When I consider how I spend my time professionally, I find it is often devoted to demystifying two things:

1. What is ‘good’ selling?
2. The proper use of psychometric assessments, especially in sales recruitment

Having written on the former on many occasions, I would like to dedicate this space to the latter – the proper use of psychometric assessments in sales recruitment.

To put this into perspective, my business has psychometrically assessed 40,000+ people in sales, business development and leadership roles using a variety of purpose built assessments.  This has provided us with valuable insight into what assessments work best in sales recruitment.  Over the years we have been exposed to many test publishers promoting their various assessments, claiming this and claiming that. We are constantly scanning for new tools.

We have discovered that there is no one single assessment that can measure everything you want to know about a sales person. Some test publishers have made this claim, however upon investigation we have found that they have often compiled several different assessments (measuring different things) into one offering. In doing so, they reduce the number of items measuring each area; therefore limiting the laser effect you need in sales recruitment.

This brings me to the major issue at hand: sales recruitment is one of the most challenging jobs around.  It is fraught with ambiguities because of the very nature of trying to assess ‘soft skills’ such as attitudes and actual versus perceived capability. Given this complexity, as a sales recruiter it may be beneficial to partner with a qualified and experienced organisation to support you when using assessments.

There is not one-quick-fix to getting this right. To assist you in your sales recruitment, let’s look at three important questions when it comes to using psychometric assessments:

1. Why use assessments?
2. What assessments should you use?
3. When should you use assessments?

Why use assessments?

While you don’t have to use assessments when recruiting, when used in conjunction with a robust sales recruitment process they can add real value to your decision making. The problem arises when assessments are used in place of a multi-pronged recruitment approach.

Recruitment, especially sales recruitment, can be very time consuming, therefore there is a tendency for people to take short cuts and replace the other steps in the recruitment process with a ‘quick’ psychometric assessment to base their hiring decision on.

This ‘assessment only’ approach is not how psychometric assessments are designed to be applied (reputable test publishers will always tell you this). This approach is not best practice; it does not give you all the answers and could get you into trouble with recruitment and anti- discriminatory laws. In fact, best practice states that assessments should account for no more than 20% of your decision making process in recruitment, especially sales.

The other main issue that arises out of this ‘assessment only’ approach is that the ‘assessment’ can get blamed if the sales person doesn’t work out.  Assessing in isolation is the issue here, not the assessment itself.

Psychometric assessments are best used to back up and cross reference the current data you have gathered via other means.   Depending upon which assessments you use, they can corroborate what you have already gathered and give you additional information to further investigate areas of concerns.

Tip: Psychometric assessments should compliment a multi-pronged sales recruitment process rather than be the recruitment process in entirety.

What assessments should you use?

I have seen anything from the CLEO quiz, numerology, star signs, and simplistic 4 quadrant models through to purpose built psychometric assessments used in sales recruitment.

Essentially there are thousands of so called ‘psychometric assessments’ out there, many claiming to test for sales effectiveness and predict sales performance.

So what to use?

First of all, it depends on what you want to measure.  There are a variety of purpose built assessments which are designed to address the following important questions about a candidate:

•  Will they sell?
•  Why will they sell?
•  How do they sell?
•  How well can they sell?

In our work we use a range assessments which have been purpose built to measure different areas including:

•  Personality
•  Motives and Values
•  Prospecting fitness- sales hesitation and call reluctance
•  Leadership potential
•  Cognitive Abilities – i.e. abstract, numeracy, and verbal reasoning, etc.
•  Coping strategies under pressure
•  Emotional Resilience and Emotional Intelligence (EI)

Tip: Depending on the level and complexity of the sales roles you should match the psychometric assessments to the required competencies and areas of capability.

When should you use assessments?

As assessments should not be used as the sole determinant, it is often advised to use them after the first interview but prior to the second interview and reference checking. This is recommended so that the assessment results can be used to verify and check gathered candidate information and then incorporating the results into interview questions and reference checks.

While there are some assessments you can use prior to the first interview or even at the resume submission point, the decision to assess earlier is often based on costs to the business. Obviously, it would be great to test everyone who applies, however this would not be economically viable or recommended in most recruitment situations.

