“Bob” and “Joe” are salespeople on a 21-person team where everyone is paid a small salary and commissions. Bob and Joe are great friends, and are the top producers on their team. Together they produce 83 percent of the company’s sales volume and average $250,000 a year in salary and commissions each.
At every monthly meeting they get the pat on the back for being top producers. Depending on which guy wins in any given month, he gets the front-door parking spot for the next month and his picture on the wall.
At the end of the year, one of them always wins the sales trophy and the all-expenses paid trip.
And all the other salespeople scratch their heads in wonder at how these guys seem to pull this off without ever looking like they're doing any work.
Speaking of the rest of the team, the other 19 salespeople produce 17 percent of the company’s sales and average $47,000 a year in salary and commissions. And no matter how many times you've changed people, tweaked compensation, moved managers or begged, this just doesn't seem to change.
Unfortunately, the stockholders and board of directors has noticed. And since you are the executive who built this team, you are the one who was told, “The fat must be trimmed from the sales budget or you’ll be trimmed from the company.”
At this point, which of these two groups would you look at to trim some of that fat?
- 2 salespeople who cost you $500,000 and produce 83 percent of your sales.
- 19 salespeople who cost you $893,000 and produce 17 percent of your sales.
Admittedly this is an absurd question without more facts. But for conversation's sake, which would you choose to let go based on current knowledge? Would it be the producers or the underachievers on the team?
Easy choice, right?
Let’s add another factor to your decision.
Bob and Joe each work a total of one hour and six minutes a day, but the rest of the team works a full day and sometimes more.
Who would you fire now? Any change?
Have I at least piqued your curiosity?
More factors needed? Fine.
Within the 19-person sales group there are three natural leaders, 12 hard-working people two slackers and two rookies.
Between you and me, the slackers are toast. But that's just a short-term fix that doesn't address the real problem. So let’s add a few more factors and increase your understanding of how this happened so you can make a more informed choice.
Your company brokers used goods that come from many sources, and you never know at any given moment what will be for sale tomorrow. You’ve built a bunch of systems to move the inventory through the warehouse, and one of those systems is designed to inform the entire sales team of what’s available, so they can get out there and sell it.
It's a fast-pace sales environment, and everyone, including your customers, knows it.
At exactly 9 a.m. and 1 p.m. every day, the system releases the "new inventory for sale" counts to your entire team. There is a rule that says “Whoever gets a truckload under contract first, wins.” (You want competitive salespeople, so you’ve leveraged competition everywhere.)
Of course, one of the fall-outs of this rule is that salespeople and customers come to agreement too quickly, and occasionally a customer cancels a deal. So your inventory system lets the salesperson tag the inventory as “Under Contract” once they have a verbal order, making it off limits to the rest of the team. But it also allows them to change it to “Contract Canceled” up to 30 minutes later, if the customer doesn't commit to the electronic contract.
Of course, you would rather have contracts that are solid, so each month you reward a family dinner gift certificate to the salesperson with the least amount of canceled contracts.
Something that has always caused you wonder about Bob and Joe, however, is they always seem to have the most canceled contracts. But you’ve always laughed it off, because they are the top two producers in your company and they can afford dinner out whenever they like.
Based on this new intel, have you changed your mind about what fat to trim?
Probably not. But the story isn’t over, is it?
What if you learned Bob and Joe are the top salespeople, because they’ve figured out how to get into the inventory system at 8:57 a.m. and 12:57 p.m. – three minutes earlier than the rest of the team.
Here’s their entire sales process (this gets implemented twice each day):
- 8:57 a.m. – Begin searching inventory for truckloads of the easy-to-move stuff. Note the lot number of every large quantity of the hot items my customers will want right away.
- 9:00 a.m. – Start tagging the best lots with “Under Contract” so the other salespeople can’t get to them.
- 9:05 a.m. – Blast my customers with the inventory list that’s available. Set the starting price and give them a 10-minute window to respond with their best offers.
- 9:15 a.m. – Blast all customers with the current bids and give them one more chance to increase their offers.
- 9:23 a.m. – Close the sales based on best offers received.
- 9:25 a.m. – Change "Under Contract" to “Contract Canceled” on all lots not moved.
- 9:30 a.m. to 12:57 p.m. – Do whatever I want.
Any change in thinking about who you would fire now? Is the fact that Bob and Joe are cheating enough to cross your ethical boundaries?
I’ll admit, it’s a complex choice. On one hand you must congratulate these guys on their creative approach. But on the other, you must wonder what else they might be doing that goes against your ethical standards and beliefs.
And as an executive at the company, your obligations are to your stockholders, your company and the entire team first, and to any single employee last.
Now let me ask you a totally different set of questions that go to the core of the point I'm making.
Suppose you had built your sales team so that everyone was paid a salary to implement the company’s sales systems. And suppose you gave the dinners to the people who found ways to improve the system itself. And suppose you gave bonuses to the entire team whenever the changes they made in the system increased the volume of sales that system produced.
- Would 90 percent of your team be sucking in 64 percent of the team’s salary budget while producing only 17 percent of the result? (Would you even be carrying 21 salespeople.)
- Would Bob and Joe have horded their secrets, or would they have shared them with the team?
- When they shared their ideas with the team, is it possible one of the other team members might have taken the “create a short-window auction” concept and perhaps figured out how to use that concept to move some of the less-desirable product?
- Would you be spending $1.4 million on your sales team's salary?
- Would the stockholders and board of directors be on your ass to trim the fat -- would you even have any fat to be trimmed?
- Would your own job be on the line?
This is but one example in hundreds of why sales commissions must die.
And yes, it's an absolutely true example.
Gill E. Wagner, Sage of Selling
President of Honest Selling
Founder of the Yellow-Tie International Business Development Association