Monthly Archives: June 2012

Understanding the Real Cost of Field Sales Professionals

Key Concept ~ Congratulations!  You’ve reached sufficient traction in your burgeoning business to hire your first field sales team.  You know it’s an expensive move, but a necessary step in the scaling of your business.  But are you sure of what the real costs are of deploying field sales teams?  Here are some insights from a project I did a few years ago that shed some well needed light on field sales, and the critical nature of mindfully leading your investment.

Several years ago, I was consulting on business strategy with a custom sales company called SalesForce4Hire®, LLC.  I worked with them to help develop something we called Sales Prototyping®.  Every company in the world prototypes a product before bringing it into production and the market, but rarely, if ever, did we witness companies prototyping their sales process.  The company’s focus is primarily in the medical device space, so a typical sales launch from a traditional company would put upwards of 28 sales reps in the field to launch a new device.  This provides ample coverage of the key population centers, and associated physicians and hospitals, around the country.  This also represents an investment of around $5 million per year!

As we were refining our strategy, positioning and value proposition, I dug into the research to try to determine the true, albeit hidden cost, of field sales personnel in the industry.  As I waded through the research, I was astonished at the inefficiencies that exists in many sales organizations.  Two things immediately jumped off the pages of the research.  First, industrial, business-to-business sales representatives take a lot of office days.  With technology being what it is today, this, to me at least, seemed excessive.  The second issue was how much time was wasted in sales meetings.  Again, with the online meeting capabilities combined with the mobility enabled by smart phones and tablets, this seemed excessive.  Between the two, 98 days a year are spent out of the field!  That’s twenty work weeks out of the year or 40% of the available selling days per annum (including a two week vacation, but not including holidays).  Forty percent of the company’s investment of $5 million for their sales team is $2 million!

So out of the 132 remaining sales days, how much time do field sales representatives actually spend in face-to-face selling time?  According to the research, the typical field sales rep is spending somewhere between two and three hours a day actually selling to prospects (and let’s hope they’re true prospects).  This is primarily due to poor planning resulting in excessive windshield time.  You’d think with the 78 days of office time taken, sales reps would be more efficient once they got their butts out the door.  What we’re left with is somewhere between 33 and 50, eight hour days, of face-to-face selling time for a typical field deployed, industrial sales representative, per annum.

Now, let’s get down to the brass tacks of the real cost of field sales.  I’m going to use a fully burdened, annual cost per sales rep of $100,000 per year (this is conservative in many industries, as the annual cost can easily run upwards of $120,000 to $140,000 per year, depending on the geography and industry).  At the end of the day, the cost of face-to-face selling time for many companies is running somewhere between $250 and $380 per selling hour.  And you thought your attorney was expensive!

I realize a portion of this burdened expense is performance based, and thus variable, but it is critical, especially for a first time entrepreneur, to fully understand the significance of the investment they’re making in field sales professionals.  Please keep in mind, these figures reflect fully engaged sales professionals.  Rarely have I met a sales person that wasn’t ready to jump ship for greener pastures, and the employee disengagement numbers are simply dismal today (for a detailed analysis on the misalignment of employees today, please visit Igniting Creativity in Business).

The point we brought to the surface through this investigation is you had better have a really solid sales launch plan in place before you decide to deploy a field sales team.  We were also able to make a strong case for our value proposition.  Without a finely honed, well targeted plan, you may find your sales acquisition costs are exceeding your profitability.

© 2012, Terry Murray.

SaleForce4Hire and Sales Prototyping are registered trademarks and servicemarks of McGeever©, LLC.

Leave a Comment

Filed under Sales

That Sound You Hear is Adam Smith Rolling Over in His Grave

Key Concept ~ I came across an article today in the Wall Street Journal entitled, “Small Firms’ Big Customers Are Slow To Pay“.  Hunting the great whale customer is always tempting to a small firm, but keep in mind the lessons of Jonah and Captain Ahab.

If you’re running a small, entrepreneurial firm, you’ll want to read this article.  The companies that comprise the S&P 500 recent crossed the $1 trillion dollar threshold in cash reserves.  One trillion dollars in reserves?  Some of these CEOs should be featured on “Horders”.  These are many of the same companies that are belly-aching over the fact they cannot find “qualified” candidates, want some other organization to train their talent base, have squeezed their current employees to the breaking point, and are usurping our democracy through hidden, unlimited contributions to PACs.  Now they’re squeezing their small vendors to fatten their reserves as well.

