|
 Sink or Swim: When Small
Companies Don’t Provide Enough Sales Training
Those of us who began our sales careers in the 70’s
and 80’s may remember the old adage where a
potential new salesperson is put in a room with a
telephone and a phone book and told they now have
all they need to succeed in sales. If they did not
intuitively pick up the phone book and began
miraculously making appointments, it was then
determined that they simply did not have what it
takes. As ridiculous as that may sound, today in
small companies this practice still remains.
However, the subtleties of its enrollment makes it
even more damaging since the bosses believe
they are providing proper training.
A
fast-tracked career is one of the benefits received
when working for a small company. However, many
times the exposure to new opportunities comes
abruptly as employees are required to perform duties
before receiving proper training. This happens
throughout all departments but it is most
problematic in the sales department.
In
most departments a team of individuals work
collectively together to achieve a common goal. In
this the new recruit can learn from colleagues
and/or follow established protocol: fill out the
required forms, log the collected data and file the
documentation. Sales is a different animal; the
people have a unique temperament. They tend to
prefer to work alone and covet tribal knowledge. The
processes tend to be ill-defined and although
results are based on effort, the outcome also
involves chance and a bit of luck.
Most sales training in small companies is based on a
perceived osmosis; place the person in an
environment where they are exposed to sales
dialogue, which may include a few key meetings and
presto out pops a salesperson capable of achieving
results. While this may be possible in a low dollar
“gumball” sale where the ticket items are
inexpensive and the sales person can bluff their way
through, for sales transactions that involve a
higher level of sophistication, specific industry
language or persuasion based on experience this
technique usually does not work. This is especially
true of longer sales cycles involving a series of
transactions where the salesperson performs research
to locate leads, develops a communication strategy,
uses past performance and case histories to convince
the prospect of industry expertise and presents
proposals that may not be as attractive as their big
competitors and therefore must be sold on the unique
capabilities of the firm. This type of sale requires
the salesperson to develop cognitive thinking
abilities, which are best learned in a linear
training program in order to understand the
processes and reasoning so they can use the tools to
develop strategies unique to each situation.
In
small companies owners or key employees are often
involved in the hiring and training processes which
mean they must forego other important duties.
Therefore the risk of a wrong hire or inefficient
training can be disastrous to the bottom line. For
this reason company owners need to honestly assess
their ability to provide proper sales training based
on the existing structure of the company and
consciously choose a hiring and training process.
If
the company has the structure to provide formalized
sales training (or the money to invest in outside
consultants), the company can afford to hire
inexperienced sales people. One advantage to this
approach is the ability to train “fresh” employees
to adapt to the company’s unique culture and
processes.
If
the owners and/or key employees have the “tribal
knowledge” that must be passed on to the new
employees yet lack the time to establish a
structured sales training program than the company
is better off investing in a more experienced sales
person that offers a faster ramp-up time given their
knowledge and experience.
If
the company chooses a “sink or swim” training
structure, in order to locate those self-starters
with inherent sales skills capable of succeeding in
this type of environment, the company must be
prepared for employee turnover. The process involves
hiring several individuals, setting time limits and
measureable goals and quickly firing those that do
not reach the mark. Otherwise the company retains
ineffective, unhappy employees and this is not
beneficial to the company or the individual, as no
employee wants to get out of bed every morning to go
to work just to fail.
|