q

Testing times when recruiting ‘good’ salespeople

August 6, 2009 in Recruitment, Sales Assessments, Sales Research, Sales Talent, Uncategorized

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.

1 Comment »

Why everybody lives by selling something – part 2

July 30, 2009 in Culture

For some time now I have been testing the concept of ‘everybody lives by selling something’ with almost everyone I meet, including senior leadership teams (comprising of HR, Finance, IT, Operations, and Sales), primary school teachers and administration staff, senior banking risk professionals, and health professionals (including my podiatrist and GP).

I am curious to see how people respond and how they see themselves in relation to the concept of ‘everybody lives by selling something’.

Often when one mentions the words ‘selling’ or ‘sales’ you can see people visibly recoil in disgust, with many immediately saying something like “I don’t sell” or “It’s not my job”.  As discussed in previous posts, people often reference limited stereotypes about selling which are usually tainted with negative, manipulative, references that most people find offensive and unable to relate to.

However, since I have been asking people to consider the concept of ‘everybody lives by selling something’ I have been pleasantly surprised at the responses.  It appears that most agree with the statement, whether they are officially in a sales role or not.

While initially, some people viewed the statement as only applying to a commercial transaction where money was exchanged and did not see themselves related to sales at all, they soon opened up as we explored the concept further and applied the principle to any form of exchange between two or more people. When we discussed that most people essentially work in a ‘contact dependant’ career where some form of exchange is essential for them to succeed in their job we then agreed that, indeed, ‘everybody lives by selling something’.

Take for instance, a recent experience I had where I was interviewed (Michael Parkinson style), by the Head of Risk for a major Australian bank, in front of his senior leadership team all of whom are senior risk professionals.

Now in most organisations ‘risk’ is not usually associated positively with ‘sales’.  In fact, there is often a ‘standoff’ between risk and sales – the ‘us versus them’ approach.   I have seen both sides of the fence roll their eyes at the mention of the other.

For this interview I was asked to expand upon the concept of ‘everybody lives by selling something’ and the Principle of Exchange.  My client sponsor (and interviewer) has worked with me for some years and wanted to raise to a conscious level the importance of proactive, open, and transparent relationships.  He knew that the concept of ‘everybody lives by selling something’ may be a challenge for some, however he felt it was so important he was prepared to take the risk (pardon the pun).  The good news is that it was received in a favourable light, even for a tough audience like this.

Here is an excerpt from a communication piece that went out to the group post the session.  The PIE Model is especially well worth a read:

“…Essentially Sue believes that if we have an idea, product, service, skill, capability or talent by which we earn a living we need to be able to sell, in the general sense of the word. To put it another way, in order to maximise our impact and ongoing influence we need to ensure our talents and capabilities are visible to those who need to be influenced.

In a previous life I used a model called the “PIE Model”. This suggests that 70% of an individual’s impact or effectiveness is defined by their Performance (P), 20% by their Image (I) and 10% by their Exposure (E) to the right people within the business. Whether the percentages are correct or not is moot.

The point is that Performance alone will not maximise your impact. You also have to be seen as credible and have ready access to the decision makers. Imagine the world’s greatest Op Risk professional who portrays an image that alienates the business team they work with or equally a super star technocrat in Market Risk who sits in a corner all day never interacting with their business partners or leaders. Both will do a good job, but neither will create an impact to demand respect or influence their business leaders.

To be clear – I am very keen that we all perform to the highest possible standard. I also want us all to focus on becoming more effective by improving our interaction with our business and functional partners.

Consider your exposure to the broader business, think about how you communicate with and influence your risk and functional colleagues, reflect on how your persona and image impact on the messages that you are trying to convey. If you’ve never considered this before discuss it with your line manger and build it into your development plan.

One other aspect of Sue’s message that resonated with me was her assertion that a great salesperson will build trust, communicate in a transparent way and do what they say they will do. This creates their competitive advantage as sales people. Sounds like a good set of principles to me and I believe that these traits are also those of a successful Risk professional!”

I commend the leaders of this business for taking a stand and putting the concept out there to be discussed openly and candidly.

Why is this important to you and all the people in your business?

The message is clear that we all are, indeed, responsible for how we manage our careers, our perceptions, our image, and our roles within businesses and the broader community.

We all affect each other in terms of how we relate and how we communicate our intentions and actions.  Sure, it is the primary responsibility of the sales team to go out and proactively source new business. However, we are all representatives of our businesses – from the back room to the front counter, from the customer service call to an internal email, from the company website to the comments on your Facebook page or your Tweets.

How we all speak about and reference the organisation and the people within can influence and impact on sales results and ultimate success of the organisation.

Many people who know me have heard me say that I would love every role in every business to have a sales capability defined in it.  So far the signs are promising as it appears that nearly everyone I speak to is able to relate to ‘everybody lives by selling something’ at its broadest level.

