Moments — build and develop...

"I need you to hire 15 people and fill this room."

"How long do I have?"

"Three months."

"OK"

Three months later bums were in seats; then 24 months later (after some course corrections) viability was proven  — the team, as well as its expanded future iterations, became part of the sales channel strategy.

I only think of this because recently I came upon the Inside Sales Development Program manual I created as part of the ongoing development of the Inside Sales channel — I smiled as I thumbed through the manual not only because of the memories but also because of the reminder that once you have built something there is an ongoing need to keep developing it.

Constant development begets constant building.

Ironically, this development program was never used by its intended audience but did become the core for another initiative and team I helped built — and with it, I became a better strategic thinker, tactical executer, and people leader.

Build and develop... build and develop...

There is no other way.

iamgpe

Sales versus Marketing... a narrative that is getting old.

The other day I was trying to explain the Sales and Marketing function to a friend who is a hard core "finance guy"; as I went about doing so, I couldn't help but flippantly say —

"When things are going well (meaning revenue) Sales gets the credit; when things aren't going so well Marketing gets the blame" 

We both laughed... but surprisingly not that hard.

I could not help but think of a conversation between a seasoned commercial leader and a marketing manager where I heard the manager say, "I understand what you are saying from a sales perspective but marketing is different, and we are going to do this..." As I was listening to the marketing manager I actually screamed in my head, "No, no... nooooo. The commercial leader is correct, and you are not different... focus on the customer, the customer's needs, and work together to generate revenue!" 

I should point out why I have earned the right to have an opinion on this topic. My career (30 years and counting) has been in both Sales and Marketing (almost 50-50), and I have received my fair share of credit and blame; for right or for wrong, I feel I have some insight worth considering. Academically, marketing is the business discipline that encompasses "Product", "Price", "Place" and "Promotion" (The 4 Ps); within the "Promotional Mix" is the sales channel... and make no mistake, this channel is extremely important — Why you may ask? It's because sales is one of very few groups in business that has an intimate and personal understanding of the customer, and is able to communicate complicated messages to generate revenue.   

And for anyone who doesn't think revenue is king, you should go ask any investor(s) you have to offer some insight regarding this point.

In my mind, the only thing that is different between Sales and Marketing is the levers available to each group, and maybe the degrees of separation their activities can be from revenue generation. The objectives of Sales and Marketing are the same — Engage with the customer, offer the appropriate product(s) and/or service(s) to meet the customer's need(s), and generate revenue. I very much appreciate the complexity to do all of this, but in the end it does boil down to this.

Many years ago a Sales Leader* was at a marketing retreat and was asked to speak about the relationship between Sales and Marketing. He was elegant, insightful, complimented his marketing partners, and offered insights on the sales team. At one point he compared sales to a "brochure" that talked back, had opinions, and offered ideas. He went on to say that some in marketing see themselves as "the great orchestrators of all things marketing, and frankly don't like rebuttal from one of their channels". He very eloquently suggested that this was the wrong perspective and that the sales team was a wealth of customer insight and ideas, and it's crucial to work together for success. Besides he went on to ask, "Don't we all have the same objective to engage with customers, offer the appropriate product(s) and/or service(s) to meet the customer's need(s), and generate revenue?" Fifteen years later his perspective still resonates for me —The narrative should always be Sales and Marketing.

So if your narrative is Sales versus Marketing, I strongly suggest you work to change this because no one wins when there is a dysfunctional relationship between Sales and Marketing, It's hard enough to generate revenue at the best of times.. just ask anyone in either Sales or Marketing. And if you're asking how to go about changing the narrative, I suggest you start with Sales and Marketing Leadership because in the end this is a leadership issue... on both sides. 

Let's not even get into those finance people who ask us about our latest expense report.

iamgpe

* His title was Sales Leader but in reality he was just a Great Leader... full stop.

The worst example of Leadership I've heard in a while...

The story goes something like this...

A relatively new employee arrived at work and as she settled into her day she got a call from Human Resources to come to their office. Upon arriving, she was informed she was being terminated; they went on to say it wasn't a performance issue, that they would give her a good reference, and the situation was the result of broader business issues. It was effective immediately, and did she want them to collect her things.

After hearing this, I asked where her boss was when as this was happening and was told he was in another office in the building. I could not help but become indignant on her behalf and said, "That is just awful leadership, and most likely reflects a gutless culture. You are better off not working for an organization like that." 

Before I offer a perspective as to why I said this, I should make it very clear that I understand employees get terminated, be it for cause or simply because the company is at a bad time in the business cycle. It is one of those hard realities of business. I operate under a simple premise that hiring managers hire and hiring managers fire, and there is a great responsibility that comes with hiring, managing, leading, and every so often, terminating people. This situation was a lack of ownership in my mind and avoiding the responsibility for the greatest asset a company has.

If you may be thinking Human Resources IS responsible for terminating, I will suggest that's not the case. Human Resources is responsible for governance of people, the systems and processes for people management, coaching, and maybe even development, but not termination of a person (or hiring for that matter). They are a partner in what has to be done, but the responsibility and ownership is with the manager.

Terminating someone from the organization needs be, and always should be, a very difficult thing to do. There needs to be a constant reminder that it is not a faceless exercise and that a person's life is being impacted. I understand that a person owns his or her career, as well as meeting the expectations that come with the role, but it is important to keep this in mind:

• If they are not working out, maybe you shouldn't have hired them in the first place.
• If they were struggling, did you work to develop them up to their potential or out of the organization in a clear and respectful manner.

In the case of the story that I heard the other day, the manager should have been front and centre to look the person in the eye and deliver the difficult news, if for no other reason than the respect owed to the person. 

And this brings us back to why I think it's the worst example of Leadership I've heard in a while. Why would anyone want to work for an organization that doesn't want to take ownership, avoids what is difficult, and doesn't respect the most important asset they have? I will also point out that the manager has a boss, and that boss has a boss, and this situation most likely reflects something bigger than just one person. It probably reflects a company culture and maybe that is why they are struggling.

What makes this story even more interesting is two days after being terminated the company called the woman back and offered her a job. She of course declined.

Rightfully so in my mind.

iamgpe