Business Management Structure Continued

OK!!  So I know everyone has been waiting intensely for my game-changing, profound solution to the Sales Management problem detailed in my last post.  Never fear!  The solution is hear!  Hahaha. 

Anyways, I think the most obvious solution would be (that's a very strong "would") to simply hire a different type of person for the management position - put more scrutiny into that promotion given the specific traits that could make or break the rest of the team being managed.  That produces another problem, though: sales people tend to be very achievement-oriented (in my experience).  They like recognition, and especially with the hard work and long hours many of these folks put in to their job, they need a pat on the back/raise/promotion to a) feel like the job has been worth the effort and b) they probably need to value those things to be successful at the job in the first place.  I know that last sentence didn't make any sense, but damnit, I don't care!  You people are so fickle...

So my suggestion is rather than change who you hire, change the structure into which you hire them.  Right?  Attack the problem at the source.  Now, what we need is a way to get "big picture" people into management positions, while keeping top producers motivated and continually receiving promotions... I've got it! 

First, take the "Sales Manager" position and completely change the title.  Yes, perhaps this position requires more experience, but it is a completely different role than the Sales Rep so "Sales Manager" is almost misleading considering its overall purpose.  Maybe change it to something like "Enterprise Relationship Associate" or "Strategic Sales Team Member" or something that doesn't imply that it is "above" the Sales Rep position.

Second, change the way the role is described.  No longer is this the "manager" of the sales team (after all, I'm sure some Sales Executive could find time to check in with the team once a month or once a quarter to see if they're hitting their numbers, right?), but rather a "go-between" - a coordinator, if you will - who recognizes the high potential opportunities that span across the team and stays in touch with the team members to make joint calls or whatever to build those opportunities into some huge.  This person might have a yearly quota, but no monthly quota because the idea is that their opportunities will takes some time to build, and will pay off in a big way down the road.  This person could also handle sales training for the team to keep them up-to-date on new sales tactics and help the team to share successes and train each other in the areas in which they excel.

Third, create tiers for the sales team.  Perhaps the upper tiers have some sort of "reporting" responsibility, but no requirements to manage the team.  Just a title and pay raise that makes them feel special (pay would obviously be more than likely a higher percentage of commission rather than a higher base pay).  So the tiers could be something like this:

Sales Assistant
Sales Rep
Senior Sales Rep
Sales Account Executive

So clearly there is a feeling that meeting and exceeding quotas is being rewarded.  And then maybe you throw in the reporting requirement (Senior Sales Rep is required to collect and report numbers on a monthly basis to the Sales Executive who then submits a monthly report to the CEO or whatever) so there is some measure of increased responsibility.

And there you have it!: An enterprise "management" position that is equal to a Sales Rep position (after all, I think you could argue that this position belongs in the marketing department anyways), fulfills it's duties without needing to micro-manage the team, and a tiered promotions system to make the reps feel valued.  ANd think about this: with this system, you would actually be promoting and rewarding the REPS WHO ARE ACTUALLY BRINGING IN YOUR MONTHLY REVENUE (rather than the Manager that yells at them every week for not doing well enough).  Important?  I think so. 

I actually think this would be incredible beneficial from an HR perspective as well.  I say this because me and few other Reps I know would actually fit in better to the "Sales Manager" position because of some of the strategic/marketing thought processes required for that position.  I am going to be a lot more attentive (and have an easier time selling myself) to a "Enterprise Relationship Associate" job title than "Sales Manager".  And I imagine that someone who really loves sales, quotas, etc (the stuff I hate!) would be far more attracted to a Sales Rep, Senior Sales Rep, etc position as well.

The main purpose of this solution is to provide an environment where:

1) Your workers aren't doing "double-duty" - i.e. Sales Reps already do a great job managing and being hard on themselves, they don't really need a Sales Manager to do it
2) Sales Reps feel recognition and promotional opportunities in the organization for performing well/their position title indicates their importance to the company
3) Quality of life is better - stress is still there, but much lower because the Sales Reps are managing themselves rather than having their personal pressure doubled on them by their manager
4) You are placing the right people in the right positions because the titles and duties of a Sales Rep vs. Sales Manager are more attractive and fitting to the types of people that would really excel at them.

Number 4 is pretty critical because if you hire the wrong people into the wrong positions, this system starts to fall apart, but there are some pretty sophisticated controls in place in most HR departments that keep that sort of thing from happening too often.