So why not ask your people how they feel about the concept ‘everybody lives by selling something’ and let me know they have to say using the Request information form.

No Comments »

4 valuable life skills that make for success in sales and any other role

July 22, 2009 in Emotional Intelligence, Self Development, Tips

There are many things written and said about effective sales people, effective leaders, successful entrepreneurs, great teams and so on.

Many descriptions are in circulation.  There is an overabundance of experts recommending this approach one day and that approach the next.

Those of us who want to be effective and successful often follow the advice of those experts however we are at risk of turning ourselves inside out and losing sight of what we are really here to do if we keep trying to bend to the winds and whims of the latest management trends, fads, findings, research, etc.

I am not against reading widely, continuous learning, adopting new ways and adapting to change as you have probably realised by now.

However, in recent times I have been feeling overwhelmed by too much information and instead found myself opting for a ‘less is more’ approach to life.

As I always do, I have been sifting through a lot of information and finding that I am beginning to distill some fundamental truths that hold true whatever the fad or trend of the day.

On my most  recent distillation process I have found that I was able to identify four valuable life skills that work very well for me in every situation I have found myself in.  You will recognise that these skills are essential to effective selling, and I am sure you won’t miss their relevance to all other roles we play, personally and professionally.

So in the spirit of ‘less is more’ here are my 4 valuable life skills which continue to serve me very well:

  1. The ability to ask good questions
  2. The ability to actively listen
  3. The ability to receive and give honest feedback
  4. The ability to reflect on my actions

I hope they serve you well too. Enjoy your sales week.

Remember everybody lives by selling something.

No Comments »

How we can learn MasterSales lessons

July 16, 2009 in Attitudes & Behaviours, Coaching, Culture, Performance Management, Sales Leadership, Sales Talent

Like many people in Australia, my family and employees have been captivated by MasterChef Australia.

What I love about MasterChef is that it can be seen as a metaphor for expressing our talents and being the best we can be.  Given my interest in everything to do with sales, personal mastery and performance, I particularly love the parallel I have been able to draw about what it takes to be an elite master chef and an elite sales person and elite sales leader by the observation I have made in MasterChef.

As lessons for people wanting to master the sales profession,MasterChef works on many levels:

  • It’s about acquiring and honing a range of skills, often difficult to master skills individually and even more so in concert with each other
  • It’s about receiving and dealing with real feedback about real results
  • It’s about learning from your mistakes – practice, practice, practice
  • It’s about resilience – being able to get back up when you are down and face a new day whatever it may bring
  • It’s about personal insight and self-awareness
  • It’s about humility – letting go of the old to embrace the new
  • It’s about listening to and understanding what needs to be achieved
  • It’s about operating under pressure, sometimes extreme pressure (internal and external)
  • It’s about finding your own character and what you stand for; your values, your purpose
  • It’s about friendship and community even in a competitive environment
  • It’s about skillful learning – including learning how to be coached and mentored
  • It’s about personal responsibility
  • It’s about respect – for self, for peers, your leaders, and your profession
  • It’s about process – following the recipe, the fundamental rules of chemistry that work
  • It’s about personal leadership and being true to yourself
  • It’s about potential, opportunity, creativity, innovation and achievement

In my opinion, the real heroes of this program are the judges and guest chefs who have shown leadership and clarity of purpose in their mentoring and managing of the various contestants.

As leaders they display and model:

  • Their skillful leadership as masters in their own profession – they know what it takes to be a master craftsman in their profession.  There is something magical in watching a skillful person create something wonderful.
  • Their respect for the discipline of training, learning, constant practice and continuous improvement
  • Their respect for process and quality – the foundations, the recipes, the ingredients. As leaders they leave nothing is half baked (pardon the pun).
  • Their love of and passion for what they do and the expectation they have for each contestant to reach and push beyond their own potential and what they thought they were capable of.  Their encouragement and desire for excellence in each person is outstanding.
  • Their coaching skills – from running the master classes to their observations and feedback at the contestants work bench as they work through real life challenging situations is nothing short of text book.
  • Their constructive and honest feedback at judgment time as well as their ability to drill down to the fine detail to show where contestants did well and where they could improve makes for fine example of performance management conversations at their best.
  • Their care, respect and concern for each person and each person’s special gifts and talents.
  • Their regular referencing to and questioning of the real intentions of each person to make sure each contestant was in it for real.
  • Their knowledge about how to run a viable business – from cost of ingredients to the true value of a dish.
  • The standards they set.  There is nothing mediocre aboutMasterChef.

My hope is that we as Sales Leaders can aspire to be role models in the same way these leaders are for their people.

We each could learn lessons from how all the people on this show have managed their part in it – the good and the bad.

MasterChef inspires me to continue to live by our motto at BARRETT, ‘excellence through purposeful action’.

Excellence means giving our best to whatever we do and giving our best to relationships. Setting noble and realistic goals and remembering to plan and practice. We don’t try to do everything; instead we focus on developing our special gifts.

