(1 votes, average: 5 out of 5)
Loading ...
I want to start with a disclaimer for those who were attracted to this post by expectations of scandalous details from Gov. Palin’s past - you will be greatly disappointed, I don’t know of any. This is about building and managing high impact teams.
(No Ratings Yet) Loading ...
The most interesting session of the second day for me was the Project Management one. A number of PM software 2.0 executives present, seemed to agree that the major shift in an approach is integration of project members into the project management process. In other words, we don’t need to chase our team members around to collect information about the status of their tasks, so we can report it to a project client or sponsor. We now have tools to do it! The tools discussed during the session seem to have a different approach, focus and even philosophy behind them, but I would love to take time and some poking around to form my own opinion where capabilities end and marketing starts.
(No Ratings Yet) Loading ...
The extremely well publicized challenge of getting sales people to use spunky new, very expensive, Sales Force “Automation” system is regarded as the Achilles heel of CRM strategies. It is very well documented experience of many corporations that tried and failed, and many CRM implementation practitioners who were responsible for adoption management of these strategies. Indeed the best SFA system from adoption perspective would only have one screen with a large button with a dollar sign on it. It would completely automate sales process from a salesperson point of view - just push the button and collect commission check.
I know this would sound pretty ridiculous to Sales Management, however their idea of Sales Force Automation does not appear too valuable to sales people either. To start with, the name SFA sounds as inspiring to sales professional as Global Warming sounds terrifying to folks who live in the cold climes. Let’s face it - the Sales Management Automation is often much more accurate name for many implementations.
The practice of “sticks and carrots”, if well thought through and consistently implemented, had some positive results. However the best results will be obtained from the holistic and balanced approach to adoption management by understanding value proposition for both corporate AND sales perspectives. The important, and probably most critical, part is to understand that these perspectives are not well aligned and often are viewed as conflicting.
1. Attempts to “sell” SFA to sales people without meaningful to them value proposition will backfire. There is nothing more repulsive to a real pro than a “pretender” trying to fool them;
2. Attempts to “mandate” the use will fail at the best, or will destroy company’s best asset at the worst. The worst performers will become the best users of the system, and the best performers will leave the company;
3. Keep your eyes on the ball. That means that well planned SFA can improve performance of many capable, but under performing, sales people by helping them be more consistent. It cannot make them “stars”. Don’t promise that. It will not make star performers any better. Don’t promise that. They will not believe it even if you do. SFA will not help people who should not be selling. Don’t promise that;
4. Do not try to “pay for use”. Sales people will find the way to be paid without using it. Find specific ways to pay for desired change in behavior. If you think I just contradicted myself, you don’t keep your eyes on the ball - the purpose of SFA investment is NOT for salesperson to be logged in often. If the purpose of investment was to improve accuracy of forecast - find a way to compensate for accuracy of the forecast and/or decrease commission rate for “bluebirds” and “sandbaggers”.
(5 out of 5) (5 out of 5) (5 out of 5) (5 out of 5) (5 out of 5) (5 out of 5) (5 out of 5) (5 out of 5) (5 out of 5) (4 out of 5)