Tip: Use the insight gained through assessments for the second interview questions and reference checks.

Conclusion

Whether you currently use assessments or are considering (recommended) incorporating them, the important point is:

Providing structure and using a multi- pronged approach are the two techniques most likely to help improve the reliability of your sales recruitment process and placements.

Remembering that sales recruitment is one of the most challenging jobs around; the average increase in output resulting from improved selection is approximately 2.5 times greater in sales jobs than in low-complexity, non-sales jobs. This is why is can also be important to partner with an organisation who has a sound understanding and working knowledge of recruitment and assessments.

I wish you happy and successful selling and sales recruitment.

Sue Barrett is Managing Director of BARRETT Pty Ltd. For more information please go to www.barrett.com.au.

You can send feedback via this form.

I find it somewhat frustrating when people make simplistic claims and statements about salespeople like: ‘super sales performers are all risk takers and oblivious to rejection and failure’.

Statements like this are simply not true and trivialise the complex world of selling by trying to box people without proper analysis and insight.

There is a large body of research that shows there are many types of sales people for different types of clients, products, and markets.  Just because a sales person may be excellent in one market may not mean they are well suited for another.

Take call centres for instance.  If the type of sale is simple and transactional, putting in people who like complex problem solving and variety would be a very bad decision.  Boredom and repetition, amongst other things, could see people like this leave sooner than intended or create havoc while there.

The reason I am speaking up about this is I find many people do not understand the intricacies of selling and tend to take a one-type-of-salesperson-does-it-all approach when selecting and developing sales people often leaving them frustrated and angry and not getting the sales performance they want.

In the last 15 years my team and I have analysed and profiled over 100 different types of sales roles as diverse as:

-    Business Banking Sales,
-    Media Sales (TV & Radio)
-    Online Advertising Sales
-    Publishing Sales
-    IT Sales
-    Hi-tech Medical Equipment Sales
-    Pharmaceutical Sales
-    Funeral Sales
-    Wholesale Sales
-    Print and Distribution Sales
-    Telephone Sales (inbound and outbound)
-    Direct Sales (party plan, etc.)
-    Money Market Sales
-    Mortgage Sales
-    Investment Sales
-    Recruitment Sales
-    Industrial Sales
-    Engineering Sales
-    Key Account Management Sales
-    Sales Management
-    Sales Directors
-    Music Licensing Sales
-    Account Co-ordinators
-    Sales Support

I am here to tell you that there were many variations in these sales roles and variation in the styles and types of people needed to perform these roles effectively.  For instance, some need to be very prospecting fit, while others needs to be detailed, patient and very thorough.

When one assumes that an organisation can have one sales force with no differentiation, there are often negative consequences.

These include:

• Individuals don’t work together well.
• Sales opportunities seem to ‘slip away’.
• Individuals can’t seem to get the job done.

The assumption that every salesperson can be all things to every customer does not work.

This assumption regards all customers and salespeople as a commodity, or an interchangeable part. For example, if a salesperson is unable to secure a sale with a customer, the organisation may not make a conclusion that the salesperson does not meet the needs of the customer.

Instead the organisation might view the customer as a commodity or an opportunity that has been lost, and will hope that the salesperson is able to secure another sale with a different customer.

A ‘one-salesperson-does-it-all approach’ does not work when you have a diverse product range or a varied pool of customers.  Each customer has unique needs, operates within a unique organisation, and needs to know different information from the salesperson. Therefore it is necessary to link the salesperson’s style of working to the needs of the customer, your market and your products.

Too little work is done in this area and yet it is one of the most critical areas you need to consider for business success.

The book The Quadrant Solution by Stevens, H & Cox, J, describes a sales model based upon a quadrant that is used to evaluate the organisation and its products on its complexity and the expected customer experience.

Complexity:
When a customer is making a complex purchase, with a lot of customised offerings, the seller needs to do a lot of hand-holding during the purchase and delivery. That would be a high touch sale (hand-holding, longer more secure relationship with seller). If it is a simple purchase and the customer can handle the purchase on their own, this would be a low touch sale (customer is confident in handling purchase, doesn’t need hand-holding, short/temporary relationship).

