At 08:04 21/10/1997, Eugene Taurman wrote:
>Comments on Gordon Housworth's note about sales organizations:
Your post brought many smiles
>One of the problems I have seen with the type of system you describe is:
>The best performers are engaged in improving there performance by
>manipulating the internal system. That is they get very good at driving to
>organization to serve their needs at the expense of the other parts of the
>organization.
Absolutely. I saw this happen countless times - the analogy I used at the
time was the "hyperactive thyroid." Yes, one has to have this organ to
regulate and operate the body properly in order to survive, but the body
suffers when the organ lapses into hyper-production.
And those without sales exposure should heed our maxim: "Sales will write
your strategic plan with the next order" unless the firm has a very good
structure/process for deciding what kinds of business that it wants. And
the sales compensation plan must square with the strategic plan (which
they rarely do as they're usually produced by different parts of the
organization) lest you "design-in" invisible distortions such that
management is left wondering why it gets the business that it does.
>Instead of being good at selling they are good at forcing the system to
>work for them. Senge address this with his system thinking circles.
>Companies that do as you describe often do not understand the connection
>between getting the next order and how well the system performs.
Yes, this is the average condition for sales performance in my experience.
The egos and articulation of this upper tier of sales producers, coupled
with the value of their contribution, makes them minor nobility capable of
much independent action and back-channel contact. Upper tier producers
get this leverage deal by deal by virtue of their impact on monthly and
quarterly performance, as well as overall in terms of their annual
performance. At my point in the organization, I could only regulate it
instead of remove it. Having been a salesman and managed sales staff, I
can say with wry admiration that the best salesmen can be "pushers" of the
"drug" of money to a voracious management seeking the "contentment" of
financial performance.
>With my clients I have seen the "better" sales people destroy accounts for
>other and the company lose sales in one area to serve the better
>manipulator. These mangers failed to see how the whole process of
>serving the customers is connected.
Agreed. And just let the struggle get out of hand between "National
Account Sales" and "Regional Sales," and see what fun you get.
>What you describe may work if the sales are totally independent of the
>factory. The more connected the less likely the organization is to get
>good at serving all it's customers.
Perhaps I do not understand the words, for I would say that what I
describe works better when sales is "more connected" rather than when it
is "totally independent" - the better the opportunity to get the right
business, clean business (meaning no contractual shoddiness in terms,
delivery, etc.) and fulfill the firm's strategic plan. (I have in mind
some of the metrics-related questions that I raised in a parallel post.)
Thanks for triggering memories that enjoy the luxury of distance.
Best regards, Gordon Housworth
Intellectual Capital Group
ghidra@modulor.com
Tel: 248-626-1310
http://www.modulor.com
--Gordon Housworth <ghidra@modulor.com>
Learning-org -- An Internet Dialog on Learning Organizations For info: <rkarash@karash.com> -or- <http://world.std.com/~lo/>