What do you think?  Would you like this structure?  What holes am I missing in this idea?

Business Management Structure

I think it's worthwhile to start this blog off with with a topic I've been thinking about a lot lately, and which is deeply important to me.  It starts with a question: "Have you ever had a manager/boss you liked?".  Or perhaps, better worded, "Have you ever had a manager/boss who was motivating and enabled you to use your best talents and abilities to maximize your potential at your job?". 

For majority of the people I've talked to in my life, the answer is either flatout "no", or "I had one good boss..." or "Well, there were some things I liked about some more than others...".  I think I have met one, maybe two people in my entire life that have actually stated that all their bosses have been great.  Now, we can go around in circles about whether or not the boss or the attitude of the employee has more effect, blah, blah, blah... (yeah, that's right, I said it).  But from the perspective of a business owner, the goal is to improve and control what you can, and looking at your own structure rather than blaming an employee is far more productive.

So I guess I'm taking this from the perspective of the business owner.  In my (unresearched) opinion, there are very few "good" managers out there.  Good being defined as one who does what I suggested above:

"Is motivating and enables employees to use their best talents and abilities to maximize their potential at their job." 

I think I've been pretty lucky at my current position in this arena.  These problems seem to be minimized more than they have been elsewhere in my career.  But I think this problem is especially prevalant in the sales industry.  I have long wondered why Sales Managers are so horrible at their job??  In my experience, they tend to exhibit the following qualities:

Control Freaks
Micro-managers
Egos - always thinking they can do a better job than their subordinates, even when they've never been in the field
Use stressful tactics to motivate - pushing, threatening, making employees feel insecure
Believe that if employees simply put in more time and more effort, they will reach goals (no matter how unrealistic)
Disrespect for a good work/life balance

The funny thing about this is that sales is already one of the most stressful jobs in our country; and they think that adding stress and pressure is going to get more productivity out of their workers?  Now, granted, not all employees and certainly not all Sales Reps are as sensitive as I am.  I think I naturally take things harder than others.  But I've discovered that people also tend to levitate towards me when they feel uncomfortable, insecure, or just need someone to vent to.  Thus, I have had a LOT of conversations with colleagues about the demotivating tactics of our managers listed above.

Here's the interesting piece of this analysis: these are the qualities I've observed in successful Sales Reps:

Control Freaks
Micro-manage themselves
Tend to put a lot of pressure on themselves
Believe their bosses are right, and that if they just work harder and longer, they will achieve their objectives
Have an extremely difficult time maintaining a positive work/life balance

Hmmmmmmmmmmm… very interesting.  This tells me something that explains why the tactics of the managers don’t work so well.  The Sales Reps are already putting high pressure and stress on themselves; if they weren’t pro-active self-motivators, they wouldn’t have been hired in the first place.  Therefore, the additional pressure and stress added by management puts them in overdrive and leads to less effective work at best, and burnout at worst.

This also tells me something about the structure of Sales organizations, and solidifies a thesis I came up with recently.  This is generally how the hiring and promoting happens within a sales organization:

Impressive candidate is hired as a Sales Rep

Sales Rep delivers outstanding results and impresses upper management

Sales Rep is promoted to Management position to reward them for good work

Sales Rep may continue working up the ranks

Now, in my humble (and again, unresearched) opinion, based solely on experience, I think a Sales Rep and a Sales Manager have two distinct purposes. 

Sales Rep:  Build business, hit monthly numbers

Sales Manager: See larger opportunities amongst closed deals, build big deals and relationships that will pay off in the long run

Unfortunately, I think most sales organizations see the Sales Manager as the person who is supposed to keep tabs on the Sales Rep and basically be their “parent”.  BUT if they are hiring the right people as Reps, they are already managing themselves and do not need a “parent” to keep them in line, rather they need a “big picture” person to tie together potential opportunities they don’t have the time to look at or pursue.  That’s my justification for the above defined purposes of Sales Rep and Sales Manager.

What I’ve seen happen over and over, is a situation where a top-producer gets promoted to management, viewing this as an opportunity to manage his “less-productive” counterparts the way he manages himself.  This results in micro-managing and intense pressure on the sales team, and in the meantime the “big picture” high-level client development falls to the wayside because the Sales Manager is more concerned with monthly quotas.

My next blog post will go into detail about the solution to this issue because, quite frankly, this post is already REALLY long!!!