Failure is a two way street in that both management (the company) and the employee did not accomplish the objectives. Employee failures are always well documented but few leadership teams take the time to understand where and how they failed too. The typical sales leadership failures we see on a continuing basis are:

1. Setting growth goals to challenge hunters but hiring farmers to deliver the numbers. This never works so the company starts viewing the sales staff as independent contractors and retools the commission plan to performance levels no one in the history of the company has ever achieved. The underlying attitude is – if we don’t get what we want, we won’t pay them anything!

2. Not using objective screening tools to understand if applicants have the skills, aptitudes and motivations to do the job. Typical final selections are best described as beauty contests based on references, resumes and recruiting relationships build during the interview process.

3. No definition or accountability regarding a consistent go to market sales process thus allowing everyone to do their own thing. The chaos that results is only amplified in terms of gross forecast inaccuracies.

These leadership failures are all fixable – CRO’s have to own their role and do it.

80% of the challenges in meeting revenue objectives originate in two areas:

1. Not knowing or being able to explain your Differentiating Value (DV) in the prospect’s world. DV is the cornerstone of your entire go-to-market process so trying to sell without it is equivalent to trying to build a house without first constructing the foundation.

2. Hiring the wrong sales people. Understanding the hunter and farmer roles in any revenue system is critical for staffing your go-to-market platform. Both roles are equally important for success and need to be clearly defined in the revenue plan before staffing selections are made. We continually see organizations hire candidates they like rather than the talent they need.

Both issues are fixable – give us a call if you would like some guidance on how to proceed. This is the 80/20 profile of our business so there isn’t much we haven’t already seen.

The process of selling (prospecting, qualifying and closing) and the responsibilities of sales management (coaching, accountability, incenting and staffing) have not changed – the tools are advancing but the end game is still the same – make the numbers. These new tools are interesting, some totally entertaining, and the global computer and communications technology industries are enjoying substantial revenue uplifts trying to convince you these are ‘must have’ resources but tools alone won’t make the business successful. Time to get your head out of the ‘cloud’ (yes, another technology must have) and back to the blocking and tackling basics for making the numbers.

The short answer is:  Leadership teams strategize systems – not tactics.

My experience suggests most companies will strategically plan and develop their infrastructure systems (lean manufacturing systems, global IT systems, ISO 9000 systems, etc.) as core assets of the business but invest little time on their revenue processes.  That is not surprising when you consider sales is not a college degree discipline (in sales, you earn your PhD on the street) so the typical planning discussion for sales ends up being a series of tactical decisions like attending more trade shows, increasing promotions, upgrading the web site, adding social networking, etc.   Once leadership teams realize how the 4 core processes of a closed-loop Revenue System can be integrated into a system that actually supports the business vision, the roadmap for growth becomes much less virtual.

Look at the transaction from the prospect’s world and define how their overall performance is improved by having your product / service. That is your Differentiating Value and you can never have too much DV. Most prospects are already buying from someone else today so the more DV-based improvements your products deliver to the prospect’s business, the better platform you have for revenue growth.

The question always comes up…“What if they are happy with a competitor’s product and there doesn’t seem to be a benefit to making change?” This happens every day in sales. Our observation is one of two situations typically applies. If your product delivers substantial, compelling DV to your market and the sales rep has asked all the Critical Qualifying Questions for Motivation but the prospect is not responding, your rep is 1.) not connecting with the emotional buyer or 2.) the prospect is not a ‘fit’ for your DV. Assuming the prospect is not a fit for your DV, it is better to know that as early as possible in the sales cycle so you don’t waste time pursuing and forecasting dead end deals.

The interesting part of these discussions is no executive has ever said we have a world class sales revenue system. When asked, they all site almost endless examples of disappointments ranging from failed campaigns to failed hires.

So, the answer to the question is more about “how long can you wait?” before deciding to make your revenue system a core asset of the business just like the other world class systems you have in place today. The bottom line is a closed-loop revenue system will outperform and be more economical to operate than the alternatives.

Companies have discovered their “go to market” process cannot be left to independent interpretation. Having regional or district offices introduce, position and sell your products/services in totally different ways has proven to be costly, inefficient and unproductive. The go to market process starts with the age old 20 second intromercial and runs through how you position your offerings to qualify, forecast and close new business.

If you feel your go to market process is rock solid, ask you executive team to give a 20 sec intromercial at the next team meeting. If the executive team is not on the same page about how they introduce the business, the sales team will not be there either. Random revenue processes are seldom part of any successful plan or strategy.

My experience suggests all companies do have some form of revenue system (heart) in place today. The reality is most are the “open loop” intermittent variety meaning the core revenue tasks of selling, forecasting, rewarding performance and staffing operate as standalone events with minimal process accountability. They may be done by one individual but that person addresses these as independent – sometimes even burdensome – tasks.

All companies have revenue stimulators (cold call Fridays, end of quarter discount promotions, etc.) that are used to keep the vision alive – and the doors open – but these are best described as tactical adrenalin, not a revenue system.  When these no longer produce the results needed, the quick-fix option is lowering the revenue bar to align with current ‘system’ capabilities assuming the financial structure can accommodate the reductions. This is the drug of choice for sustaining most ‘open loop’ based revenue models…and the number one reason why companies prefer a ‘closed loop’ revenue system (heart).