How to avoid common producer sales management mistakes

There is more to working with producers than just paying and praying. It also takes continuous in-office supervision. Some agencies are fortunate enough to have the time and talent to coach their sales staffs. Regretfully, most shops can’t afford dedicated supervisory personnel. Instead, “sales manager” is just one of the many hats that a principal wears. This less than full-time effort is often offset by quick reflexes and solid instincts, but fallacies still abound. This month’s column identifies five of the most common managerial myths.

Money is everything.

Money is important, but it’s not the only reason why producers stay with agencies. Additional influences include stability, pride, marketing assistance, and trust. A secure work environment and solid company markets are essential for any producer’s success. But, if your salespeople routinely depart for more stable surroundings, a few extra dollars won’t do much to motivate those who stay behind.

Another non-cash consideration is that healthy intra-office rivalries are stimulated by producer contests. Conduct them on a semi-regular basis, with agency-wide recognition as the primary reward, along with the requisite prize.

Creative marketing campaigns are another important motivator. They help to keep sales efforts fresh and exciting.

And finally, producers always sell more for managers they trust and are trusted by. So, routinely involve your agents in selecting target markets and setting sales goals. Their appreciation shows through improved productivity.

Set annual sales goals only.

As traditional as an annualized commission goal is for measuring an agent’s success, it doesn’t provide the complete picture. Annual numbers don’t specify which target markets to work, if one policy type should be sold more than another, or even differentiate between calendar quarters.

Also by focusing an agent’s efforts solely on a distant yearly goal, the person might slide by for months, and then with year-end approaching, quote and write anything — instead of planning their production efforts throughout the calendar. That’s why it’s wise to also set quarterly guidelines for prospecting activities and sales by policy type. Producers with specific short-term goals are more likely to outsell those who only see through 12-month windows.

Give a single sales aptitude test.

Profiles are informative pre-hire tools. They assist managers in assessing a job candidate’s strengths while pointing out their weaknesses. The information generated helps to reduce the risk of hiring a sales failure.

Gain multiple perspectives on this important issue by giving two different brands of tests to each potential job candidate. Then compare the results. If both testing companies output a similar viewpoint, then you know in which direction to head. If the results vary, give your candidate a third test as a tie-breaker. It is far less costly to pay for multiple tests than it is to hire the wrong person.

Let seasoned producers train inexperienced agents.

It’s a mistake to pull an experienced agent from the field in order to train a new hire. Some veterans are not capable of dissecting and recreating their successes for study, or may hesitate to do so because they fear future competition from a younger rival. Others may have poor work habits, be unnecessarily cynical, or simply resent babysitting without additional pay.

So instead of putting a new hire through this gauntlet, send them to formal sales training school. In the classroom, agents learn how to sell from skilled trainers and pick up valuable tips from fellow attendees.

Still, it is a good idea for new and seasoned producers to jointly prospect for new leads. They share the burden while having the opportunity to bond. Plus, the senior agent is rewarded with the larger prospects and the junior partner learns how to convert suspects into leads.

Sales manage instead of selling.

This wishful fallacy applies only to certain smaller offices. It assumes that if a principal stops selling and manages full-time, that the agency will grow at a faster pace than it would otherwise. It’s expected that the agency’s remaining producers will more than offset the value of the principal’s former sales efforts.

Full-time management is only desirable once an agency achieves a certain size. Smaller offices can seldom afford the lost production. The business may get into trouble quickly if the manager loses touch with his key clients and with selling in general. There is also the potential that agents who were assigned some of the principal’s old accounts may take them with them if they ever leave the agency.

Gain extra time for sales management duties by reassigning small no-growth accounts to CSRs, and exercising other time-saving actions, instead of abandoning sales entirely.

Conclusion.

Avoid the siren call of these and other sales management fallacies. Consider the consequences of any actions that seem too simple. Agency management is not a science; it’s an art. And like creating any piece of artwork, training and motivating people requires good raw material, patience, and skillful experimentation. When things go well, the end result is not only good for the artist; it’s also good for the subject. Skillful supervision is always a win-win proposition.

Topics Agencies Talent Training Development