Here at Select Metrix we have much for which to be thankful.  The news of the recessionary economy and the unstable world can be overwhelming in today’s media.  But this drumbeat can be distracting – from your good health, your warm home, your loving family.

My hope for you is safe travel to a joyous home filled with family, friends and mirth.

Have a happy and blessed Thanksgiving from all of us at Select Metrix!

Comments(0)

I have sat through some interviews which have been enlightening in terms of the struggles of hiring managers who do not hire often.  One of the blatant deficiencies I observed was this – a lack of good questions.  Is there anything more important than questions in interviewing an external candidate?  Even an internal candidate.

Here is one instance of what I observed – a rather inexperienced manager asked esoteric questions that left me scratching my head.  The candidate did a good job attempting to answer the question without embarrassing the hiring manager.  One question took almost 2 minutes for the hiring manager to ask!  The question included an analogy, an experience aspect and a hypothetical component…I think.

This interaction was a perfect example of the manager being too clever by half.

The most effective approach is to prepare for each candidate by writing down your questions for that candidate.  If your question takes more than 15-20 seconds to ask, cut it down.  If you choose to use an analogy, test it out on a coworker.  If they struggle with it, rework it (or scrap it).  The most effective questions are direct, succinct and open-ended.  Provide the candidate with the opportunity to navigate to the answer they would like to offer.  Pay attention to the topics they choose – there is much to discern in that information.

Comments(5)

I have a friend who is a Director of Sales for a medium-sized company.  A few months ago, he had a major issue with one of his salespeople in another Midwestern state.  The salesperson cursed out a customer on the phone (the customer was “pestering” him by calling his cell phone more than 1 time in the same day).  He was let go by my friend.

Now it turns out that this salesperson is pushing his resume out to prospective employers.  One of them called to verify his employment and had some interesting facts.

• Salesperson claimed to be a Sales Manager (he wasn’t)
• Salesperson claimed to win the President’s Award (they don’t have one)
• Salesperson claimed to be part of the Top Seller’s Circle (again, they don’t have one)

You get the point.  Let’s just call it creative resume writing.

Comments(1)

This may sound like a fine delineation, but I thought it was rather profound.  One of our customers mentioned that he had people who could “do” certain tasks in a hiring process.  However, these people were not able to provide “help” in the hiring process.  That may sound like he is splitting hairs, but I find that point to be extremely important.

One of the struggles in assisting companies in their hiring process is that most companies, unless quite large, tend to hire on a need basis.  This means they do not spend their entire time hiring.  In fact, it often is pushed into the margins of their day.  Other tasks take priority and the mundane work of sorting resumes, answering candidate questions and scheduling phone screens and interviews gets pushed to others.

If these important tasks get pushed to people who simply do the task, you run the risk of neutering the efficacy of your hiring process.

The key is to push these tasks to people who can help in the process.  Not only do they complete the task, they bring extra value to it.  In many small companies, this “help” can only  come from the hiring manager.  In larger companies, there are simply more options to choose from in terms of specific tasks in the process.

My point here is to highlight that hiring is a critical process…one that should not be completed by whomever is available to quickly check a  task off of a list.

Comments(0)

I’ve been swamped of late with sales candidate assessments for different customers and have encountered an important trait – common sense.  This is a broad topic, but we use it in a fairly defined manner – using common sense.  We actually measure this aptitude in one of our assessments which often leads to rather pointed discussions…especially when a candidate has a low score in this area.

But what of it?  Our definition utilizes speaks to common sense being more of a natural reflex as opposed to a logical thinking process.  I’m not talking about intuition but rather the practical thinking in regards to seeing the world.  Does that make sense?  The ability is clearly beneficial to successful selling.

Think of salesperson’s task – successfully convince a stranger to hand over their (or their company’s) money for your product or service solution.  Most times salespeople have to go to the client’s facility to meet with them.  Most times they have never met the prospect.  Most times they are not certain of all of the buying factors (need, budget, decision process, timing, etc.).  If you think about it, this is a tall order.

Now think of a salesperson with the ability to see things in a practical manner, to see the world clearly.  How intrinsically helpful is this ability?  A salesperson with this aptitude can move through a qualifying process quickly and accurately.  In essence, they are more efficient.

A salesperson lacking in this area has to incorporate more aids (record keeping, organizing tools, selling system reminders, etc.) to move through the same area.  It has been my experience that these salespeople will move slower in comparison to the aforementioned salespeople.  These salespeople will also miss some important qualifying points.  They will, essentially, take longer to cover the same ground.

I’m not sure this distinction is necessarily critical in the present market.  Most companies I talk to are thoroughly qualifying every lead – they are not overwhelmed with hot leads.  Yet, the economy will pick up and business will start to move into a faster pace when it does.  At that point, a less efficient, slower-moving salesperson may become a real liability.

If you are not assessing salespeople today, it is time to start.

Comments(0)

I’m back in my psych book this morning looking for a specific answer to how managers get stuck on “bad” instances from otherwise strong performing salespeople.  I’ve seen this effect with some sales managers who have a generally sour impression of a salesperson who seems to be doing well in the role.  When I pursue the topic with the manager, I typically hear of anecdotal stories with what seems to be innocuous outcomes.  However, the sales manager is still upset by situation.

Here is what I discovered in the test book – availability heuristic.  Availability heuristic is basically this – making judgments based on how easily instances come to mind.  From the textbook:

Which is more common – words that start with the letter k (e.g. king) or words that have k as the third letter (e.g. awkward)?  In English there are more than twice as many words having k for the third letter as words starting with k, but most people wrongly judge that k is more commonly the first letter.  The reason, presumably, is that it is easy to think of words starting with k but harder to think of words having k in the third position.

Here is the hook:

When a boss evaluates an employee’s reliability, he may be guided by how easy it is to remember the employee’s missing a deadline.

The authors provide a good example of air travel – millions of people fly innumerable miles all over the world and flying is one of the safest modes of travel.  But many people ignore this face and become reluctant to fly because plane crashes are so readily available in their memory.

Managers need to be cognizant of this mental short cut.  Some salespeople become labeled based on this effect.  Before moving into end-of-year reviews, make sure you perform a thorough reconstruction of each salesperson’s performance.  Remember – don’t take short cuts.

Comments(0)