I recently read a book on corporate strategy. Inside was chapter on intergrating your strategy into your compensation plan and measure the affects. I had the opportunity to have several conversations with the author in which he shared…
I have wondered for a while what Sales Performance Management (SPM) means. From a systems perspective, that journey took shape as commissions tools, things that did calculations back in the 90s. This morphed into what we have today. But I want to look at the timeline – what we have today and why it became that way.
Nothing is harder than truly splitting commission on a deal. In the past I’ve seen this being done one of two ways: one is that the reps split what would be 100% commission on a deal, or the second is that the company overpays on the deal itself by paying over 100%.
One of these causes conflict without specific rules, the other causes irritation on the part of the manager, finance and commission team.
We have seen commission systems for well over 20 years now, all with the promise of automation and miracles. In many cases, this requires some substantial effort, whether configuring the commission system or developing integrations that require high skill set levels, substantial time to test and are prone to bug fix issues for years to come.
Before thinking about choosing an SPM product you should deeply understand your reasons for entering the market. Without a clear conception of your goals it will be difficult to assess the relative value of the solutions being offered. Remember, of course, that organizational questions of capability, maturity, governance cannot be ignored.
According to the Sales Management Association’s report, Salesperson Retention and Turnover, “Businesses retain just 71% of salespeople annually, on average.” You don’t need the HR Director to tell you the exact numbers: every business manager knows that attrition and high staff turnover eat into profits, slow down productivity and damage morale and company culture. So…