As we do each Friday in March and April, my wife and I drove to upstate New York to watch our son's college baseball games.  But this article isn't only about normal, it's also about the abnormal in both baseball and sales.

For miles along I-90 in Western Massachusetts, both on Friday and returning Monday morning, there was only 1 very weak bar of signal on Verizon's wireless network.  Not acceptable and not normal.

The temperature for spring baseball games is usually in the 40's and on nice weekends, the 50's.  It touched 90 degrees for the two games on Saturday and was in the 70's for the two Sunday games.  Very acceptable but not normal.

The leaves were on the trees!  Acceptable but not normal.

Our son had 4 hits on Saturday.  Acceptable but not normal.

I looked at the stats for the nine starters in the Friday night Boston Red Sox game and six of them had batting averages that were not only well below the league average of .243, they were all below .200. Very unacceptable and not normal.

If we look at the capabilities of a typical sales team, failing to meet the CEO's revenue requirements, it would be quite normal for us to see two thirds of the sales team falling significantly below the industry or global averages.   Unlike the statistics used by baseball management and operations and devoured by fans, sales stats comparing sales contributors and sales teams aren't available, preventing Senior Sales Leaders and the C Suite from seeing how their sales team compares with other sales teams in their industry.  At least that's how the thinking goes.  But it's untrue.  Those comparisons are available and have been available.  Objective Management Group (OMG) has those statistics on more than 2.3 million salespeople and thousands of sales teams in 200 industries.  OMG makes that data available and I'll show you where you can see the stats for your industry, and even see how your sales team compares to both the industry norms, as well as the abnormals like the top 10% and bottom 10%.

Most executives review their sales team and determine who the A's, B's and C's are based on revenue.

"Revenue is not, has never been, and never will be an indicator of sales effectiveness. "

Revenue is revenue and Executives have revenue sensitivity. Watch this 3-minute video to better understand what I mean.

 

blah

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

3:13

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Stop using revenue to rank your salespeople or to conclude that your salespeople with the most revenue are good salespeople.  It's fiction.  It's BS.  It's misinformation.  It will lead you to make bad decisions.  Revenue represents what customers spend with you.  Sales effectiveness is the measure of a salesperson's ability to grow revenue by bringing in new business.

OMG measures 21 Sales Core Competencies.  You can see the stats for all 21 competencies for all salespeople here, select your industry to see the industry-specific stats, and begin the process to see those same stats for your sales team.  This is FREE!  After seeing your aggregate scores compared to your industry and the rest of the world, you can optionally receive a variety of detailed reports and files for a fee.

Enjoy!

Image copyright Copyright 123RF

You hired a great salesperson that didn't work out.  You hired a so-so salesperson that did work out.  You hired another great one that kicked ass, and another one that was so-so.  That's the story of hiring salespeople.  It's mostly hit or miss with an emphasis on miss.

In this article I'm going to share an actual example that illustrates why this happens so frequently.  I'll show you tangible differences between three salespeople who succeeded and three who failed in the same role at the same company.

Most of the time when we perform these analyses the differences are usually seen inside of the 21 Sales Core Competencies - the performers are strong in the necessary competencies and the failures are not.

So let's dig into some data, shall we?

One of the ways that Objective Management Group (OMG) customizes a role configuration to recommend the ideal salespeople for a particular role is to conduct a top/bottom analysis.  We attempt to identify 15-20 scores or findings that differentiate the top salespeople from the bottom salespeople.  In small companies we use three tops and three bottoms.  In mid-size companies we use five tops and bottoms and in large companies ten tops and bottoms.

We manually analyze and compare those top and bottom salespeople against 280 scores and findings to identify those which differentiate the tops from the bottoms.  As I mentioned, the differentiations are usually found in the 21 sales core competencies or the attributes within those competencies.

Yesterday, I completed one of these analyses and the salespeople who were failing appeared to be stronger salespeople than those who were succeeding.  That's not good!  But I've learned to stay with it, not give up too soon, and remember that if I'm patient enough the differences will shine through.  That's how it happened with this team but many of the differences weren't in the 21 Sales Core Competencies.  They were simpler, more basic, and more behavioral.  Check out the screen shot below and I'll recap it beneath the image where you can see a sea of green at the top and a sea of red at the bottom.

There were nineteen findings identified that were differentiators.  Only half came from the 21 Sales Competencies, like:

• Sales DNA  (average of 6 Sales DNA Competencies) Score of >76
• Supportive Buy Cycle (one of the Sales DNA Competencies) Score of >56 
• Comfortable Discussing Money (one of the Sales DNA Competencies) Score of 100 
• Handles Rejection  (one of the Sales DNA Competencies) Score of >60
• Hunting (a pure selling competency) Score of >50 
• Account Management (a selling competency) Score of >66
• Prospects Consistently (an attribute of the Hunter competency)
• Gains Trust Early (an attribute of the BuildsTrust competency - not one of the 21 Sales Core Competencies)
• Makes Decisions (an attribute of the Buy Cycle competency)
• Will Uphold Margins (an attribute of the Buy Cycle competency)

It was more unusual to see the following findings as differentiators.  These are more behavioral and are well outside the 21 Sales Competencies.  As you read through them you can clearly see why salespeople with decent selling skills would fail when these findings appear as weaknesses:

• Time and Organizational Skills
• Self-Starter
• Works independently
• Business Minded
• Prior experience calling on SMB's
• Prefer to be recognized for achievements
• Previously sold into a very competitive marketplace
• Figure it Out Factor >61 (a compilation of 10 findings that predict a quick ramp-up)
• Compatibility with the Role's selling requirements - score of >67

If they can't get started, organized and work on their own, in a remote selling role, the chances of success are nearly zero, regardless of skills!

