More Gravy 5 Ways to Gauge Your Sales Managers’ Coaching
Coaching is about accelerating a sales rep’s growth and ability to achieve personal goals and reach full potential. It’s a four-step process that: (1) identifies opportunities for improvement, (2) gains commitment, (3) develops a plan and (4) sets an accountability meeting to discuss progress. Set aside one hour a month to review your manager’s field visit reports. Why not go farther and follow three or four field visits with the same rep to see if the accountability for the reps to carry out their self-improvement plan is being reviewed by the sales manager? You are looking for progress toward improving one or two areas of the rep’s development. Read More >>
The
representatives wanted transparency in decision making. They wanted to
analyze every decision made, understand all the alternatives, and
examine all the potential outcomes. Even the simplest management
decision was to be treated this way, the same as the critically
important compensation decisions. The organization was paralyzed,
fractured, and dramatically missing objectives. Pay any attention to national political discourse and you will hear the word “transparency”. In the context of the political system, “transparency” seems to imply full disclosure and open processes. To some “transparency” means legislative bills should be posted on the internet, along with exhaustive campaign donor lists, White House visitor logs, congressional financial records, and much more.
Is transparency what we truly seek?
These public calls for “transparency” remind me of personal business experiences. Maybe the two are similar.
Years ago just a couple days into starting a new job, I participated in a meeting with representatives from the organization I was leading. Also present were some of the existing leadership team I inherited. On the agenda was a very important income related topic. The mood was agitated, the representatives careful and the language tense. Every statement by a leader was followed by a barrage of questions dripping with attitude and suspicion. It took only a few minutes for me to get the picture.
The representatives wanted transparency in decision making. They wanted to analyze every decision made, understand all the alternatives, and examine all the potential outcomes. Even the simplest management decision was to be treated this way, the same as the critically important compensation decisions. The organization was paralyzed, fractured, and dramatically missing objectives. It seemed, the workers had no confidence in the managers, were suspicious of their motives, felt the managers were unavailable to talk, and did not believe management was focused on the best interest of the workers. But, would transparency make it better or worse?
After a few minutes, I concluded this situation likely developed over time as a compounding series of small decisions creating doubt and suspicion in the representatives minds. Perceived indifference and inaction by the senior manager (whom I was replacing) was likely the catalyst. A total meltdown was imminent.
To turn this situation around, strong action had to be taken immediately. Since we are talking about transparency, let’s just focus on that attribute here.
The representatives calls for transparency make sense from their perspective. Yet a leadership team cannot operate totally transparently. Many subjects just cannot be discussed publicly and still other subjects probably should only have selective public discussion. In a fully transparent environment, imagine a team of 30 people trying to make a decision on who should sit in the newly remodeled offices. A bizarre example, but illustrative on how inefficient fully transparent environments can be. Imagine in that same transparent environment, where anyone can veto a decision, a team of 30 people deciding on the content of a newly designed marketing brochure, or the most efficient route of a delivery truck, or the top end voltage of a new product design, or the distribution of bonus money. You get the picture. It will grow old and ugly.
Is it really transparency they were seeking? Maybe political stalemates are desired, but in business it can be debilitating.
Perhaps what they really desired was trust, honesty, integrity and confidence in their leaders. Most organizations run better and accomplish more when those attributes are present. If absent, they can be restored - it will take time, patience, perhaps a bit of transparency, and a strong effective leader. It is definitely worth it.
Brian Casto
About the author:
Brian Casto, CEO and Founder of Group 19, is an executive, leader, and entrepreneur recognized for his ability to build adaptive high performance, motivated sales organizations to accelerate revenue production.His unique talents in building and leading field and inside sales teams across all geographies and customer industries are supported by his strong business acumen, pioneering spirit, competitive drive, and enterprising approach to strategic customer focused selling.
Sales Gravy FEED
