Sales training curriculum
Planning your sales training curriculum for 2013? At this time of year most sales training managers are into planning for the year ahead. Given priorities being set and budgets being finalized, this is a good time to not only think about what sales training needs to be accomplished but also to review some of the fundamental “how-to’s.”
In previous blogs we have touched on the idea that what you do before and after the sales training is as important as the sales training itself. It is hard to over emphasize the point that time spent beforehand planning on how to position the training and afterwards on how to reinforce it, is time well spent. With that notion on the table, let’s turn to three other ideas that are worth considering as you plan for 2013.
Sales training isn’t always the answer. Sales training programs should not be relied upon to fix all performance problems. Sales training programs can address a lack of knowledge or skill. They can effectively jump start new sales reps by providing them with a base of knowledge. They can be a great help in making sure that a new product lives up to expectations. And, that’s just the short list.
However, sometimes a performance problem is not about a skill or knowledge deficiency. For example sometimes it’s a motivation issue … or perhaps the source of the problem has to do with management issues inside the company? Or, perhaps, the performance expectations aren’t clear or the compensation system is dysfunctional. In situations like these if sales training is embraced as the solution the end result is misspent money and a sour taste about sales training.
The same sales training isn’t always for everyone. Companies often institute company-wide sales training initiatives. Sometimes this makes sense – like when you’re goal is to institute a common sales language for the sales force. And, of course, corporate-wide sales training is a good idea when a new strategic initiative is introduced. For example, if the sales team must move from selling individual products to selling an integrated solution, then everyone needs adjust and adapt their skills to the new sales challenge.
These are specific situations faced by many companies where the same program for everyone is the right answer. On the other hand, sometimes it is a better idea is to target programs for specific segments of your sales team. For example, a “Top Gun” school for your high performers could be a high payoff or maybe if you are experiencing high turnover, a program targeted just for new hires is smart training priority. So, perhaps every program should not be for everyone.
Sales people, like everyone one else, learn best when they’re motivated. Telling sales people they need to attend a one or two-day sales training session next Tuesday may get “butts in the seats” but their minds are elsewhere. Sales training yields much better outcomes when sales people want to be there – when they come to the sales training program with a positive attitude.
So, how do you get sales people “to want” to attend sales training? Buy-in is not about compliance; it’s about persuasion. Senior management support, of course, is a key – clarifying the message as to why the sales training is being done, sharing that they’re serious about the sales training, etc. But that shouldn’t be the end of the effort. One approach is to generate positive buzz. One of our clients rolled out a sales training initiative by inviting the most successful, respected sales people to attend the first three programs – we called the programs – “Inaugurals.” When the very best spread the word that the sales training program was worthwhile, a positive buzz was created. After those first three programs, it was easy to fill the slots in future programs. In fact, we had a waiting list and in the end, everyone in the sales force attended by choice.
If you found this post helpful, you might want to join the conversation and subscribe to the Sales Training Connection.
©2013 Sales Horizons, LLC
Richard,
Having spent the past 13 years creating sales curriculums for a Fortune 100 company, your article could not be more on target.
Your first point is one that seems to need constant reinforcement, even at senior levels. There is a mindset that training is a fix-all or at least an easy box to check that we did something.
I am seeing growing buy-in and understanding on point number two. I think budgets in recent years, especially, have made this something the sales organization often comes to the learning organization and requests. I absolutely agree that, if your budget is limited, spend on the best of the best. There is a ton of research that suggests that your best sales people, despite their current high performance, have the most ability to generate more income. This makes the ROI for advancing their training a winner.
Your final point may be the most important. I concur on everything you’re saying about buy-in. I have been increasingly pushing the idea of enhancing personal development skills in our sales training efforts. There is a big assumption that sales people are motivated by ego and money, or that we are paying them enough that they should be able to motivate themselves. This is all true to a point. The fact is that tools to maintain a positive attitude in sales, while readily available, are often not seen as a role of “training”. However, corporate learning models, at least successful ones, are increasingly moving away from a “training” model and toward performance enhancement. More and more learning organizations in larger companies are being incentivized to “move the financial needle”, not just train people. I think it is a huge failure of sales training in many organizations that they focus on product and skills, but neglect the most important thing a salesperson has going for him or her – their psychological grounding for success.
Ray – thanks for the interest and comments. The distinction between training a model and performance enhancement that you make is critical and tends not to b addressed enough and not really explored.
A correlated point is often trAining has been done to fix a performance problem which is okay but one might also want to train folks to adjust and adapt their skill set to be better able to perform a future task – say a company is planning g to move from selling individual products to an integrated solution might call for some training