What To Pay Out On?

"You've done your job, they should pay you the commission."

These were the words to me of an experienced fellow rep in my first ever Enterprise solution sales team.

I'd been ecstatic to win a lovely deal.

Only for the conglomerate corporate HQ of the subsidiary client to cancel it, just a few days later.

Devastating.

Needless to say, despite the supposed reasoning of this travesty, I neither expected nor ever received the commensurate remuneration.

I shuddered at this recollection popping back into my mind three decades on. As I learned that EPL clubs no longer tend to award goal bonuses to players who score.

I revel in such development. In that most results-based business of The Beautiful Game, some are finally redressing the restrictive imbalance to reverse their age-old literal stance of goals over process.

Apparently the drivers include the new 'moneyball' style quants who've turned football if not quite upside-down, then certainly given it a fresh kick up the behind.

With a new breed of techbro owners whose deep statistical leanings see them leap into previously roped-off, gated and fortified high echelons of the game.

In days of yore, with-holding the long establish practice of extra cash for a goal would be unthinkable. Your star striker likely to at the very least be open to offers from elsewhere.

The same surely going for a salesteam's star seller. No way can you take away their extra cut of the proceeds.

And yet this is precisely what's been happening lately.

Whether from pseudo-science or valid study, a number of solution firms are reportedly recalibrating how they award performance.

One of the arguments for this being that you don't want people motivated purely by money, but rather by success.

A sentiment I applaud, in principle. Let's not though, forget rewarding achievement.

Win bonuses still apply, as do those for any streaks attained and final competition placing.

In football's current evolution, pots of cash now relate to expected goals [aka xG] differences, a positive set-piece balance, and performance against teams nearest to them in league position.

As in football, you don't win a sale because of having greater possession, fewer free-kicks conceded around your box or most attempts on target.

Yet you are definitely more likely to prevail when you are following a constantly refined process that is provably generating success.

So it feels like it makes sense to have a balance in your compensation scheme too.

Choose wisely. There's only folly in say, paying out on Board Presentations when just one in four come home.

Yes, the signature can trigger 'bonus'. But it's vital not to forgo the lever that is genuine (and by that we DO NOT mean big-ticket training regimen or crm screen tabs) process markers. [Note too for instance how Design is Destiny.]

Do remember the key concept. The nice balance. In the original meaning of the phrase.

I once read the manual on Sales Compensation. Or as its title had it, the Handbook. Simplicity remains key. Then combine the trad elements - accumulating payment per deal - with the behaviour you know leads to sustained success.

That pattern of events that when in train render you practically unbeatable.

Subscribe to Salespodder

Don’t miss out on the latest issues. Sign up now to get access to the library of members-only issues.
jamie@example.com
Subscribe