Purposeful Action means having a clear vision of what we want to accomplish. Knowing why we are doing what we are doing. Having a clear goal and getting back on track if we get scattered or distracted. Finishing what we start and persevering until we get results.

As author William Arthur Ward quotes  “The price of excellence is discipline. The cost of mediocrity is disappointment.”

I commend MasterChef for its devotion to excellence through purposeful action. Thank you.

Remember everybody lives by selling something.

No Comments »

Are you creating competing motivations in your sales force?

July 10, 2009 in Ethics & Values, Sales Leadership, Strategy

How to incentivise and reward sales people has long been a contentious topic.  Too many times I have seen businesses set up incentive programs that reward the wrong behaviours which can affect team morale, client relationships, sales, staff retention, and so on.

For instance, I recently met the managing director of a medium sized software business who asked me why would his sales people keep selling one version of their product when they had been instructed to also sell in a newer more comprehensive version of the product.

I asked him two questions:
1.    “How do your sales people get incentivised for each product sale?”
2.    “Do they earn most of their income from their commissions or from their base salary?”

It turned out that his sales people earned more commission by selling in the older version than the newer version of his product.  And the sales people made the bulk of their income from their commissions rather than from their salaries.

There you have it.  What makes perfect sense to the sales person – “If I make more money by selling in one type of product and the majority of my income comes from my commissions I would be stupid selling anything else.” does not always work for the organisation or the customer.

Lesson: If you want a different outcome (as did the aforementioned MD), you need to think about what behaviours you want to drive and reward in your people that don’t create competing motivations.

And here in lies the issue with certain aspects of the Financial Planning industry.

Much of what is being written about the Financial Planning industry in current and recent times is centering around the issue about competing motivations.

As I see it there are two different models in operation in the Financial Planning industry:

Fee for service model

  • Is where you engage an independent Financial adviser to guide you and instruct you in your financial planning and wealth management strategies.  These people are in the business of selling their consulting services and their advice. They earn their  income purely off their hourly consulting time.  Service fees are applicable to the level of service provided.  Their focus is on advising on the three keys are of wealth management:  Creation, Consolidation and Distribution with no products commission attached to their advice.

Product sales model

  • Is where you buy a specific product or suite of products to incorporate into your financial planning and wealth management strategies.  In this instance you know you are buying a product via a transactional product sale.  You can do this at a bank branch for instance.  Some people who run their own self-managed super funds work this way by purchasing only product.   Others may use a broker who sells a range of these products and can provide easy access to the right product you need.  Brokers usually make their money by getting a commission on the sale of these products.  Some brokers also make trail commissions for the life time of the sale which is where you are seeing an increase in complaints.  This model is basically the old Insurance Sales model.

There is nothing wrong with these models so long as they are open and transparent and do what they say they do.

Basically, people should know what they are getting i.e. independent advice for a specified fee or product for a specified fee/commission.  For instance there are customers who do not want to ‘pay fee for service’ and prefer the commission model so these two models offer choice which is only fair in an open market.

However the problems arising for the Financial Planning industry is when people using the ‘product sales model’ try to pass it off as the ‘independent financial adviser’ model.  All this does is create competing motivations like:

“Do I give my client what is best for them or best for me?”
“I need to sell more product to supplement my retirement pool not necessarily my clients.”

The issue as I see with this approach it is that we are more likely to get products that make the most money for the broker or planner not the best product or solution for us.  We are at risk of becoming a vehicle for them to make as much money as possible at our expense as is evidenced by some of the more spectacular business failures in recent times.

Financial Planners who are really only selling product with a commission structure attached as their main source of income cannot truly act in an independent  advisory or consulting role.

The competing motivation that can arise is that they can become more concerned with how they could get paid rather than how they can provide better advice for their clients.

This poses some important questions for the industry:

  • Why have these competing motivations been allowed to manifest?
  • In the industry trying to squeeze a product sales model into a consulting sales model?
  • What is the industry doing about creating a client centric model where it’s all about the client and the client’s outcome?
  • What relationships have been created with the product suppliers that may be leading to these competing motivations?

In my opinion the terms Financial Adviser or Financial Planner have been poorly defined and often misused by the industry potentially leading to misunderstandings, confusion, and in some cases distress and financial loss for some customers because they did not get what they paid for.

In my opinion, those who sell product should be called a Financial Product Specialist or Financial Products Broker.

And those who truly practice legitimate Fee for Service models can rightly call themselves a Financial Adviser or Financial Planner.

Clearly this issue will not go away until the industry finds the best way to legitimately define Financial Advising or Financial Planning and stop creating opportunities for competing motivations which only serve to devalue their industry and its potential for a truly professional model that works for all.  More work to be done here .

Remember everybody lives by selling something.

No Comments »

← Previous Entries
Next Entries →