Customer experience:
When a customer needs a high degree of technical support during and after the purchase, it is a high tech sale. If the customer has the experience and knowledge to handle the technical components of the sale, it is a low tech sale.

In the book he describes four sales styles that link into the quadrant model. These are consultative selling, relationship selling, display selling, and super closer selling.

I have provided examples of each style as a way of demonstrating my point about the variety that exists in sales, however from our research there are even more selling styles or subsets of selling styles.  Not all selling roles will fit these categories however I feel it is a good place to simulate our thinking on this topic and help you make more sense of what you may need by way of sales talent.

Consultative selling style:
Salespeople who adopt a consultative selling style enjoy being the trusted consultant to their customers. They like a degree of complexity in their work, and are comfortable interacting with high-level managers. They are analytical, ambitious, educated, professional, self-confident and well-organised. They are able to work with customers who need technical support and a long-standing relationship (high tech, high touch).

Relationship selling style:
Salespeople who adopt a relationship selling style enjoy building and fostering relationships with customers. They have a strong work ethic and enjoy a hands-on approach when interacting with others. They are warm and personable and are sensitive to problems that the customer may be having. Relationship salespeople are not technically oriented, and focus on the relationship aspect of a sale (low tech, high touch).

Display selling style:
Salespeople who adopt a display selling style are comfortable promoting or displaying a product to the customer in the most effective way. They ensure that their approach is easy, convenient and simple for everyone to understand. They prefer to work with customers on a transactional basis, and are not inclined to provide the technical or long-term relationship support (low tech, low touch).

Super closer selling style:
Salespeople who adopt a super closer selling style are progressive and determined in their approach. They are extroverted, energetic and competitive in their style. They are visionary, entrepreneurial and are often viewed as experts in their field. They tend to get customers excited about the possibilities of a product/service, and their primary focus is on closing the sale. The super closer salesperson is generally moving too fast onto the next prospect to maintain a long-term relationship with the client, but will provide them with the technical support to secure the sale (high tech, low touch).

In conclusion, excellent salespeople can generally sell many things but not usually everything and even if they could, some selling environments would not suit them in the long term and therefore they would not be classified as good sales person for your business if this happened.

Our salesforces should be organised so that the natural selling style of the salesperson compliments the kind of product or service that they are selling, and fits in with the customer’s market.

My point is that we all need to know what type of sales role and sales person our businesses need to prosper. By determining a salesperson’s natural tendency or selling style, we can ensure that this is linked to the customer and products unique needs.

In today’s world we are well equipped to define the type of sales role our business needs and define the salesperson’s selling style to match that role.  So let move away from limiting sales stereotypes and open ourselves to diversity.

Remember everybody lives by selling something.

Happy selling

Now is the time to rethink your sales strategy and your sales force.  Design the sales force your business needs and get great results.

Tip: It’s all in the thinking and planning that happens before the execution.

To help you start your thinking and planning here are two case studies from our work files where the businesses got it right.

Story one: Transform your current sales team into a new sales team

“The Sales Culture transformation and competency project we worked on with you in 2008 has been such a great success for our team.  The culture is now fantastic and the morale of the Sales Team is very good.  We aimed for the culture we wanted and got it.  People have settled into their roles and are working out fantastically. It was the planning and thinking behind it that made it work.  The Competency work has, without a doubt, made a difference. The Sales Competencies are ‘Gold’. We refer to them all the time and the Sales People are using them as well to develop themselves and have clearer, more accountable, performance reviews.  The competencies helped our team realise how responsible they need to be in their roles.”

This is what can happen when you design your sales force to deliver your strategy.  This quote comes from a Sales Director of a business we have worked with for many years.  They had the same sales force structure over the last 15 years and a very stable sales force to go with it.  The team and structure had worked very well, however the market was changing and the business and its sales people needed to adapt and evolve to ensure they were current, fit and productive.

