Tag Archives: executive coaching

Sales Coaching

The Sales Coaching Dilemma

In common with training and management, coaching is unregulated, and therefore anyone can call himself/ herself a coach, and they do.

There are four distinct levels of coach and as you move from one level to the other, the need for skill and experience increases commensurate with the complexity of the coaching process.

LEVEL 1 (L1) – CAREER COACH AND LIFE SKILLS COACH

Level 1 coaching is typified by the coaching process being in the hands of the person being coached, which means that they drive the agenda rather than the coach. This is where most of the coaches in existence (up to 80% of the coaching population) operate. The focus of the coaching effort tends to be on life skills and career coaching. There is a significant gap in experience, knowledge and skills between coaches operating at this and the other levels.

LIFE SKILLS COACHES

Life Skills Coaches will have arrived in the coaching role from a variety of routes; some from training; some from a period of redundancy; in fact – just about anyone, from just about anywhere. They do not need any specialist knowledge, or experience. Some will have been trained; a few will hold a qualification; most will have picked up their coaching knowledge and skills from books or from attending a short course.

Some are very dangerous. They will be self-taught psychoanalysts and can often be found exploring people’s deep routed emotional problems without the ability or experience to know when to stop. They seek to advise people how to be healthy, wealthy, and happy. Most will certainly not be wealthy. Others might be healthy. Significant numbers are blissfully happy to have anyone to listen to them.

Some will have bought an expensive franchise offering untold wealth; most will be earning below average incomes. Some will be advertising themselves as Executive Coaches (Level 4); most will never actually engage in anything close to Executive Coaching.

They represent 90% of the coaching population at Level 1. You will encounter them at each and every networking event, in increasing numbers.

The coaching process is open-ended, meaning that providing the person being coached is able to pay the fees involved, it will go on indefinitely. There is rarely a definable, measurable goal.

CAREER COACHES

Career Coaches are usually to be found in-company; sometimes employed from external sources; often they are in the HR Department. In the same way as the Personnel Department became the HR Department, ‘Jack and Jill from personnel’ – became ‘Jack and Jill, the Career Coaches’.

Career Coaches will be probably be annoyed that I have placed them at Level 1, implying that they don’t need specialist knowledge or experience. Nevertheless, it is true. That said, many internal Career Coaches will have undergone various levels of formal training; some via the CIPD route; some will use career preference inventories to help them add a pseudo form of credibility to their efforts.

As with life skills coaching, career coaching is often disguised as executive coaching although it bears little resemblance to the executive coaching process described at Level 4 here. Career coaching offered to senior managers is usually a precursor to sending them on an expensive study programme in a European Business School which for many has no outcome other than an attendance certificate. No one fails. The only time career coaching is offered to lower levels of employees is when redundancy follows and the expense of providing career coaching is seen as an unavoidable cost in order to mitigate industrial disruption and employment appeals.

LEVEL 2 (L2) – SALES COACHING

Level 2 coaching is where Sales Coaches operate – in theory.

The coaching process at Level 2 is focussed on business outcomes and is driven by the coach. This is why a significant number of coaching initiatives in companies have failed, and continue to fail. The reason being that the people involved in being a Level 2 Coach are either only being trained at Level 1 – which is not a lot; or not trained at all.

A lot of companies who they say their managers have been trained as coaches, have invested at best two days, and at worst half a day in training their managers as coaches. In addition, the coaching models being used begin with the employee’s agenda, not the manager’s, and not the organisation. A classic example would be the use of the GROW model, which begins with either

– What is the Goal?

– What are you trying to achieve?

– What is your Goal?

– What are we trying to do?

The last type of question is meant to show inclusivity – i.e. we are all in this together.

Beginning with the salesperson’s agenda is an abdication of the Sales Coach’s role in ensuring that the organisation’s aims are placed firmly at the front of the queue.

