If you hired a sales manager how would their compensation be based and how would you effectively measure, and track their actual effectiveness or ineffectiveness ?
So just my input as this has been part of my job... A good sales manager will not only hire, fire, train and coach- they will also keep an eye on each person and learn their strengths and weaknesses. They will help develop each producer so that they are less dependant on receiving 'help'. The sales manager will help monitor workflow and make sure sales funnels stay full and leads aren't dropped. They also monitor what's being submitted and how it's being - making sure e&o is not a concern and ethics are at their highest. They also help ensure the sales process overall contributes to the customers loyalty to the agency.
Maybe it's because I've done the job- or perhaps because I've done it well- but I do believe a good one is worth their salary.
Most sales managers are paid a competitive salary and a performance bonus based on the agency production/growth/profitability. Tracking their effectiveness should be apparent when you look at the numbers. Also think about what you are seeing from each producer. Ask for weekly updates- run downs on each producer, what they are addressing with each one, what goals are set, what improvements need to be made, what accomplishments have been made... Pay attention to what feedback is coming in... are new customers happy or are there complaints about the sales process? Are the producers setting your agency up to be known as an upstanding authority in your community, or was it a process they wouldn't have gone thru if your company wasn't saving them a ton of money?
Most sales managers are paid a competitive salary and a performance bonus based on the agency production/growth/profitability. Tracking their effectiveness should be apparent when you look at the numbers.
However, using sales numbers as a metric is not an accurate way to determine the effectiveness of the sales manager. This is a huge mistake that so many corporations make.
Often, the sales manager can do little or non of what was listed above, but yet his/her agents can still produce impressive sales numbers misleading upper management that the sales manager is effective.
This is why so many lazy and even bad sales managers go unchecked for so long.
What is needed is a type of feedback system from the agents. A bi-annually or even quarterly meeting with the agents and only the agency owner - or in larger organizations, the director of sales - to determine what is working and what is not working and what improvements can be made with the sales manager and the sales process.
However, using sales numbers as a metric is not an accurate way to determine the effectiveness of the sales manager.....Often, the sales manager can do little or non of what was listed above...
Oh, I'm sure this is the case in a lot of places. I can only speak from MY own experience... and in my experience I came into a large and somewhat stalled agency on two seperate occasions. The first agency I was hired but after assessing the situation and making suggestions, the owners recoiled and didn't want to make the changes I suggested. I still managed to have some impact on the agency, but minimal.
The second agency I went to I had experience to draw on and I knew upon starting there that I would need freedom and the owner was on board.
When I went in- the producers in place were horrible. Disorganized, unmotivated, most of the missing a lot of the time.
It took me about 3 months to get some fresh blood in and get the ones not willing to be coached out- From that point forward- the numbers (including quote activity, # of policies written and # of households with more than 1 line) directly reflected my efforts. Can I take credit for every sale? No of course not- but that's not why an agency has a sales manager. After a sales manager is in place for 6 months- if you don't see things shifting (both numbers and attitude of the agency) then something is wrong. Either the manager is ineffective or too many constraints has made them ineffective.
I also believe another measure is how the sales team talks about the sales manager. Every single producer had/has a definite opinion of me. If they were trouble (writing shady stuff or lazy) they hated me. If they just wanted to be better producers- they loved me. No one was indifferent to me and I always took that as a compliment. If you ask your producers what they think and they are indifferent, chances are there is a lot of internet surfing going on.
Now- I'm writing this from one perspective. From the sales manager's side of things. I'm hoping to go out on my own in the next year.. and I'll be managing my producers myself then as well. But what about when I am ready to hire a sales manager? I think my own experience has taught me that good ones are hard to find. There is always that subjective value they bring and an intangible quality that makes someone a good leader and want to be invested in what they do every day... but more than anything I will trust the number and the producer feed back. If 20 sales managers don't impact the numbers is it possible that all 20 just weren't up to the job? I think so. But I'm tough like that. lol.
What is needed is a type of feedback system from the agents. A bi-annually or even quarterly meeting with the agents and only the agency owner - or in larger organizations, the director of sales - to determine what is working and what is not working and what improvements can be made with the sales manager and the sales process.
It's often harder to weed out incompetent sales managers in larger organizations than smaller. In the latter the agency owner's line insight is often clearer.
In medium to large agencies with managerial hierarchy it's much easier for one to succeed by impression, and the use of compliments, flattery, or other obsequious behavior to THEIR boss in order to gain favor.
It's important to not compromise the anonymity of the agents.
I have witnessed and read about cases of insidious retribution by sales managers that befall on agents who the sales manager "discovered" was responsible for his/her (much needed) corrective action.
In one case in particular this Sales Manager crawled like a viper through an agents book looking for any reason, often petty reasons, to nail her to the cross. She was a high-ranking, good agent.
This is a major reason why agents are afraid and reluctant to voice their opinion and why a bad Sales Manager continues uncorrected.
If the agency needs it and is on a high growth curve, a great Agency Sales Manager is almost a necessity, unless one of the principals can fill that role - which in my opinion is a better option.