In 2008, this Sales Director realised she needed to develop a new strategy moving forward and with that needed a new sales culture and team to deliver it.  But she didn’t want to get rid of the current sales team.  They were good operators with great industry knowledge and experience.   She knew it would be foolish to start from scratch with a new team and she didn’t want to create confusion or unnecessary unrest or anxiety in her existing team.

Her concerns rested around getting buy-in from the team regarding the new strategy and, in particular, their need to adjust their roles somewhat.  Despite not wanting to lose people she was prepared to do so if necessary.

What did she do?

• Developed her sales strategy and then presented her strategy to her sales team, inviting feedback and explaining ‘why’ they all needed to move in this direction using a well researched, evidenced based approach.  The team knew what was happening in the market place so it came as no surprise to them that they needed to shift.  That is fine intellectually, however we knew the challenge would be in actually getting them to shift in real terms.
• To get the real shift happening she then engaged her team in the development of the new Sales Roles by engaging in a ‘job design’ process with us.
• Out of the ‘job design’ process we developed the right Sales Behavioural Competencies (DNA) and ‘ideal’ role/person specification matched to sales strategy, product and customer base.
• Sales Behavioural Competencies were then linked to the Sales Team performance management reviews and are now being used in coaching, recruitment and succession planning processes.
• Sales Behavioural Competencies were mapped to measurable sales metrics
• The Sales Behavioural Competencies now act as a pivotal reference point in all their work.

As mentioned, the Sales People are using Sales Behavioural Competencies to develop themselves, have clearer, more accountable, performance reviews and better role clarity which means they know how they need to perform to achieve their strategy goals.

Story two: Design the sales team you want from scratch – green fields

A Divisional Manager of a large Australian corporate came to us because they didn’t want to hire people from their industry as they didn’t think they were competitive in the current market. They wanted to refresh the gene pool and bring in fit sales people who were not tarnished by the industry mindset and its way of doing things.  They knew that in this over commoditised marketplace their sales people were their competitive edge.

They were on the right track but didn’t know where and how to start.  So here is what we did together to find elite sales performers:

• Reviewed sales strategy, path to market, and products being sold
• Developed the right Sales Behavioural Competencies (DNA) and ‘ideal’ role/person specification matched to sales strategy, product, and customer base
• Built a structured sales recruitment process and kit
• Targeted industries the new breed of sales people could come from and went to market to find them
• Built and implemented the right sales induction training program matched to sales strategy, sales competencies, product, and customer base
• Had new sales team present their ‘go-to-market’ action plan to senior management before they went to market
• Implemented a sales management support system
• Followed up with infield training and coaching
• Mapped and measured sales metrics

The results were stunning from a sales initiative perspective.

The ‘new breed’ of elite sales performers achieved a sales closing ratio of 4:3 within 2 months against an industry average of 3:1 and sold the annual sales budget within 5 months.

Feedback from the sales people was that this was the best sales recruitment and sales induction process they had ever been through.  In all their sales careers, and many came from big name companies, they have never been set up so well to succeed.  They felt confident, proud, and capable to really deliver.

Feedback from the client:  “We worked in partnership to develop an end-to-end model for a new innovative sales team. The approach was unique in that they worked with us across recruitment, training, needs analysis, pitch planning and the end delivery. They added huge value to any sales process.”

By designing your ‘ideal’ sales force blue print you can build and achieve the following in your business:

• Change your culture by creating the sales culture you want
• Design the ideal sales force you want
• Recruit the sales force you want / your strategy needs
• Refresh your thinking, ideas, actions and results
• Develop career paths and succession planning
• Clear performance expectations
• Clearer, more accountable, performance reviews
• Provide a framework for identifying what a high performing sales person looks for your business
• Profiling of the core sales capabilities / competencies for sales managers/ sales people for use in recruitment, performance management, training, coaching and succession planning.
• Provide a framework for assessing the calibre of candidates as defined by core competencies and values;

As you prepare for the next financial year and are developing your sales strategy take time to reflect on what your ‘ideal’ sales force blue print should be.

Do not underestimate the value of taking time to think and plan, ultimately it could make you a lot more money.