Sales Coaches should have some experience of sales. Not from the perspective of specific knowledge of the product and/ or service being sold, but of the emotional pressures associated with being in a sales role. Salespeople are very sceptical of coaches who do not have sales experience. Whether this is right or wrong is immaterial. The reality is that you will tend to get on better with the target audience if you understand about selling from experience. And getting on with the salesperson is important. Sales coaching in this form works because the coaching relationship is built on trust. Trust from the salesperson of the coach; that performance short-falls and experimentation to improve will not be criticised, even though any lack of effort might. Trust from the coach of the salesperson that the latter is trying to improve and not just pretending.

The Sales Coach does not need a significant amount of knowledge about the product and/ or service the salesperson is selling, but it could reduce the amount of time needed to help the salesperson focus on improvement solutions. On the other hand, often, prior in-depth knowledge of the product and significant experience of the actual sales role can often be a barrier to effective sales coaching. Quite often, the less you know, the better the coaching questions are.

In sales coaching there has to be a clearly defined sales process – the Game Plan. Without a clearly defined game plan, the Coach will be working at Level 1. A game plan focuses both the Sales Coach and the salesperson on what has to be done, and how it to be done, in order to elicit an outcome – the performance. If performance is low, then either the game plan doesn’t work and needs to be changed or the salesperson is not following the game plan – and might have to be changed. Once you have a game plan, it can be enhanced in order to enhance performance but not in one day and not all at once. This brings me to the last point in Level 2 Sales Coaching – timescale.

Many people, when asked the question, is sales coaching short-term or long-term, will opt for long-term. The correct answer is short-term. By this I mean that the focus of each coaching session is on a short-term activity. In football, you often hear the cliché – ‘we take it one game at a time’; and so it is with sales coaching. The football coach may have a long-term goal to win the league, but slavish focus on winning the league is fraught with failure, without the focussed activity of working out what it will take to win the next game. In this way Sales Coaches work on one thing at a time. Taking one piece out of the total sales process and working with it until it is improved. It is called whole-part-whole. By taking a small part of the whole process and improving it, the knock-on effect is to improve the whole.

The Sales Coach should be the line manager.

LEVEL 3 (L3) – METACOACH

The MetaCoach is the Coach of the Coach. In a sales or a business environment this should be the line manager but it can also work by using either internal trainers as the MetaCoach or external MetaCoaches provided there is a significant level of interaction between the MetaCoach and senior management. If the MetaCoach is not the line manager, then the MetaCoach needs to have direct and regular access to the senior line manager, and preferably to the manager above them.

The agenda is driven by the organisation. The MetaCoach should have management experience. As with the Sales Coach, there should be clearly defined sales management process, but there rarely is. One of the main reasons why MetaCoaching fails to materialise in most companies is the lack of a detailed management process. Just as it’s vital to have a game plan for the sales process the same should apply to the management process. We already know that the greatest influence on sales success is management. In the same way, the greatest influence on the success of sales managers is the senior manager they report to.

The MetaCoach does not need either product knowledge of the products and services being sold, or specific experience of the sales or sales management role, and the lack of these is often an advantage. Some management experience however is desirable in order to have empathy with the difficulties of line and senior management.

The timescales involved in MetaCoaching is medium to long-term improvement in management performance and behaviour.

MetaCoaching should be provided by senior management, but rarely is, and therefore external coaches are often used, when the budget allows, to provide coaching to line sales managers. The difficulty is that external coaches have little or no authority and surprisingly (given the cost) minimal interaction with senior management. MetaCoaching by external coaches tends only to work effectively if it is combined with Executive Coaching for the senior manager.

LEVEL 4 (L4) – EXECUTIVE COACHING

Executive Coaching is almost exclusively provided by external coaches to senior management as either a development tool, a career advancement process, or sometimes simply as a way of spending an allocated budget without any particular end game in mind. It should lead to the provision of an opportunity to engender some blue-sky thinking on the part of the senior manager being coached and in some environments it does work. It depends on how experienced the Executive Coach is, why they were engaged in the first place, and where the outcomes of the coaching sessions are reported.

