[channin19]

On average how long does it take for you guys to train a representative to open a new deal?

How long does your average rep stay with the company?

[Regium]

We have those reps who stay for a few weeks (most) and those reps who stay for a few months (handful)

[FUNd]

We have those reps who stay for a few weeks (most) and those reps who stay for a few months (handful)

Interesting. Do you ever wonder why they all leave after a few weeks/months, or do you know why?

[JSL23]

Commission based Sales is rough, always a revolving door. It's a cultural thing. I have been in B2B Sales for 11 years now and worked in 6 places total. I've been in MCA for just over 10 months and having interviewed at a few places noticed it is not much of an interview. They give you a tiny bit of rah-rah company BS, ask a couple of quick questions, discuss compensation and ask when you can start(from the small sample size I've seen and stories I have heard at least).

From my experience if you make someone go through an actual interview process: Phone screen, 1st face-to-face, follow-up, maybe a mock pitch, or some type of basic test to see if a Candidate is a fit, then a Final Interview it makes it more important to them and weeds out the people you don't want. Follow that up with a few days of hands on training(and continued Sales and Product training afterwards) you create a winning culture. Those that don't micromanage but coach their Sales staff and rewards them for production are often the ones that see the least amount of turnaround. Those that bring someone in and say "Come in Monday at 9:00" without interviewing them, don't train them, omit important details about compensation, and just put them in front of a phone without any development are the ones that are and always will be revolving doors.

[FUNd]

Commission based Sales is rough, always a revolving door. It's a cultural thing. I have been in B2B Sales for 11 years now and worked in 6 places total. I've been in MCA for just over 10 months and having interviewed at a few places noticed it is not much of an interview. They give you a tiny bit of rah-rah company BS, ask a couple of quick questions, discuss compensation and ask when you can start(from the small sample size I've seen and stories I have heard at least).

From my experience if you make someone go through an actual interview process: Phone screen, 1st face-to-face, follow-up, maybe a mock pitch, or some type of basic test to see if a Candidate is a fit, then a Final Interview it makes it more important to them and weeds out the people you don't want. Follow that up with a few days of hands on training(and continued Sales and Product training afterwards) you create a winning culture. Those that don't micromanage but coach their Sales staff and rewards them for production are often the ones that see the least amount of turnaround. Those that bring someone in and say "Come in Monday at 9:00" without interviewing them, don't train them, omit important details about compensation, and just put them in front of a phone without any development are the ones that are and always will be revolving doors.

Agree. In my experience in the B2B finance arena over the past 10 years, it seems to be profitable for companies to have that level of turnover. A lot of them foster the environment for it to take place in my observation, so I must assume its a profitable business structure and not a byproduct of a shoddy or lazy interview process. The guys at the top give the new salesperson a song and dance about 6-figure dreams, a quick pump up 2 day training, and it's off to the phones with the yellow pages and a micromanaging boss counting calls and call time. The rep builds the database with qualified leads, but gets burnt out quickly, quits, and the guys at the top sweep out the leads that were produced and close them. Rinse. Repeat.

The problem with this model is they are essentially just using people and flipping them into telemarketers when they are promised real opportunity. Pretty dirty.

[JSL23]

Agree. In my experience in the B2B finance arena over the past 10 years, it seems to be profitable for companies to have that level of turnover. A lot of them foster the environment for it to take place in my observation, so I must assume its a profitable business structure and not a byproduct of a shoddy or lazy interview process. The guys at the top give the new salesperson a song and dance about 6-figure dreams, a quick pump up 2 day training, and it's off to the phones with the yellow pages and a micromanaging boss counting calls and call time. The rep builds the database with qualified leads, but gets burnt out quickly, quits, and the guys at the top sweep out the leads that were produced and close them. Rinse. Repeat.

The problem with this model is they are essentially just using people and flipping them into telemarketers when they are promised real opportunity. Pretty dirty.

Very true. you have to wonder though, just how profitable is it really? If the top Producer who is going to take the pipeline the Account Executive built up, wouldn't he produce without it anyway? And what about the people who actually have potential and options? They will jump ship at the first decent opportunity. Instead of having 3 or 4 really great people you have one or two.....And of course, the more savvy reps are going to take whatever pipeline they built a decent amount of the time and some other place will gain those clients.

I've heard the argument that it is profitable to burn and turn people a few times, but I'm really not sure-it seems to me it's more of an unwillingness to change from what may have worked in the 80's/90's and an inability to cultivate talent. That's the one thing I will give Medium-Large companies who pay a base, they invest in talent. Not just by paying a base/benefits but they spend a lot of time and money to find the right person, and invest in their success. If they lose that person or it just doesn't work out, it effects them; they have skin in the game. Of course, as the Salesperson, you have to put up with a lot more red tape and BS corporate politics. The earning ceiling is often lower as well in that type of situation because they offset the base with lower commission structures.

It takes thick skin and a lot of savvy to be a Salesperson, not only because you have to deal with rejection on a regular basis, but you have to be careful where you choose to work.

[WhoisKingsley]

I always say that you know this is right for you within the first 3 days after training. Some pick it up- some get frustrated and tell me "I'll see you Monday!" and I never see them again. We explain the business, they seem interested and then they realize it's not as easy as they think. I don't like telling my secrets but here's some things to keep in mind

1: The "No" answers that reps get really lower your drive. I train my guys that "No" is good. Sift out the bad so you can get to qualified leads! If someone tells you know or is rude- on to the next. Teach to like the word "NO"
2: Commissions. We try to have a "Hands Free" approach. We give the knowledge and you offer your personality and let you handle everything case by case. The harder you work the larger the commission the more quantity deals come in along with their quality of work ethic. We offer a 70% cap on self gen and 50% on leads depending on the work. So the handful that stay are for good reason
3: They leave because they learn the business and move on- they attempt to take their "portfolio" and work it alone. You have to make each rep a vital part of your company- not a telemarketing/bottom feeder- avoid that
4: Work environment is everything. We like to have a "mullet" persona... Corporate in the front... and be ourselves behind the scenes. Create competition in teams and let everyone be themselves. It's hard enough with the rejection on the phones and then sticking everyone in a suit.