Take the money and energy, and put it into -product- training. You don't want a salesman. You want an evangelist subject matter expert educator who can take an order after the customer convinces himself that he wants the product.

posted December 29, 2008

Hi Doyle,
The evidence is that the impact of training tends is minimal unless actively followed up and reinforced.Just think back to your school days (or if you were in it the military). How many times did you do times tables ? My own observation would add to this.
1. If you don't assess who is trainable you are simply wasting money
2. If you don't analyse training needs at an individual level you are simply wasting money
3. If you don't have a management who have bought into the changes that the training is supposed to support you are simply wasting money
4. If you don't have a properly constructed follow up by well equipped managers and external coaches you are simply wasting money.

Someone else asked this question elsewhere a month or so ago. AIRI the figures are heavily biased in favour of coaching, that is proper 1 to 1 goal focussed individualised coaching. High Impact, High price, High value - we reckon RoI is of the order of 25:1 plus.

Coach don't train, but assess first

Links:

• http://www.huntersm.com

posted December 30, 2008

There are many impacts training (sales or otherwise) may have and they will all vary on many of the choices made at the time the sales training is ordered, written or delivered.

You train people because you want a change. You want people to move from one state to another. So I would have to ask...

What change is desired? Why this training? Why this trainer? Why this course? Why this length of course? Why this delivery method? Why this location? Why these trainees? Why now?

Who asked for the training? Why? Who designed the course? Who tailored it to the trainees? Who was compelled to be trained? Who volunteered to be trained? What's the trainer/training's mission? Whose mission is it? Is it a realistic mission? Is it relevant to the job? the company? the market?

Is it a credible trainer? Is the company willing to do what is required to incorporate the training into its culture? Why?/Why not? How does attending training relate to compensation? to recognition? to advancement? Are there extraordinary distractions (fire/passing of leader/power outage/takeover/layoffs, etc.)?

For all of this, I general invite my trainees to expect just 3 nuggets of gold from any training course. If they get more, it is a bonus. But I want them to be able to tell anyone who asks what 3 valuable ideas, methods, tools, techniques they got from the course. If there are not at least 3 clear and actionable points, then there is little point in training anyone. If there are 3 or more, it will be up to the trainee and the company management to take steps to act on those clear points.

posted December 30, 2008

Doyle, the problem with training is that it never sticks when it is an "event". Training needs to happen on a regular basis and should be the responsibility of the Sales Manager. Too often nowadays if the training budget gets cut no training takes place. Well, we disagree with that premise and just wrote a blog posting on the very topic called "You as a Sales Trainer". Here is an excerpt:

Remember the basic rule of business:
"People don't buy technology for technology's sake; they buy it to address business issues." So, why do we spend 58% of our valuable training time talking about product? We do it because that is our comfort zone.

We can bring in product experts to talk to our team and feel like we have provided training but as Inside Sales Managers, do we know how to provide sales training? Probably not but shouldn't we?

Make an investment in yourself as well and start to build out a curriculum that focuses on specific skills and then train your reps in monthly sessions. They want to learn and you want to teach right so what is stopping you?

To sum it up, don't let a lack of budget get in the way of getting the job done. You have skills that you can transfer to your reps, use your time wisely and it will pay off in enhanced productivity and greater achievement of goals.

Anyway, you get where I am going. Training isn't an event it is a culture that needs to be reinforced continuously. Just MHO.

Links:

• http://blog.bridgegroupinc.com/blog/tabid/47760/bid/7785/You-As-a-Sales-Tra...

posted December 30, 2008

An estimated $5 billion is spent annually by US businesses to train sales professionals. However, research indicates that as many as 80% of these companies have no measurement framework in place to determine how much the training investment actually impacts business operations and results. Additionally, studies have shown that 86% of knowledge retention is lost within 90 days of sales training events without specific reinforcement vehicles and integration with business practices. And yet thousands of companies continue to take a "train and hope" mindset, with little consideration for legitimate success criteria. Before investing in the next "fix the sales force" initiative, companies need to make sure that they can answer a series of tough questions including:

--Does tha sales training fit with the overall sales strategy of the company?
--Does the training include support for all key methodologies required for success?
--Does the training program provide a skills assessment that can objectively determine how well existing sales and management skills support the desired strategy and process?
--Is training and reinforcement coaching provided for sales management? Is management part of the process or not?

posted December 30, 2008

When a company seeks training for their sales people, it is usually an indication that there are other issues that need to be addressed in order to achieve long-term goals.

The first step should always be an assessment process. The sales process, methodologies, tools and personnel need to be evaluated in order to make recommendatiosn that are actionable, measurable and appropriate.

Training is usually part of an engegament and sometimes it involves coaching and a top-down approach to the sales process.

