A recently published research report from the folks at Corporate Visions about the state of B2B sales training suggests that most sales leaders view on-site instructor led training as the most effective modality, while virtual options are considered far less effective. However, these leaders perceive a dilemma that is often expressed something like this: “I can’t afford to take my reps out of the field to attend sales training”.
I’ve heard this countless times over the years and at some level it is a fair concern. In situations where a solid sales process exists and reps are reasonably well skilled and executing at least somewhat effectively, minimizing time away from day to day sales activities might be reasonable. And modern technology enabled training modalities that don’t necessarily interfere with day to day sales activities can be an acceptable approach in these cases.
But many times there is a fallacy in this line of thinking. What about situations where the reps haven’t mastered the requisite skills or are unable to effectively execute the sales process? Or maybe the process is broken (or non-existent) and needs to be (re)built and thus trained on? Or new methodologies for account management, opportunity management, etc. need to be implemented?
In these cases I’ve too often heard the same refrain, that the immediacy and pressures of day to day activity trump the need for time away for training. This can fairly be described as insanity. Essentially what these leaders are saying is “we’re too busy doing dysfunctional things that don’t work to take time away to improve”. This is flawed, short term thinking. Yes, we have quotas to achieve, deals to pursue and other customer demands . But we also waste a lot of precious selling time. Recent studies suggest that on average reps spend well less than half their time on productive sales activity. There are useless meetings, countless administrative burdens (some necessary and others not so much), internal demands that have nothing to do with their sales responsibilities, wasted time around the water cooler; the list goes on. But somehow they do these things, often to the detriment of optimal sales performance. And yet, when it comes to training that will actually improve performance in both the short and long term, they just can’t afford the time. This is the classic definition of insanity. These sales leaders need to “slow down to speed up”. They need to hit the pause button and invest in training that has a positive impact on performance.
Like any other investment, the anticipated benefits of training should outweigh the hard dollar and opportunity costs. Research indicates that a striking majority of sales training fails to deliver desired results. This further discourages investment in training. But it doesn’t have to be that way. A well-designed training program, customized to the needs of the individual organization can offer a significant return and have lasting impact (as long as there is a strong reinforcement mechanism – another important consideration).
It is the responsibility of both sales leaders and training providers to ensure this happens. Sales leaders, in collaboration with the training provider, should consider which modality is appropriate for their situation, whether it’s on-site, virtual, on-demand, etc. A “blended learning” approach is usually most effective. It’s not an either/or decision. And training providers are responsible for collaborating with clients to really understand their specific situation and providing training content that is relevant and valuable. Finally, as stated previously, the skills learned in training must be inspected and reinforced by competent sales management. When these things happen the return on investment in training is almost always positive.