Executive Coaches should have some senior management experience and should be able to use this experience to be upfront in declaring whether the coaching provided is having any effect or not. True Executive Coaches should be charging enough not to be concerned about telling the truth when it is needed, whether palatable or not. Unfortunately there are a number of people who call themselves Executive Coaches who should really be working at Level 1, not Level 4.

Executive Coaches work with senior managers helping them develop leadership skills and behaviours. The instance of executive coaching being provided by internal coaches is rare. In any event, the best coaches are often frustrated by the manner in which coaching is viewed by the organisation and the constant introduction of the latest training fad; and they leave to set up their own coaching consultancies.

THE DILEMMA

The most effective type of coaching in business is sales coaching. However, the budget for developing line sales managers as true Sales Coaches has to be agreed by senior managers, and senior managers have to become involved in regularly supporting their Sales Coaches by the provision of MetaCoaching. Unfortunately because of the proliferation of Life Skills Coaches operating at Level 1, many budget holders believe that coaching exists at only two ends of the spectrum – Level 1 which is generally ineffective as a business tool, and Level 4 which is expensive and reserved for senior management. Regrettably that belief means that many sales organisations miss out on the significant positive impact that sales coaching can have on revenue improvement.

[http://thesalisburypartnership.com/index.html]

Article Source: https://EzineArticles.com/expert/Frank_Salisbury/4756

Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/9230363

Leadership

Lone Wolf to Lead Wolf-The Evolution of Leadership

Privately held companies range in size form very small “Mom & Pop” operations with revenue as low as $100,000 or less, to huge multi- million dollar distributors with locations all across North America. Wholesale distribution also has some mega-distributors with sales ranging from $1 billion to as much as $27 billion. The majority of wholesale distributors are family owned.

Family owned organizations, both small and large, with succession issues, family preparation and second and third generation leadership issues have been subjected to the evolution of leadership. These organizations are often founded by an aggressive, highly talented entrepreneur. Many of the principles of leadership that helped build the success that the organization enjoyed in the past is not the type of leadership that will maintain that success through generations of ownership. Contrary to some “leadership authorities” belief, the Machiavelli theories on leadership just don’t apply today. Niccolo Machiavelli is considered by some a leadership guru who lived during the renaissance period and is often quoted and written about today. Machiavelli believed that “Men are more ready for evil than good.” “A leader’s goal is one of power and domination.”

The Evolution of Leadership

Times have changed, leadership has evolved. The days of the “Lone Wolf” leader at the top who dominates with power are gone. Successful privately held organizations have gone through the leadership evolutionary process. They understand that today’s leader must create change in the organization to meet the needs of their customers, to meet the needs of their employees and to meet the needs of their vendor partners. It involves a particular life cycle change. This change varies according to the generation of leadership.

More often than not, the “seat of the pants” based on intuitive judgment leadership style of the founder with highly autocratic methodologies won’t work in today’s business environment. Today’s environment demands a stable administrative structure that requires a change in the nature of past leadership practices. Simply put, it’s an evolution from a highly reactive, autocratic individualistic style to a more empowering, people employee oriented proactive style. It’s about going from a “Lone Wolf” leadership style to a “Lead Wolf” leadership style that has confidence in the employee’s ability to make things happen and empowers the employees to get the job done.

Founders and even second and third generation successors may find it difficult to make the transition from the “Lone Wolf” to the “Lead Wolf” leadership style. When this happens, ownership may put personal needs ahead of business needs and the organization is not managed in the best interest of its customers, its vendors and its employees. Organizations that are still run in the “Lone Wolf” style have an owner at the helm that has a strong dominating personality that is likely to be a poor listener. This “Lone Wolf” syndrome is easy to recognize. The same problems seem to arise over and over. Market share deteriorates, cash flow problems exist, there may be a vision but no plan exists to accomplish that vision. Anxiety may set in and the owner becomes defensive or even paranoid and resorts to blaming others for the lack of success or pending failure. Without outside intervention, executive coaching, a solid board of directors or even an advisory group, the company may end up being sold or worse yet the company may go into a death spiral. (e-mail rick@ceostrategist.com for the article “The Death Spiral” and the “Leadership Thought Provoker” Checklist)

