Are excellent salespeople considered talents? In the short term, they may be, but not necessarily in the long term. By short term, we mean one, two, or three years. However, if we look at this matter from a five-year or even eight-year perspective, will these excellent salespeople still be assets to the company? The answer is undoubtedly no. Therefore, we come to the conclusion that excellent salespeople cannot be relied upon.
"The Salesperson's Brain" vs "The Company's Brain"
The skills of a salesperson belong to themselves, more precisely, they are stored in their brain, and the brain is attached to their body. At any moment, their legs could take their brain anywhere. For a company, what is needed is the content inside the salesperson's brain. This content does not belong to the company; it belongs to the individual salesperson. Hence, the key to solving the problem of the salesperson's brain lies in converting the individual abilities of salespeople into corporate capabilities. This so-called conversion refers to establishing an internal training system within the company to transform the experiences of more salespeople into the company’s experiences. As such, companies face two choices: either continuously seek out suitable top talents to compensate for potential talent loss, or completely change the reliance on top talents by establishing a system that can train salespeople, namely, a modular sales training system, thereby turning the salesperson's brain into the company's brain.
Not relying on top talents allows a company to grow
While excellent salespeople bring benefits to a company, they also bring disasters. Such events are not uncommon. We find that many top talents were not cultivated by us; their numerous traits might not even be cultivatable. If a company relies on the growth of a few elites, its fate becomes self-evident. Looking at all renowned growing companies, their growth almost always stems from the struggles between elites and ordinary people. The foundation of a company's growth is not dependent on elites but on broader ordinary individuals. These matters should be understood as follows: so-called excellent companies have rules established by a few elites, enabling ordinary people to achieve great things under these rules. A company that cannot allow ordinary people to accomplish difficult tasks will certainly not grow large. Its underlying meaning is: relying on one or two elites will never make a company large.
Cultivating ordinary people to surpass mediocrity is a harder task than nurturing excellence. Through research, we find that most small companies with annual revenues below 50 million yuan typically have very small sales teams, generally within 100 people. Most of these people have grown alongside the company, specifically guided step-by-step by the boss. Among them are sales elites, but companies built solely on these elites have reached their limits, and sales cannot significantly improve anymore. Changing the status quo is not about introducing more elites but rather improving the performance of each individual salesperson by 10%. Such a strategy is more realistic and enduring.
Concentration equals risk
All matters are like this: excessive concentration inevitably leads to risks. This applies to both sales and management. Why does concentration lead to risks? Many people believe that concentration isn't a problem as long as there's a supervisory mechanism. In fact, we find that the result of concentration is to abolish the supervisory mechanism. No autocrat or someone who monopolizes resources would willingly let you supervise them. As long as their concentration persists, it brings risks. Of course, no company wishes for the 20/80 rule to exist within its sales team. Everyone understands this principle clearly. Excessive concentration, not just the 20/80 but even the 30/70 rule, places the company in a very dangerous position. The fate of the company is controlled by a few individuals. At this point, the company can only hope for better professional ethics among salespeople, but good hopes often diverge from real realities. How to make these excellent salespeople loyal to the company, how to make them more stable—various methods like incentives, rewards, and benefits have been used, but in the end, those who need to leave still leave, and those who need to cause trouble still do. The risks caused by concentration are fully manifested. Feasible measures are not simply enhancing management but transitioning from reliance on elites to reliance on the masses, from a few individuals to the majority. Thus, enhancing the substitutability between salespeople ensures that anyone, including a leader, knows they can be replaced, allowing them to truly follow leadership and avoiding the risks brought by irreplaceable individuals. This is also the goal pursued by the "Modular Training System."
In summary, through the analysis of the above issues, we can see:
1. Excellence is often the most destructive.
2. Ordinariness is often the safest.
3. Management of people must be based on substitutability.
4. Ordinariness is easily replaceable.
5. The Modular Training System establishes an ordinary, replaceable management system!
"The Salesperson's Brain" vs "The Company's Brain," Not relying on excellence allows a company to grow, Concentration equals risk