←back to thread

388 points replyifuagree | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0.251s | source
Show context
corry ◴[] No.37966968[source]
“Pushing sales people to increase their amount of sales/quota is like asking meteorologists for sunshine”.

Hmmm it doesn’t seem unreasonable in that context? You’re really asking people to work more effectively, to accomplish the same amount of work more quickly.

It’s like asking sales people what their quota should be. They pick a number that is no-brainer hittable, because there is a lot of complexity and many unknown variables in getting deals signed, so to prevent looking bad they’ll pad their number. But their no-brainer number is below what the business needs.

So you tell them their quota is going to be a bit higher. They’ll have to stretch to hit it.

And it’s even MORE important since their comp is DIRECTLY tied to hitting that number.

And yet sales people aren’t writing article after article about how self-set quotas are sacrosanct, should only settable by sales people themselves, and how clueless management is to try to get more performance above the no-brainer target.

replies(16): >>37967032 #>>37967045 #>>37967049 #>>37967125 #>>37967129 #>>37967177 #>>37967191 #>>37967206 #>>37967725 #>>37968246 #>>37968785 #>>37968936 #>>37969087 #>>37970168 #>>37971201 #>>37975757 #
1. k1t ◴[] No.37967177[source]
I feel the sales analogy is quite general (hit a quarterly/annual quota) but the engineering example is talking about a specific piece of functionality.

If you asked the sales team about a specific deal and they said "We estimate a 70% chance of closing the deal. It'll bring in about $5m in ARR."

If management responded "Could you make that 80% and $7m ARR?" I think that would be a closer analogy.

Sure it might be possible to improve the odds of closing and jack the price up at the same time - just like it might be possible to complete that feature in half the time - but somebody will have to make some major changes or concessions somewhere to make it happen.