Identifying Barriers to Success in Your Sales Force

I have written and conducted corporate training seminars for the mortgage division of one of the largest banks in the world. In that capacity, I applied many of the concepts you mentioned, including having a clearly defined audience. We were regularly working with internationally famous celebrities and the CEOs of major corporations. Employees have a tendency to freeze up when, for example, they realize they have an actual rock star on the phone who needs assistance. Their first impulse is to treat them with awe, but that tends to be off-putting. What high-end clients like that want most is to be treated with the ease and confidence of an accomplished professional who works quickly and knows exactly what to do so this VIP can get on with their day and always have a warm, satisfied feeling when they think about the brand.

Thanks for the great comments. @Mike you raise some great questions. How can you tell? Maybe by the ones who are enthusiastic during the interview. Or the one who wrote that great cover letter depicting how they can help the company. Maybe one who has not been job hopping but who has spent several years at each position all the way climbing higher and higher. What kind of flaws might be in the recruitment process? Not checking on the facts. Not calling any of the references to verify that this person is for real. Not checking their education before the offer. Many job seekers lie on their resumes/cover letters just to get their foot in the door. Perhaps you could create a test for candidates as part of the interview process. Don't tell them ahead of time that testing is involved but, once they get through enough of the interview for you to determine that they "could" be your next hire, test them. Written or hands on - either way you will be able to find out if they told the truth or not. You will also know, by questions that they might ask, if they are amendable or not. Anyone else have thoughts on this?

As a manager, what are some ways to identify which candidates are more likely to improve with long-term coaching? And sort of related, what kinds of flaws in the recruitment process could be lead to the hiring off employees who are unlikely to improve? Perhaps a step could be added that challenges candidates with some sort of "outside-the-box" task or mental challenge? At least for me, coachability is difficult to determine before the hire is complete. Thanks for any insights you have!

This article really gave me a boost this morning. I think perhaps we all feel stuck sometimes, and it's important to try to find out why so that we can keep forging ahead. I particularly like the point made about coaching and recognition: perhaps when we coach others, we also coach ourselves...

The article suggests asking your team how to improve motivation. Employee input is of utmost significance if a company wants to succeed. Satisfied employees are motivated employees. Listen to them, try out some of their best ideas, and make improvements based on their suggestions. Your employees are the real heart of the organization, so allowing them to shape the way the company works will go a long way toward the future of the company.

Although some employees respond well to positive competition, an overly competitive environment could hurt sales. I think it important to think of the individual personalities on your sales force before implementing any type of competition. I prefer motivators that provide awards for individuals improving their own numbers or for teams meeting goals. Too much individual competition can discourage new team members or those who are seeking help with problem areas.

I appreciate that this article mentions asking sales force members themselves what target numbers they should have or new tactics to improve sales. What is the best method for asking employees for this information? Focus groups? Surveys? Meeting with each employee individually? I have a feeling that focus groups could be successful because people could bounce ideas off of each other.

@Sarah thanks for the question. Asking for a daily breakdown of tasks is probably a good indication that the employee is not living up to their potential and the manager is trying to determine why. Maybe they are spending too much time chasing leads that are not going to result in a sale. Maybe they are spending too much time doing cold-calls and not getting any prospects. Asking for the breakdown could show glaring discrepancies for both the employee and the manager. But, if an employee is doing great -closing on those sales, then a breakdown is truly not needed. @Jacob so very true - clear cut directives coming from just one source is the ultimate. Sadly this doesn't always happen but it should be up to the manager to work this out, not the worker.

I agree that speaking to the sales team and asking for input is important, but could asking for a break down of daily work begin to move into micromanaging? I do think that information is crucial, but it can be taken too far, and often is, so how can you find balance and not become the overbearing boss?

The biggest barrier to success I've encountered as a sales manager and a sales person, is competing directives from various members of management. Unclear objectives or constantly shifting targets and programs makes it very difficult to focus energy and build success at any one sales goals.

I believe one barrier to success on a sales team is a lack of diversity. The more diversity you have among your team, the better chances you have to engage potential customers in sales. That means including all kinds of people on your sales force--men, women, young, old and people with different ethnic backgrounds. Stats show that diverse companies fare better than competitors over the long term.

I think keeping performance goals measurable is so important. It helps the employee have goals to work toward, and also serves to highlight any areas where management needs to rethink goals that are either too easy to reach or too unattainable. By having specific targets, people are never left wondering what to do next, and they can use those goals to best make use of their time.

I am a huge advocate for ample training to fully arm your sales professionals with the tools they need to succeed. However, I don't necessarily think that asking for a detailed schedule of activities each day is effective. It reeks of micro management and that can serve as a deterrent for productivity. Checking in with your employees is important but asking them to take time away from sales to justify their work can negatively affect moral.

@Lydia great questions. Most things can be taught - such as sales. But personality isn't going to change all that much. To be a good sales person you must have great people skills. Whether on the road or in a local shop, a sales person needs to be that outgoing personality type. Teaching sales and teaching technology can be done as long as the person has the right aptitude for sales.

This article raises some interesting questions about assessing a sales team. I wonder however whether some of these issues go back to recruiting. For example, some companies emphasize technical experience over a sales background. So some sales people may know the product well, but they're short on people skills and with others it's the reverse. How does a company strike a balance on these issues? Can you learn to be a good sales person on the job? Or should companies look for strong people skills up front?