Do you monitor and manage tasks or do you identify and train to essential competencies?
Do you want to know the big difference between due diligence and a core competency?
Here's a classic example:
Collecting 50 business cards per day is an act of data procurement, while training to a 60% conversation to appointment ratio is focusing on an essential component to ensure your sales team's success.
Don't focus on accountability to tasks but enlighten to identification. It's much more important to teach your people the "business" of the business they're in.
If you currently have your sales team accountable to tasks, then you're merely "managing" tasks. In order to become more effective - you should be training on measurement of competencies so your people can 'run their own business.'
You measure details not directly related to performance and results.
A telecommunications sales manager proudly told me he requires his sales reps to document '100 dials per day.' I was shocked when I heard this. I asked him if he was in the 'dialing' business or the 'communication' business.
Think about it for a minute. What does the measurement of 'dials' have to do with performance or results? Can you ever improve your dialing skills?
It's insane to waste time and energy measuring that type of stuff when there are so many other "valuable" things to measure.
The focusing of measurement not related to "performance and results" takes you away from the real deal
In the X2 system 'Show Time' begins with the actual conversation, a measurable competency that we can attach to systems and training for critical improvement. By measuring these competencies you'll spend less time documenting insignificant information and more time analyzing meaningful business metrics.
You attempt to manage your subordinate's 'time'.
During the playoffs, a winning college coach was interviewed about his coaching philosophy
"You develop the best game plan you can, build systems and processes to help support it, train everyone how to work within it, and then let the players go out and unleash their natural abilities. You let them play the game between the lines."
Makes sense doesn't it?
Most sales reps will be accountable to results if you identify the important competencies required for success. Your job is to supply targeted training with appropriate structures for learning and application, and measure degrees of improvement.
You require detailed forecasting beyond your normal sales cycle.
It's hard to imagine a management strategy more toxic than this one. Because only two things can result and both are disastrous.nLet's say your average sales cycle is 27 days and you require your team to supply a 30, 60 and 90 day forecast. First of all, the forecasts you get won't be very accurate to the actual results. Second, it will probably be resented and considered 'busy work.'
Here's a much better idea:
Set up your forecast to the time within your control - in this case a 30-day rotating calendar. Define a business rule for forecasting accounts on a weekly basis.
Ask empowering questions:
" Has it passed the defined gateways to be included on your opportunity list?
" Have you helped the sales rep 'scrub it' to make sure it's realistic and not pie-in-the-sky?
" Have the proper strategies and tactics been implemented per account to effect a higher closing ratio?
Bring your forecast accountability back within your normal sales cycle for more focus and better results.
Do you see yourself as a people manager or a behavior coach?
Attempting to manage people delivers rather poor results. (It really does!) People usually resent being 'managed'. They feel controlled and naturally become defensive especially sales people who are self-starters and consistent producers. That's why experts say to manage to 'required behaviors.' I have always believed in taking it one step further. Here's an example of what I mean. Webster's dictionary defines behavior as 'an act'. You can tell people how to act or show people how to act. I suggest you do this with transferable systems and powerful routines that are in line with the competencies that will improve their results. (You decide)
Is your management style the same for self-starters as it is for mediocre performers?
Think about it.
Your ultimate goal is to empower ALL your sales people to be self-sustained performers, right? Some people need more help than others - but top producers usually only need to be held to general points of accountability.
My advice Back off!
If they have a sales drill that works, let them work it. Define your management style and processes in line with performance benchmarks and results.
For everyone else - Diversify your degree of 'hands-on' management in line with routine results and declare those milestones as the road to becoming a self-sustained professional.