Introduction
There are several advantages of having sales people to promote products but having sales people in an organization is a very delicate issue that requires a huge amount of concentration and care.
The single most significant trait that a person should possess in order to be successful in a generic sales position is the overachiever trait. The successful sales person possesses and demonstrates the discipline, self-control, and mastery to force him to achieve goals purely for the sake of achievement. The greater the amount of the overachiever trait a person has, the more likely one will be successful in sales. This single trait acts as an independent force and also influences, dominates, and controls the other factors in his temperament. The overachiever trait interacts with and to some degree controls the other six traits.
The degree to which the candidate possesses this trait will strongly influence his probability for success in sales, and if the person is sufficiently high on the overachiever trait, he can be successful in sales with almost any combination of other traits in his behavior style. So in order to search the sales staff with this sort of personality trait requires a high amount of time and money. In case of long search for the sales staff with these characters, organization has to bear huge amount of expenses.
Similarly high scores for the entrepreneur, active, and aggressive traits contribute to success in a generic sales position. Conversely, low scores for the sensitized and passive traits are frequently important for success in a sales position. A positive score on the compulsive trait is helpful but generally contributes a negligible amount to the overall sales success rating. A low score on this trait, however, can be a serious limitation for success, especially in some technical areas of sales.
A disadvantage to the firm is that for matching the sales person with the optimal compensation package. In case of lower sales, the firm has the burden of these lucrative pay and compensation packages. Any compensation system exists within the general management philosophy of the organization. And the pay system used to compensate the sales force is part and parcel of the overall style of management that pervades the firm.
Moreover, a sales compensation system that works effectively under one style of management can fail miserably under a different management philosophy. This means that compensation systems and the firm philosophy interact and should be compatible in order to gain maximum effectiveness from both.
Two examples of different firm philosophies will illustrate this point
Firm Hibuty has a stated philosophy that encourages team effort, group orientation, and shared responsibilities. It should reinforce this sense of cohesion with a compensation system than rewards these behaviors. Such a firm philosophy requires a compensation system that includes group sharing of bonuses and joint sales work. It probably means that some staff members are required to operate as experts but are not required to directly sell products.
Such experts may be paid a bonus (loosely based on the general welfare of the firm) but are not required to allocate a given number of hours to particular sales results. That is, they contribute to the overall sales effort but are not held strictly accountable for sales results. The thinking behind the approach is that everyone contributes–whether they are directly involved in sales or not–and that everyone should share according to some commonly defined sense of team spirit and goodwill.
Firm TH has a more entrepreneurial philosophy that requires a more production-minded compensation system. Such a system would reward individual results; commissions would be split for any joint sales production, and almost every person would be required to sell in order to maintain his or her employment. Technical staff positions without direct selling responsibilities would be rare. That is, technical experts are expected to provide advice to the sales people and to sell that advice to clients.
This is probably accomplished by splitting commissions with members of the sales force. Under this approach, some basic training takes place in the office with a staff trainer who is paid a straight salary. The more advanced training takes place in the field and the majority of the learning is on-the-job training. This approach emphasizes individual results, minimal overhead expenses, and few, if any, staff meetings. Although the group members function under a common corporate banner, everyone is calculating his individual commission earnings.
Conclusion
These two instances underscore the importance of understanding the firm philosophy before having sales personnel. Moreover, the sales personnel who are selected come into the organization with certain notions of what kind of compensation system works best for them. The factors that affect this are the sales person’s behavior style, the time frame to complete the sales task, and the management philosophy of the organization. If the sales person’s compensation expectations are met, if the sales task time frame matches his needs, and if the overall management philosophy is consistent with the salesman’s, then the members of the sales force will be more productive. To the extent that one or all of these variables are out of sync with the others, the compensation system will not be motivational for the salesman.
Works Cited
Kane, Margaret. “Still Looking for That Sales Culture?.” ABA Banking Journal 98.6 (2006): 22.