{"id":17061,"date":"2023-09-12T00:00:13","date_gmt":"2023-09-12T00:00:13","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.sandler.com\/?p=17061"},"modified":"2023-09-12T15:32:18","modified_gmt":"2023-09-12T15:32:18","slug":"sales-leaders-improve-forecast-accuracy-closing-ratios-aligning-sales-process-and-debrief-with-buyer-journey","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/sandler.com\/blog\/sales-leaders-improve-forecast-accuracy-closing-ratios-aligning-sales-process-and-debrief-with-buyer-journey\/","title":{"rendered":"Sales Leaders: Improve Forecast Accuracy and Closing Ratios… by Aligning Your Sales Process, and Your Debrief With the Buyer Journey"},"content":{"rendered":"

We\u2019ve all been in situations where a salesperson says, \u201cI\u2019ve got X<\/em> amount of revenue coming in this month\u201d\u2026 and reports a couple of weeks later that everything is \u201cstill on track\u201d for hitting the revenue target of X<\/em>\u2026 but then, at the end of the month, tells us that the actual figure is X<\/em> minus Y, <\/em>totaling Z<\/em>. Where Z is a number smaller than we were promised- or expected to hear.<\/p>\n

This dynamic plays out all the time, in virtually every industry we serve. In fact, we\u2019ve noticed it happens often enough that seasoned sales leaders eventually learn that this phenomenon is something that needs to be planned for and taken into account.<\/p>\n

The problem is, though, that what sales leaders typically do in response<\/em> to this challenge is the same thing that salespeople do to create<\/em> the challenge in the first place.<\/strong><\/p>\n

Hear me out. Salespeople sometimes operate by gut, and they often don\u2019t even realize they have less information than they need to be able to make an accurate prediction about the viability of an opportunity. So when it\u2019s time to make projections, they throw out a number anyway. They do this with optimism, confidence, and authority — because hey, optimism, confidence, and authority are their self-protection tools in the brutal world of sales.<\/p>\n

Then what happens? A little time goes by; they realize they\u2019re missing some critical piece of information and maybe need some help\u2026 but they hesitate to say that to their manager, because they already stated, with optimism, confidence, and authority, that they\u2019re going to hit the target of X this month. So they say nothing (and try to fix things) until the last possible minute. That\u2019s a classic low-information, low-communication cycle.<\/p>\n

But here\u2019s the irony: Too many sales leaders operate by gut, as well. <\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n

They say to themselves, \u201cOkay — Jim is likely to exaggerate \u2013 I\u2019ll cut his forecast by 50%. Maria is less likely to exaggerate, I\u2019ll cut her forecast by just 15%. And Tim, I can count on him, but who knows, he might hit a bump in the road. I\u2019ll cut his forecast by 5%. That way, when I add everything together, I should get a number that\u2019s relatively accurate.\u201d<\/p>\n

Reality check: If both <\/em>sides are operating by gut, if both the salesperson and the sales leader are using instinct instead of quantifying what\u2019s in front of them, that makes the low-information, low-communication cycle even worse\u2026 and the team\u2019s results suffer.<\/p>\n

Let\u2019s face it: This deepening low-information cycle doesn\u2019t help the person-to-person relationship between the seller and the sales leader; It stresses everyone. More to the point, it delivers forecasting results that are unreliable and unpredictable. And when it comes to revenue production, reliability and predictability are supposed to be the name of the game. So: what\u2019s the solution?<\/p>\n

At Sandler, we say the solution starts with a question: Whose job is it to qualify leads?<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n

Most people we talk to say, \u201cThat\u2019s the salesperson\u2019s job.\u201d And of course, from a formal point of view, that\u2019s correct. Yet, at the same time, it\u2019s the sales leader\u2019s <\/em>job to set the benchmarks<\/em> for qualification \u2013 to clearly define what is and isn\u2019t a qualified opportunity. In other words, the quality of the revenue forecast depends on the quality of the pipeline debrief led by the sales leader.<\/strong><\/p>\n

Leading a better qualification debrief begins with leading a better discussion about the various benchmarks in the sales cycle. And a very dysfunctional, very common, very low-information forecast cycle that we\u2019ve been talking about is, at its core, a problem arising from ambiguity among team members about the benchmarks that define a qualified opportunity at any given stage of our sales process.\u00a0 If that definition is unclear, pipeline hygiene will suffer, closing rates will not be optimal, forecasts will be unreliable, and our teams will flounder.<\/p>\n

Sad but true: All too often, our sales teams do <\/em>flounder. <\/strong><\/p>\n

Why? One big reason is that there is no clear understanding of the multiple <\/em>criteria that determine what constitutes a qualified lead at any given stage\u2026 and no clear understanding of what is needed to move an opportunity to the next stage.<\/strong><\/p>\n

And here\u2019s the point sales leaders often overlook: We need those criteria not just at the beginning of the discussion with a prospective buyer, but at all the various points at which buyers are likely to interact with the sales team.<\/em> When those criteria are vaguely defined, or missing altogether, that is a sales leadership challenge — not a salesperson\u2019s performance challenge.<\/p>\n

Peter Drucker once observed: \u201cIf you can\u2019t measure it, you can\u2019t manage it.\u201d Yet, in our experience, many sales leaders completely miss the opportunity to objectively and comprehensively track, measure, and quantify the progression of their team\u2019s sales opportunities. What may make monitoring this progression a bit of a challenge is that it takes place in two dimensions at once.<\/p>\n

In any given sale, there is the buyer\u2019s progression through the buying<\/em> journey \u2013 and there is that same opportunity\u2019s parallel progression through the organization\u2019s sales<\/em> process. <\/strong><\/p>\n

These two journeys dovetail, of course, and ideally, we want them to inform and reflect each other. They\u2019re two sides of the same coin\u2026 and just as there\u2019s no such thing as a one-sided coin, there\u2019s no such thing as a sale that unfolds in only one of these dimensions! This is one of the reasons we must be willing to critically examine what\u2019s happening to every opportunity, at every key point in its progression, with an eye toward process and measurable outcomes \u2013 as opposed to the salesperson\u2019s \u201cgut feeling\u201d about the likelihood of closure.<\/p>\n

The best way for leaders of sales teams to make that critical assessment is through an ongoing series of conversations with the members of the sales team: qualification debriefs<\/strong>.<\/p>\n

Learning to lead these debriefs well is essential to the mission of leading a sales team that adopts the cultural focus of a) putting buyers first and b) proceeding from data, rather than emotion, in critical business decisions.<\/p>\n

A good qualification debrief does not <\/em>ask questions like \u201cWhat\u2019s your feeling about whether this is going to close?\u201d. Instead, this debrief includes questions about specific, relevant benchmarks in the team\u2019s documented sales process<\/strong>.<\/p>\n

Here are some ideas that can help you make qualification debriefs more productive \u2013 make that data-driven, buyer-first cultural focus a daily reality for your team \u2013 and make tracking, measuring, and quantifying specific business-to-business revenue opportunities easier and more accurate.<\/p>\n

\n
\n

Table of Contents<\/p>\nToggle<\/span><\/path><\/svg><\/svg><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/a><\/span><\/div>\n