This is yet another effect of the leadership crisis in corporate America. No sense of social responsibility, no moral compass, just greed, avarice, and selfish behavior at the highest level. The average CEO pay for larger organizations just passed $10 million per year. I wonder how these CEOs would behave if they didn’t get their paycheck until 180 days (or over 400 days, as one small vender commented in the article) after it was agreed to be paid?

We’ve gather more than a dozen research reports over the past two years that points to the depth of the leadership crisis and resulting employee disengagement crisis that all clearly identify the depths of this situation. If you’re so inclined, you’re welcome to thumb through the pages of http://ignitingcreativityinbusiness.com where we’ve posted the highlights in slides from these market studies along with the sources.

The vision that Adam Smith had for capitalism, which freed humankind from the servitude of the feudal and mercantile guild system, has been corrupted to the point that we’re now entering an age of corporate feudalism. It’s a shame; and it in no way reflects the values and beliefs this great country was founded upon.  When is enough, enough?

© 2012, Terry Murray.

1 Comment

Filed under Random Thoughts

Terry Murray Discusses the Strategic Imperative of Creative Thinking in Business on the CBS Radio Network

The need for creative thinking has moved well out of R&D and marketing departments.  The speed and dynamics of today’s economic world require adaptive solutions to unprecedented challenges at every touch point within the organization.  I recently had the opportunity to discuss how to go about cultivating the type of organizational agility successful companies require in the 21st century with Walt Shaw on the CBS Radio Network.

You’re welcome to listen to the interview on the player below:


© 2012, Terry Murray.

© 2012, CBS Radio Network.

Leave a Comment

Filed under Associate Engagement, Leadership, Media & Interviews, Productivity, Random Thoughts, Strategic Planning

Why Small Firms Can Win the Coming Talent War

Key Concept ~ I read an interesting article in the Wall Street Journal the other day that revealed a remarkable level of stupidity being practiced in business.  In the article, Software Screening Rejects Job Seekers, Wharton School professor of management and human resources Peter Cappelli shared his insights into the jobs market and the implications today’s hiring procedures have on attracting and recruiting talent.

We’re hearing it all the time now.  Companies are continuously complaining that they can’t find the talent they need to fill open jobs.  Professor Cappelli decided to look into this situation and came up with the following conclusion; “The real culprits are the employers themselves”.  While the recession empowered employers to be exceptionally picky in their selection of job applicants another factor is at play; screening software is now used by major corporations in the hiring process.  Once again we see corporations running to technology to attempt to solve a human-centric challenge…looking out there for the solutions to today’s competitive challenges rather than being a bit more self-reflective and looking within for the answers.  And simply put, it doesn’t work.

In his upcoming book, “Why Good People Can’t Get Jobs”, Professor Cappelli reveals some striking examples of just how dysfunctional the hiring process has become.  One HR executive told him that, just as an experiment, he anonymously applied for an opening in his company.  He didn’t get through the computer screening process.  In addition, he witnessed managers piling on requirements to the point that nearly nobody on the planet would meet their expectations.  Another example of the mind-numbing stupidity being played out in corporate hiring environments is a company that received 25,000 applications for a basic engineering job.  The HR department reported that no qualified job seekers applied for the position.  Really?  One engineer reported that he was told that his background was perfect except for one thing; his last title didn’t match the title of the position in the company. A title which was unique to that company.  Worst of all, the vast majority of job seekers never have the opportunity to engage with a human being in the application process.

Now, for many, many years I’ve witnessed the hiring process being driven by risk-aversion.  Companies tend to hire the person that is least likely to fail rather than the one that is most likely to succeed.  It’s the equivalent of playing not to lose, rather than playing to win.  But what we’re seeing now makes that behavior look remarkably progressive.  The professor also points to the need for greater investments in education and training, on the part of the employers, to meet their shifting needs.  The mindful investment in human beings is mission critical in today’s economy.  Organizations must become learning organizations. in order to stay competitive.

While this trend is bad news for job seekers, it is excellent news for small, entrepreneurial firms.  The myopic approach of large companies is missing out on great talent simply because they didn’t formulate their resume with the proper keywords.  This is another example of the Industrial Age mindset still dominating Corporate America.  People are more than their resume.  Character, creativity, inter-personal skills and emotional intelligence are difficult to communicate on a one page resume.  These intangibles, that are proven to be the key drivers of success, are only revealed through relationship.  By meeting, or at the very least, speaking with a potential candidate.

Big companies have long enjoyed intrinsic advantages over smaller competitors.  This remarkable misstep opens the door to a more level playing field.  In the 21st century, talent will be the deciding factor on who wins and who loses.

© 2012, Terry Murray.

4 Comments

Filed under Leadership, Productivity, Random Thoughts