 points to win their game over the New Orleans Saints 30 - 27.  But that's nothing.  The previous week, the Denver Broncos needed...wait for it...51 points...to win their game over the Dallas Cowboys.  51 - 48.  99 points in a single football game.

It takes 51 points to win a football game now?

When game planning for an opponent, I don't think any coach, anywhere, could have prepared their team and said, "Look fellas, it's gonna be a real high scorin' game, so let's plan to score 6 touchdowns and add 3 field goals for good measure."

But that's what it took.

When you look ahead to 2014 sales, are you using the same assumptions as always?  If you want to grow by 20%, do you use the same metrics for next year that you used for last year?  Will the plan that got you there last year continue to work next year?  Have you accounted for any of these changes?

• What if customer retention worsens?
• What if your average sale or account drops?
• What if the closing percentage changes?
• What if it takes 15 attempts instead of 10 attempts to reach a single prospect?
• What if 10% fewer conversations convert to meetings?
• What if your margin drops by 10%?
• What if you lose 10% of your salespeople and you aren't able to replace them for 6 months?
• What if your sales cycle extends by 2 months?
• What if it takes 25% more of everything in order to reach the promised land next year?
• What if your competition introduces a better product for less money?
• What if it takes the sales equivalent of 51 points to meet budget?

While a customized, structured, optimized, formal sales process and targeted, effective, and integrated sales training and coaching will address and improve all of those metrics over time, you also must assume that your assumptions with regard to metrics for next year are wrong.

But how will you know which ones are most likely to be wrong?  How long will it take to notice?

You can't possibly know whether or not your metrics for sales cycle, margin, closing percentage, retention, or average sale are going to change until you have completed enough sales cycles to collect the data for an appropriate sample size.  For those, you'll have to head into 2014 and leave margin for error.  However, within one week you should know the top-of-the-funnel metrics like attempts to conversations and conversations to meetings and whether those have changed since 2011.  By the way, they have!

This is one of the advantages of pipeline management and CRM.  If you have the applications tuned to report on the right metrics, getting this information in real time is not a problem.  The real issues are:

• Will sales managers pay any attention to the metrics or look only at sales?
• Will they notice if the metrics change?
• Will they change the metrics on the fly and provide training and coaching to help?
• Will they demand more sales without providing tactical and strategic support?
• Will they be lazy, ignore the changes, but later cite changing metrics as the reason they missed quota?
• What will you do?
By the way, this is World Awareness Week - a celebration of Top Sales World. Click the image below to visit.

What if there was a way to project sales success even more so than what Objective Management Group has mastered during the past 23 years?

What if we could do what Bill James and a bunch of sabermaticians have done in Baseball?

Not that long ago, baseball hitting statistics were limited to batting average (AVE), Runs Batted In (RBI) and Home Runs (HR).  Pitching statistics used to be limited to Wins (W), Losses (L) and Earned Run Average (ERA).

Today, the sabermaticians have developed statistics that better identify the value of a ball player and some of them, like On Base Percentage (OBP) and On Base Plus Slugging (OPS) have worked their way into baseball's mainstream. They also have metrics like WHIP (Walks and Hits per Inning Pitched) and WAR (Wins above Replacement) and many more.

The saber gurus have even found ways to equalize the effects of different stadiums, competition, times of year, match ups, and more.  Some of them even project how stars of years past would fare against the stars of today!  And every year Bill James projects how each major league player will perform in the coming year.

Back to my original question, what if there was a way to project sales success even more so than what Objective Management Group has mastered during the past 23 years?

What if we could not only predict whether a sales candidate will succeed in your business, selling your offerings at your prices to your prospects against your competition, and with your challenges as we currently do, but also project how their history would translate in terms of likely revenue?  Not from guessing, but calculated from some sophisticated new algorithms.

Cool, huh?

Don't get too excited though, because we aren't there yet. However, that is my next ambitious project.  Let me know what you think about it and I'll keep you posted on my progress.

Two clients called this week to express their concerns.

Client #1 was concerned because their most important metric is sample requests and their requests are down from the same period last year.  I asked what drove sample requests and he told me that sales visits led to sample requests.

During the past 6 months we dramatically changed what their salespeople were doing on sales visits.  They used to show up, take five minutes to present their product and then the prospect would ask for samples.  Now, they completely qualify the reasons, expectations and time allotted for that visit, have a meaningful conversation about their prospect's business, and get commitments to have their products specified on future work.  They are enjoying much better conversations, achieving much better engagement and getting much stronger commitments.

