Large midmarket company

The managers were not the problem. The hires were.

Revenue was soft and leadership's read was that management was not managing: coaching, accountability, motivation, the usual suspects. The evaluation covered managers and reps both, and found the opposite.

$11.1Mrevenue opportunity identified
36 morecovery window
21closing score, weakest competency measured

The situation

A large midmarket company came to Score More Sales convinced its sales managers were the reason revenue was soft. We evaluated the whole organization, managers and reps together, rather than only the layer under suspicion.

The working theory

The sales managers were underperforming.

What the analysis found

Sales management was in fact having a positive impact on the sales force. That is rare. Most companies we evaluate have management that is genuinely weak and ineffective.

Management was already effective

Recruiting effectiveness scored 80, accountability effectiveness 78, and motivating effectiveness 61. All solidly above where management typically lands in our evaluations.

The gap was one layer downstream

Overall sales capability across the rep population scored 52, fair at best, and closing scored just 21, the weakest competency in the entire evaluation.

The company had been screening for likability and fit, not for the ability to close.

52overall sales capability across the rep population. Fair at best.
21closing competency, the weakest score in the evaluation.
80 / 81Compatibility and Desire, the two strong dimensions in the hiring profile.
57 / 44Commitment and Skills, the two dimensions that most directly predict whether someone can and will sell.
Upstreamclosing rarely fails in isolation. Qualifying, consultative selling and sales posturing fell short first.

Read together, the scores describe a well-managed team that was never hired to be capable of what was being asked of it. Salespeople rarely outperform what they were selected to do, however well they are coached.

$11.1M

The analysis quantified the gap at $11.1 million in revenue opportunity, recoverable over a 36 month window by developing the sales force's underlying capabilities.

Rather than restructuring management, the company adopted our How to Hire Top Sales Talent process: an end to end hiring system covering job description, job ad, interviewing and onboarding, with clear ownership at each stage.

What changed

The goal was to fix the selection criteria at the source rather than keep coaching around the gap after the fact. Since implementing the new process the company has seen increased diversity in its sales hires, higher retention, and increased production. Fixing the front door changed who was coming through it and how long they stayed.

The common mistake

As your sales managers go, so go your salespeople. But salespeople will rarely outperform what they were hired to be capable of, no matter how well they are managed. When numbers are soft the reflex is to look at whoever is closest to the shortfall, usually the managers. Weak rep selection criteria and weak management are different problems with different treatments, and the data made clear which one this company actually had.

Measure before you assume. The data is usually more specific, and more fixable, than the story leadership is telling itself.

More case studies

Book a Call Now

Recognize your own team in any of this?

Tell us what is happening and Lori will tell you what the data would likely find. You will hear back from her directly, usually within one business day.

  • No sales sequence. One reply from a person.
  • If an evaluation is not the right call, she will say so.
  • Prefer to see numbers first? Run the diagnostic.

Typically answered within one business day