It can be too easy to just throw training at a problem when the real answer is deeper.

"If you only have a hammer, every problem looks like a nail" -anonymous

Just my 2 cents.

posted December 30, 2008

Doyle, I normally wait until Lance or Steve would step in with the best answers because they are both great. However, not with standing the size of the organization, the product, the market, the sales cycle, sales process, I think Chuck is going the right direction "evangelist subject matter expert educator who can take an order after the customer convinces himself that he wants the product." I think this is a hiring and profiling deal and not a product training piece. We need passion and zeal in sales, not more bean counters.

Take the money, spend it on profiling and identifying sales people who fit your mold and train them YOUR WAY with your PROCESS.

The biggest reason training fails is the "retraining" that has to be done before training can occur. This is what most successful sports teams have done that win championships. That is what the Steelers did in the 70s, the Celtics in the 60's, the Dodgers, for many years. Raise your own, praise your own.

Now Doyle, if the training can be specific enough to a part of the sales process and integrated into the sales professional's tools, then you can have and immediate positive impact.

If so, I would add a segment into the training and title it "How will I integrate this into my process" or "Incorporate it into my process."

This way the sales professional being trained can be involved and say, "Hey, I already do this, but better." Or "I do this and this is a new look, or better" or "This is a good refresher." This involvement will help to increase the amount of retention time as well, because the person is involved in the process (in a perfect world.) Sorry for the long winded write-up.

I just do not want to see training done away with and find myself sitting by my desk watching a monitor or a video. I learn from the guy or gal next to me as well as the instructor. As I was told young in life, "Winners Profit from Everything."

Stephen G. also suggests these experts on this topic:

• Lance C.
• Stephan S.

posted December 30, 2008

The answer depends on the type of training. If you spend a day of reciting product features and benefits, you will have the sales team looking at blackberry’s within the first two hours.
If you teach salespeople how to connect to the unresolved problems of clients in an authentic way, you have explosive sales growth. When one of the companies I served executed this kind of training, we experienced 146% revenue growth within nine months!

Links:

• http://www.outbsolutions.com

posted December 31, 2008

It is very much dependent on the trainer, but assuming the trainer was engaging, informative, and inspiring I've experienced the following:
* 20% take the new knowledge and begin apply it immediately. The
balance "knew it" so think they do apply it; "blew it" coming in
resentful of having to sit through another session and so were tuned
out to learning anything. The "Pac20" will keep the enthusiasm up for
about 30 days - this is usually the time frame in which they begin to
perceive a diminishing return as they begin to hit snags or obstacles.
* At the 60 day marker you have 5% of the original 20 fall out.
* At 90 days, you have the 5% left still plugging away and digging for
gold.
Here's the thing. If it was important enough to do the training in the first place, where is the management support and follow up required to sustain it? You'll never get more than about a 25% ROI on the exercise, but if you could sustain that much, how much more would sales utlimately improve?

posted January 2, 2009

Sales training gives just a short burst of energy. People get amped up and then fade into the usual.

A better result would be to offer short sales training mixed with short review/mentoring over several weeks/months.

Ben

posted January 2, 2009

Doyle, you asked for the impact on sales reps !
- I think it can refresh the sales process,
- It can be a great team building exercise,
- It can motivate the team,
- Increase the teams commitment to the company strategy and goals
- Provide confidence in the sales process
- Be an opportunity for each individual to set goals when confidence is high
- Be an opportunity to learn new behaviours and methodologies
- Improve understanding of customer expectations and management of these
…..depending on the follow up actions, the commitment and quality of the company, the manager and trainer it will lead to an increase in sales because smart sales reps will do what they always do…listen, learn and respond.

posted January 5, 2009

It depends on three very simple elements: the audience, the subject, and the commitment of the company to change.
Yes, the answer can be applied to pretty much any question, but here's what I mean:
1. The audience: if you have selected the right talent (sales is a business that is contrary to human nature... naturally, we try to please our counterpart, and fulfill their needs; in sales we need to fulfill our needs and counter the natural inclination to NOT want to buy with relevant reasons... it is not a job for everyone), they will be honed in on understanding how to sell better. Natural salesmen are always inclined to improvement, if it means more sales and more commission.
2. The subject matter: it does not matter how much the salesman wants to learn, if you can't teach him/her anything. Understand where the "lids" (plateaus of efficiency) are for your salesforce, and give them those tools, and those alone. Any less, and you won't make a difference; any more, and you bore them or overwhelm them.
3. The commitment of the company to change: any training, to any person, will last about four weeks. After that, complacency takes over and people revert to old habits. Change requires a solid plan, with mapped follow up and a blueprint to turn the change activities in a culture. Most companies aren't committed enough to this follow up activity, and training is wasted.

posted January 5, 2009

I agree w/ what has been posted so far. I have experienced many "classes" that were group focused and have made sure to pay attention as much as possible and yet still lost a lot of what I learned.