Sincerely, your advocate for selling the  right way.

Have you ever done the math on how much sales recruitment costs you, especially when you get it wrong?

If you are like most managers then chances are you haven’t.  So let’s consider the costs, overt and covert, involved in sales recruitment.

If you don’t know it already, sales recruitment is one of the toughest assignments around.  I know this firsthand, as I was in this role for over 8 years with a leading consultancy and recruitment company. During this time, I interviewed about 8,000 sales people face-to-face in the technical, industrial, medical, and scientific industries.  Remember, this is not counting all the resumes I screened manually as my experience was pre the internet and we had to do everything manually – no ‘word search’.

My time in sales recruitment gave me a great grounding and honed the skills to select good sales performers but not everyone has had the chance to practice.  It was a fascinating social study on what makes a great sales performer. Upon reflection, it was a catalyst for my research into illuminating and defining the elusive qualities that make for highly successful sales people and the development of IP specifically in the Australian Sales Competency space.

It also led me to map out and demystify the sales recruitment process by putting in place relevant content and a structure people can follow.   What this structure and the right selection content do is place control back into the hands of the managers who are responsible for recruiting sales people for their businesses.   It also made me plainly aware of the costs involved.

The problem is that, for most managers or business owners, sales recruitment happens sporadically and too many managers still use unstructured recruitment practices that are the least predictive of sales performance.  Most are just winging it, relying on gut feel, and never getting enough experience to give them something to fall back on when they need it.

It’s recruitment by hope, recruitment by chance.

Taking this ad hoc approach adds to the cost of sales recruitment because even if you get it right you don’t know why you got it right, therefore making it difficult to repeat the process.

With everyone being so focused on cost management its also important we do the math on the cost of sales recruitment and the cost of getting it wrong.  We do this so that when you look at your sales recruitment you can make sure your actions will give you a better return on investment and that you hire the right sales people.

Any action we do has a cost (monetary, energy, time, etc.) associated with it.  Whether that action propels us to profit from it or costs us more than we intended is the issue at hand.   Getting sales selection wrong can cost you more than you have probably imagined.

What are the OVERT and COVERT costs associated with these issues?

• Keeping a poor sales performer on too long who is not producing and not having a better performer to replace them (Note to self : you should always be on the look out for top sales performers, keep a list)
• Sales territory vacant for too long
• Poor fit: Not selecting the right type of person for your business culture, strategy and task
• Taking too long to make selection decisions thus losing good potential recruits
• Little or no structure to your sales selection process
• Using the wrong recruiters to get you the right people (sadly too many recruiters do not know what a ‘good’ sales person looks like)

All these equal lost revenue, lost profits, lost market share, lost customers relationships, customers business drying up, loss of reputation, internal disharmony, team issues, etc.

Let’s now look at it in stark terms:

Case study: A sales person who earns a base of $60,000 per annum plus extras stays with a Company for 3 months and doesn’t work out:

Overt Financial Costs
(based on a conservative estimate)

• Advertising and Recruitment Agency costs = $10,000+
• Candidate travel costs (if applicable) = $500
• Induction Training costs = $5,000 (in-house and/or formal/external training)
• Salary and benefit costs = $15,000 plus super, work cover, etc.
• Additional costs (car/car allowance, phone, travel, etc.) = $3,000
• Severance pay (2 weeks notice) = $1,600
• Manager’s time to recruit 40hrs @ $60/hr ($100K salary) = $2,400
• Administration costs: $2,000
• Sales lost due to poor performance (2.5 times salary is the average) = $37,500

Estimation of Overt Cost Total for 3 – 4 months = $67,000

Then add:

Covert Financial Costs

• Potential litigation costs = ?
• Lost sales opportunities due to vacant territory = ?
• Manager’s coaching time = ?
• Team morale = ?
• Customer loyalty = ?
• Impact on Reputation = ?

While I may have missed some things or overestimated others, the math clearly shows that getting sales recruitment wrong is very costly.

I suggest you do an audit and check out where you have made the most of your actions and where you may need to tighten up.

Remember that its all in the preparation and execution of the right activities and make sure you act wisely and in your best interest.