The Lone Wolf Leader Still Exists

This doesn’t mean that there aren’t some “Lone Wolf” leaders that still exist today that are successful. Remember, they have a strong entrepreneurial spirit that makes them dynamic and decisive. They often have a clear vision and these traits can drive a company for some time. However, I submit to you that the “Lone Wolf” leaders that have not evolved today cannot maximize the success of their organization. They will not leverage the competitive advantage that has become the life line of their survival. The strong traits that brought them success in the past quickly become liabilities in today’s environment. They don’t believe in empowerment. They don’t believe in long range planning. They are reluctant to develop structure, policy and procedure because it inhibits the ability to shoot from the hip and it slows them down. They mistakenly believe that shooting from the hip is part of their competitive advantage because it worked so well in the past. They can make reactive crisis-driven decisions with little or no help from their management without recognizing that they must identify and correct the root cause. If they do have a board of directors, they are hand picked friends that basically do whatever they want and challenge very little. They count on only those that seem to be the most loyal and they motivate by fear and guilt. Sure, they’ll hold staff meetings but it’s more of an exercise in power to report on crisis intervention or simply to chew people out. They have difficulty in letting go of the past.

Evolution has Created the Demand for Lead Wolf Executives

Successful growing organizations have gone through the experience of change. In fact, these organizations recognized the necessity to create change. That is what leadership is really about; the ability to create change. These successful organizations have developed their employees along the way. The Lead Wolf executives have earned the respect and trust of their employees by demonstrating respect and trust in the employees themselves. Most employ a servant, situational leadership style that is based on an empowerment platform. They develop future leaders; make proactive decisions based on calculated risk. They employ root cause analysis even if they don’t formally call it that. They employ best practices and make staffing decisions based on responsibility, competency, training and capabilities. They develop a real board of directors that provide value to the organization, challenge the executive staff and hold them accountable. The Lead Wolf executives recognize and believe that leadership is an invitation to greatness that we extend to others. Successful leaders understand that they must give back what they have learned. They become mentors.

The Evolution is a Growth & Learning Process

Owner executives that have evolved to the Lead Wolf style of leadership have gone through an individual growth and learning process. They have accepted the fact that they may not have all the answers. More importantly, they recognize that they don’t have to have all the answers. Many have found a mentor or an executive coach outside the organization. Changing a leadership style is not the easiest thing in the world to do. Coaching becomes a very useful resource. This evolutionary process includes:

o Enhancement of their instinctive curiosity and a strengthening of their focus on being a customer driven organization. Service and quality become a way of life within the organization and it is used to support their competitive advantage.

o Taking their vision and redefining it as an end game which challenges their executive team to create a strategic plan to meet this end game. This plan incorporates growth and profitability as well as other specific goals and objectives.

o The recognition that employees are the most precious asset and backing up that recognition by the willingness to invest profits in the development of these employees.

o Empowerment that is accompanied by the resources necessary to succeed and accountability for results.

o Utilizing a board of directors as a resource while sharing management challenges seeking policy and guidance. Incorporating contingency planning and scenario planning as a regular exercise.

(e-mail rick@ceostrategist.com for Board of Director information including a sample director application form and qualifications)

Wholesale distribution organizations increasingly are characterized by a large and incredibly complex set of independent relationships between highly diverse groups of people. That is what the evolution is about. To be successful, the Lead Wolf executive determines how to get active involvement, innovation and creativity out of their employees. Success depends on more than just “best practice” success drivers. Success demands a superior level of leadership–a level that requires deep commitment. This commitment will not flourish in workplace environments that are still dominated by the Lone Wolf–“slap & point” or the “carrot and stick” method of management often used in the past.

Continue reading →