There have been a few exceptions and this is the part where both the content and the trainer are paramount. Good content always sticks with me. As does the good trainer.

I spent three plus years in the car business and can still remember a lot of what I learned as a sales rep, however very little of what I learned as a sales manager. The main things I remember from my management time was the one-on-one info that came from a successful manager, or managers.

I rank Steve Richards to this day as one of my favorite all-time instructors. For any industry. I typically am "that guy" that zones out and uses the time in these training classes to study the inside of my eyelids or count ceiling tiles. Steve made that impossible in so many ways it wasn't even funny.

Another favorite is someone I only recently met -- Brandon K Hardison. If you want someone to answer this question from his side of the story then you need to contact him directly. His passion and energy and talent make him a well-rounded and informational trainer.

The rest of the people I respect have been a few martial arts instructors, a few college professors and a few high school teachers.

Now, before you lose your patience, a more direct answer to your question...

Flyn pointed out that the follow up of both the instructor and the student is important. The material has to be extremely concise and useful or it will be forgotten. The information has to also be "re-visit-able" in nature or it will be lost and forgotten. The information also must be engaging or you know the rest.

Another aspect is how the group keeps tabs on the information internally, as in how the group uses the info day to day as well as possibly as a challenge for the group.

Man, the more I think about your question the more I could go on and on forever until you block me from the site!

i would love to revisit this when my brain wasn't mush from working on a site revamp all day.

You need to track down Brandon and if you would hit me via email or something for me to answer this question better and in far less words.

Thanks for the eye-opening question!

Dayn R. also suggests this expert on this topic:

• Brandon K. H.

posted December 29, 2008

I worked at a training company earlier and our most sought after program was the Sales Training for Banking products. the President of my company was the trainer and the program was highly focussed on the banks offerings and target market. It was a five day session and designed to give tangible results. It worked wonders for our clients. Infact, the program also helps identify high potential employees who are not given enough opportunity to perform. By conducting training programs you also enforce the importance of performance among employees. Its also interesting to have a mixed group of seniors and juniors in the same batch, it has its own merits. you could visit the site www.launchpad.in for more on the sales training program.

posted December 29, 2008

I think it depends on how the training is designed. I remember attending a sales training while working at Google and those lessons remained with me to date. I credit this to the way the training was structured. I went in to the training session thinking that I might never be a good sales person. However, at the end of the training session, which was totally designed to make a person realize what sales actually means and how everyone is a sales person in life.

Having said that, it still depends on practicing what you've learned. If that is not in the sales rep no matter how great a training is, the impact will be lost over time.

posted December 29, 2008

Totally agree with Flyn. Worst thing that can happen is the company invests in getting a professional system/trainer plus takes its reps out of the field then doesn't follow up internally. Unless the managers lead the use of the system the reps will stop within days or weeks.

Training needs to be repeated, reinforced and practiced over time. Most make the mistake of biting off the whole enchilada in one course - its not digestible.

To digress a little the same also applies to CRM implementations - many are done for the convenience of the company rather than creating a win-win for the company and the sales users. Both these investments are rarely accompanied by any incentive that rewards both individual and team contribution/use. Sales people who are already successful have their own tools and methodologies, where's the carrot for them to adopt and lead - its all stick normally..

I once worked out a neat little compensation scheme to reward a sales group to get behind a new CRM system (it could also be applied to training). It would have cost a few thousand dollars, peanuts compared to the cost of the licenses/installation/customization at that time. Couldn't sell it to the management as it was deemed unnecessary ("we'll tell them to use it"). Guess what, no one used it - even the manager and the whole initiative failed and was backburnered.

posted December 29, 2008

Sales training is mostly attended by people with a mind set of " i know it all" attitude. The participants rather than trying to understand the concept and leverage benefits, go by their own experiences. The trainer also plays an important part in sustaining the interest level of the participants.People with domain knowledge is able to deliver programme with lot of real life examples and the participants also able to empathise.One of the critical factor is the post training the first line manager's have to continuously ask questions and maintain relevance to the training prog.

posted December 30, 2008

NIL if the training is not yearned by the trainees ; HIGH if the training need arises from the trainees themselves.Hence it is imperative that the need of a sales training arises out of the trainees themselves rather than handed out by the management.

This can be done by the typical 'sales methods" of need identification - this time with the target trainees and Need Amplification (How the efficiency of closure can improve if the training is done etc).

With an identification of need and the desire to excel coming from the trainees, the impact of the sales training would go up dramatically.