The minimum required scores for success change by role, company, industry, target customer, price points, competition, difficulty, complexity, sales cycle, resistance, and more.

The three salespeople from the company above that were failing didn't have bad selling skills.  Remember, I looked at 280 findings and their selling skills were good to excellent in many of the 280 findings.  But it's not if they can sell; it's if they will sell!  The Sales DNA scores, and the non-sales skill findings combine to show us that their tops WILL sell and their bottoms only CAN sell.

When a company has a way to measure can vs. will they can hire with confidence.  It's like having a crystal ball.

Every top/bottom analysis looks different and as a result, every role configuration for sales candidate assessments is different. The findings we incorporate are different and the minimum required scores are different. Success in one role, at one company, in one industry, with various levels of difficulty, complexity, calling into certain verticals or geographies, selling with certain price points against various levels of competition and various sales cycle lengths, all serve to uniquely change the requirements for success used in the role configuration.

A sales-specific, customizable, accurate and predictive sales candidate assessment like the one that OMG provides is the crystal ball for 29,000 companies and it's why OMG was just awarded the gold medal for Top Sales Assessment by Top Sales World for the 9th consecutive year.

You can see all 21 Sales Core Competencies here.

You can checkout OMG's Sales Candidate Assessments here.

Leave your comments on the LinkedIn thread for this discussion.

Image copyright iStock Photos

Image Copyright BeeBright

Readers are always referring me to articles that list top sales traits, that discuss what makes salespeople great, that name the most important selling skills, or that otherwise contradict the science-based findings and statistics that I share in my articles.

In that regard, today was very much the same when a reader referred me to this LinkedIn article that revealed the Top 5 Traits of the Best Salespeople.  As a matter of fact, I actually found the article refreshing.  First, the 5 traits were admittedly based on observation.  Second, the author asked readers to submit their own top 5.  And third, his five weren't that far off the track from what the science says.  Nice job Bill Golder!

I will list Bill's top 5 below, along with the actual scientific findings they are best aligned with, and provide some context for those findings.  The test as to whether Bill's five are legitimate Top Traits of the Best Salespeople is not whether or not they line up with any of our scientific findings on top Salespeople (we have evaluated salespeople); it's whether or not they actually differentiate top salespeople from bottom salespeople.  Let's take a look:

Bill's #1 is Naturally Curious. While there isn't a scientific corollary to that, there are some findings and competencies that we can hook it up with.  Natural Curiosity is a nice way of connecting some of the attributes that reside in OMG's Sales Core Competency Consultative Seller.  Asks lots of questions, Asks Great Questions, And Makes No Assumptions are three of the ten attributes of the Consultative Seller competency. On average, salespeople have 54% of the attributes of the Consultative Seller competency but the top 10% of all salespeople average 70%.  It's an extremely important competency and when you consider just how crucial it is, and then consider that the bottom half of all salespeople average only 44% of that competency, you'll immediately understand why so many salespeople suck!  

Top 10% of all salespeople - 70%  
Bottom half of all salespeople 44%
Meets the Criteria to differentiate.

Bill's #2 is Student and Teacher.  Again, there isn't a specific corollary to that but if you read the paragraph that accompanies #2, you'll see it's the ability to connect the dots and present an appropriate solution to pain points or, what I call compelling reasons to buy.  OMG calls this competency Presentation Approach.  Taking the same route as we did on #1, on average, salespeople have 65% of the attributes of the Presentation Approach competency but the top 10% of all salespeople average 78%.  It's an important competency because it determines whether salespeople are presenting the correct information to the correct people at the correct time in the process. The bottom half of all salespeople average only 58% of that competency.

Top 10% of all salespeople - 78%  
Bottom half of all salespeople 58%
Meets the Criteria to differentiate.

Bill's #3 is Loses Fast.  This time there is a direct correlation to the Rejection Proof Competency.  Unlike Fear of Rejection, Rejection Proof measures a salesperson's ability to recover quickly.  Unlike the first two examples which are tactical, the Rejection Proof Competency is part of Sales DNA.  On average, salespeople have 82% of the attributes of the Rejection Proof competency but the top 10% of all salespeople average 94% and the bottom half of all salespeople average 73% of that competency.

Top 10% of all salespeople - 94%  
Bottom half of all salespeople 73%
Fails to Meet the Criteria to differentiate.

Bill's #4 is Passionate which directly correlates to OMG's Desire for Sales Success.  This Sales Core Competency is in the Will to Sell (or Grit) category.  On average, salespeople score 82% on Desire, the top 10% of all salespeople score 88% and the bottom half of all salespeople average 77% of that competency.

Top 10% of all salespeople - 88%  
Bottom half of all salespeople 77%
Fails to Meet the Criteria to differentiate.

Bill's #5 is Likeable.  OMG has a likeable finding - it's an attribute within the Relationship Builder Competency.  On average, salespeople score 52% on Relationship Building, the top 10% of all salespeople score 53% and the bottom half of all salespeople average 51% of that competency.

Top 10% of all salespeople - 53%  
Bottom half of all salespeople 51%
Fails to Meet the Criteria to differentiate.

As you can see, the bottom half of the sales population scores well and or within close proximity to the top 10% in three of the traits so those three fail to differentiate tops from bottoms.  But let's not discount how well Bill did at identifying 5 traits that still matter in professional sales!

So which findings best differentiate top salespeople from everyone else?  I wrote about them in an epic article - a Rebuttal (to a junk science article) on What Elite Salespeople Do Differently. 

Finally, many readers missed this article with two great sales lessons.