If you want further information how to how to structure your sales recruitment practices go to  Getting Sales Recruitment Right

Sincerely, your advocate for selling the right way.

1.      How much is a good sales person worth to you?
2.      How much is a good hiring manager worth to you?

Speaking about recruitment in these current economic times may seem foolish, however in the area of selling, this is where you could make great strides by picking up highly effective sales people who have found themselves on the job market or are looking for a better business to work in.   I know of a few highly competent sales people and sales managers who have been let go along with other staff as part of large staff reduction strategies.

In my opinion, the last people I would let go in this market would be highly competent and high producing sales people.

Which leads me to the contentious issue about who makes the decisions to hire and fire sales people. In particular, who hires sales people.

The financial and personal impact of the Hiring Manager in any organisation is enormous.  They  decide who can and cannot be hired.  We know that the attitudes, preferences and prejudices, of the person responsible for recruitment will affect the quality of the people hired, even if that person is not the direct line manager of the new recruit.   If we reflect we can see how our own emotions, behavioural preferences, prejudices and ideals impacting on who joins our company.

There is a direct financial impact on any business when it comes to hiring new sales staff.

Sales Managers are directly accountable for the success or otherwise of the salespeople they manage – their own performance is critically judged by the performance their team and sales managers live or die, career wise, by how well their sales people perform.

So who is in charge of the selection criteria and recruitment decisions of your sales people?

Realistically it should be the people how are actually leading the sales team, i.e. the Sales Managers.  Many sales managers intuitively know what they want and need however, I often see two issues arise which can dramatically affect the quality of the sales recruitment decisions made by sales managers:

1. Many sales managers do not know how to clearly articulate and define the qualities they need in terms that can be assessed and measured objectively
2. Many sales managers are not well trained in effective, structured recruitment practices and often rely on gut feel, resumes, unstructured references and the ‘personality’ of the candidate which are the least predictive of sales performance.

This leaves them vulnerable to poor hiring decisions and means then that recruitment processes and decisions are often left to those people who are not directly responsible for managing the sales team.

When another person is in charge of recruiting sales people and is not the line manager responsible for the new sales person, it is often very hard to appreciate the qualities, knowledge and skills that are required to perform successfully in a sales role, especially if they have never been in a sales role themselves.

This can lead to other major issues, for instance I was told this story recently by a frustrated sales manager:

HR Manager (who owns the hiring decision) tells Sales Manager after a sales candidate interview, “You can’t hire this sales person because they are too sales focused”.

The sales manager asked what the HR manager meant and they replied that “I think this person is too pushy and we want ‘nice’ people who are friendly and helpful’.  The sales manager was so annoyed because what he saw in the candidate was the assertive, proactive, professional behaviours and skills necessary for a B2B sales person and now he was going to have to deal with the consequences of this hiring decision, i.e. another ‘nice’ person who won’t get out and sell.  He confessed he already had too many of these people.

If sales managers cannot be well equipped and in charge of the hiring decision or cannot clearly express what they need to another, then those people who are in charge of recruitment, in my opinion, need to be held directly accountable for the performance of the sales people they select because:

Cost without Accountability leads to

• Hiring people who do not produce or stay
• Failing to hire people who would have produced and stayed

To impact positively on the successful recruitment of sales people I recommend that non line management recruiters do one or more of the following:

• Relinquish control of sales assessment, selection and staffing if they do not wish to be accountable and allow their sales managers to be trained in effective recruitment practices so they can best manage the process
• Be required to accompany salespeople on prospecting activities and sales calls for at least 14 days per year to better appreciate what happens in the role
• Share results accountability for sales revenue by participating in a base salary plus commission incentive measured on the performance of the sales force they have recommended.

Simply put, the right thing to do is to train up our sales managers in how to properly define, assess and select the right sales people for their teams and business and give them control over the sales recruitment process.   Then they can be held truly accountable for their team and their results.

In sales you hire results not potential.

Your advocate for selling the right way.

FYI Structured Sales Recruitment Kits available at www.barrett.com.au or call (+61) 03 9532 7677.