Jayaraj

posted December 30, 2008

It probably follows the same as any education. How many students are A students, and of those students haw many are going to be successful. I know a lot of MS and PhD's it does not mean they are the best candidates.

I am continuously learning and upgrading my skills, but if I don't cold call and go after business and get rejected 20-30 times a day, I will not be successful. Any Recruiter (commissioned Sales) or sales executive can make money in a Booming or Good economy, but the survivors and best sales reps go bake to basics and make the quota of calls necessary to have a hot desk.

Charlie Rein

posted December 30, 2008

Training means conditioning and changing.

Successful training that I have created and participated in, as manager and sales person, requires the participants to immediately apply what they learn and be rewarded by their managers if they succeed. This is very difficult to do when consultants star in the training, and the managers do not incorporate the lesson plan in changes to compensation and daily activities.

This can be overcome by skillful managers and consultants who customize the training and sales systems. When I did this sales skyrocketed and remained on great trajectory. When this didn't happen, it was in one ear, out the other.

Links:

• http://www.lunchwithlou.blogspot.com

posted December 30, 2008

Dale Carnegie Sales Advantage Course Impact Assessment

Executive Summary

A study was conducted to measure the impact of the Dale Carnegie Sales Advantage program. Here are the results:

• 81% of respondents reported an increase in their sales during the 8-week time period that the Sales Advantage program ran

• 34% of respondents reported an increase in sales of 40% or more

• 77% of respondents realized an increase in their commission
during the training program

• 84% of respondents reported having better prospects due to
Improved cold calling skills

• 58% of respondents reduced the length of the sales cycle
during the program

• 24% of respondents report a decrease in their sales cycle of
40% or greater

Other documented benefits of the program include:

• Increased confidence in selling
• Improved understanding of the sales process
• Greater focus on achieving sales goals
• Increased motivation in selling


So imagine the results for a group rather than an individual.

Links:

• http://www.dalecarnegie.com

posted December 30, 2008

If a prospect asked this question, I'd ask him or her to take several steps backward and talk to me about the sales performance issues:

What's not working?
What are people not doing?
How does he or she know that?

I'd probably also ask questions about management practices, how they currently measure performance, and what sort of training and follow-through occurred before.

There's lots of other things I'd ask about, just like I would for any other selling situation. (Whether the prospect asked about impact or not.)

Training isn't always the answer. My company's training approach isn't always the best fit. When I ask for the business, it's because I know we can make a positive impact and provide value not just to the organization, but also to the reps, who will invest tremendous effort in training.

Links:

• http://www.savageandgreene.com

posted December 30, 2008

Research has proven that an organization will see a higher lift if they put their education dollars towards the sales manager vs. the sales rep.

Curt Coffman, co-author of “First Break All the Rules: What the Worlds Greatest Managers Do Differently”, and perhaps the foremost authority on the role and impact of the manager said this…" The ability to build organic growth and the future viability of any organization will be in the hands of their sales managers”.

It is critical to provide sales MANAGERS with ongoing educational and informational tools that help them make decision with assurance, react to competive situations faster and achieve more with the resouces they have. Please forgive the "commercial" but the company I work for does just that. EcSELL Institute is a leading provider of continuing education and development for sales managers. It is a membership-based organization that provides an array of resources including a robust fact-based resource library, regularly scheduled Summits and webinars and a trusting network of peers who can exchange ideas and learn from each other. Everything is driven by a professional networking web portal. Members are able to make decisions with assurance, save time and become more effective leaders and thus, ultimately reach higher levels of achievement and productivity.

I would be happy to provide you a piece of research from the EcSELL Resource Library. Send me an email at kshoemaker@ecsellinstitute.com. Share what questions you have regarding sales management and I will work with our research department to find a white paper or case study that address your question. Or visit our website at www.ecsellinstitute.com and you can download "What Will You Do When You Run Out Of Leaders" and "Estimating Return of Leadership Development" - to name a few.

Links:

• http://www.ecsellinstitute.com

Kristi S. also suggests this expert on this topic:

• Bill E.

posted December 30, 2008

The impact I've seen over 25 years is, it all sounds good in the training room, but often is too hard to actually implement in the field, and it's never simple enough (or organized well enough) to unify the team so everyone uses the same strategy.

Two weeks after training, 90% of team is back to doing what they were before.

Check out Jaw Branding at my site: www.melansonconsult.com.

Works better - leverages brand positioning instead of sales tactics - simple enough to unify based on best differentiated positioning - a new branding application that works on the front lines of any sort of prospect or client interactions.

Links:

• http://www.melansonconsult.com/

posted December 30, 2008

Doyle

Hopefully some of them will see what they're doing right and be boosted by the fact.

Ena

posted December 30, 2008