I suggested that the decrease in sample requests was simply a byproduct of better sales calls.  My client wondered how better sales calls could possibly result in fewer sample requests and I explained that previously, the sample request was simply a token request - a put-off - and it wouldn't actually lead to anything except a sample being filed away in a drawer somewhere.  Now, instead of sample requests, they're getting commitments to do business and when they are ready, the sample requests lead to sales.  My client agreed.

Client #2 was concerned because their most important metric was proposals and the number of proposals are down from the same period last year. I asked what drove proposals and he told me that RFP's and sales calls led to proposals.

During the past 6 months, we dramatically changed how their salespeople responded to RFP's and what they were doing on sales calls.  They used to respond to an RFP by taking a day or two to write and submit a proposal with fewer than 10% converting to sales.  They used to show up, talk about features and benefits and ask if they could submit a proposal (remember it was a key metric so the more the merrier).  Now they call the prospects who send RFP's and have meaningful conversations to differentiate themselves from their competitors (who are sending proposals).  They learn if they is a fit, a real opportunity, and how they can do business together.  Sales calls are no longer presentation-centric.  Instead, their salespeople have meaningful conversations about business problems they could solve and propose solutions only when the prospect is serious about doing business with them.

I suggested that the decrease in proposals could be the result of more effective selling, salespeople choosing not to propose to everyone, and a much more comprehensive qualification.  I also asked for the latest conversion ratio for proposals to sold.  It was up to 45% meaning that there was a 400% improvement in efficiency and effectiveness!

You probably have a key metric that's old school too.  By old school, I'm suggesting that it was once a metric that was a key indicator of future business but now it's only a measurement of what you're measuring - in these two examples - sample requests and proposals.  There are better metrics for both of these companies.  Instead of sample requests, they should be measuring the number of new commitments to specify their products.  And instead of proposals, a more telling metric could be qualified opportunities.

Review what you used to believe was meaningful and ask yourself whether it is truly a key indicator of future business or if you are simply using convenient, old, comfortable metrics because you always have.  Less is usually more.

If you are like most executives, you start the new year asking for everyone's goals, plans and forecasts.  Terrific start.  But then what?

You'll need to modify the pipeline requirements for each salesperson.  If the goals change, the requirements in each stage must change with them.  And if any of your salespeople's critical ratios for closing have changed in the past 12 months, those new percentages also must be factored into your new pipeline requirements.

That leads to your KPI's (Key Performance Indicators) or metrics which drive revenue.  If you collect these now via a daily huddle, that's terrific; let's tighten them up.  If you don't currently have your sales team calling in every morning for 10 minutes, you're missing out on a critical piece of accountability, team-building and intelligence.

How can you tighten up your metrics?

Suppose for example that you currently have your salespeople report the number of new conversations, newly-scheduled meetings and qualified opportunities.  You can tighten them up by inserting the word "targeted".  Your salespeople are able to call on a wide range of potential customers, but a much smaller group is in the sweet spot.  It's the sweet spot which will lead them to their goals for revenue and profitability, but any old customer will count as a new sale.  Suppose you have them report only those conversations with sweet spot or targeted opportunities, new meetings scheduled with targeted opportunities and qualified targeted opportunities.  There will be more pipeline movement, improved closing ratios and your revenue and profit goals will be achieved earlier in the year.

A benefit to this change is that those salespeople who struggle with the sweet spot, but who have hidden behind their numbers, will be exposed.  Your job is to determine why they struggle with the target opportunities.  The best way to quickly identify, understand and solve these and other similar struggles is with a sales force evaluation.

Tighter is sweeter as in the tighter the targeting, the sweeter the opportunity.

What if you fail to emphasize metrics, have daily huddles or manage your salespeople very closely?  No problem.  Those salespeople will simply leave and you can start all over again.  Seriously, why would you ignore a best practice?  The old metrics which we preached in the 70's and 80's (dials, contacts, conversations, appointments, etc.) may have gone the way of the dinosaur, but metrics in general have not.  Sure, you still may use those old metrics for a salesperson whose job is only cold calls and set appointments.  But for most salespeople, the job has changed - dramatically - in the last five years and technology has a lot to do with it.  That's an article for another day, but for today, if you focus on the metrics, remove the wiggle room, and increase compliance, every capable salesperson on your team will perform more effectively.

Harder is Easier.  Read this post for more on oximoronic metrics.

Best-Selling Author, Keynote Speaker and Sales Thought Leader,  Dave Kurlan's Understanding the Sales Force Blog earned awards for the Top Sales & Marketing Blog for eleven consecutive years and of the more than 2,000 articles Dave has published, many of the articles have also earned awards.

Email Dave

View Dave Kurlan's profile

### Subscribe

Subscribe
to the Blog on your Kindle