
How to Hire Sales People - relaunched
http://firstround.com/review/the-anatomy-of-the-perfect-sales-hiring-process/
======
sk5t
> You need to ask for actual proof — screenshots of activity graphs and
> leaderboards directly from their org's CRM, for example. If you're lucky,
> some of these screenshots will show both where your candidate landed on the
> leaderboard and the names of the other high-rankers.

Isn't this a marker of both gullibility and unscrupulousness? Would the author
be okay with his current employees taking similar screenshots out of CRM and
sharing those screenshots with other prospective employers?

~~~
notahacker
It's possibly the worst hiring advice I've ever seen posted on here (despite
the rest of the article being relatively good)

If you ask this as part of a job interview process, you're signalling to the
applicants that (i) you don't trust the answers they're giving you (ii) you
don't trust your own ability to assess whether their communication is
commensurate with their resume boasts (iii) you expect them to breach their
employer's trust by sharing confidential sales figures in order to get the
job.

If you're giving those signals in the interview, good salespeople will run a
mile.

Average salespeople might still know their CRM system well enough to be able
to run the statistic that paints them in the best possible light. And even if
they can't prove they topped the activity stats for the outbound East Coast
FMCG team last month (whilst they were on a final warning for poor figures),
there's always Photoshop.

------
MangoDiesel
This is generally very sound advice. There is one part that I take issue with
though.

>We also looked for proactive junior staff out of companies like LinkedIn who
were ready for the next step, but not afforded the opportunity

>A candidate may have worked in sales, but if they were an account manager
tending existing customers, they may not be cut out to be an account executive
acquiring new business. Just because someone has made 80 sales calls a day in
a prior job doesn't mean they can demo and close. Make sure candidates have
the expertise you need.

These two points contradict each other, and I think it is a very important
issue. If you are not willing to allow a junior person a better opportunity
immediately (hiring them into a promotion) then you have to compensate them
better compared to the current company for the same position (short of
intangibles.)

Often times, larger companies will have a more deliberate and organized sales
process that is time-based. This creates scenarios where candidates that are
otherwise qualified for the next step (Market Development Rep --> Account
Executive) have a seemingly artificial ceiling preventing them from that role
at their current company. While it probably makes sense at the larger company
for a Market Rep to be promoted after 18-24 months, this person may be very
capable of the next level earlier.

If you can successfully find driven junior level people who have this type of
artificial ceiling, you can hire very valuable sales people. This also means
you are going to have to take a risk that they can perform on the next level,
but you can also hedge this risk by offering slightly less total compensation
for the opportunity _now_.

~~~
petekazanjy
Totally right! Goal of this was not to say "don't hire them" but instead
"authenticate the acumen."

Also, the non-abridged chapter for the book talks about exactly this:

"But there is a caveat when it comes to more junior staff. Many of these
industry bellwethers have the infrastructure to support solid sales training
programs and to instrument good sales behaviors, like high calling and
emailing activity. So looking there for junior sales staff, like market
development reps, who are ready to move on to a closing role could make sense.
Just be cautious that the potential hire hits your other requirements, as many
of these larger organizations have a lower bar for other important criteria."

Great point!

------
euphemize
> If there's one thing you should hire for, it's intellectual acumen, a high
> “figure shit out” quotient with the ability to grind

I think this is true in general. I've worked with highly intelligent, but
less-motivated people, and you're always waiting for that magical moment when
they come out of their lethargy and become a 100x worker. And that moment
usually never happens.

~~~
totalrobe
"General Freiherr von Hammerstein-Equord, the present chief of the German
Army, has a method of selecting officers which strikes us as being highly
original and peculiarly un-­Prussian. According to Exchange, a Berlin
newspaper has printed the following as his answer to a query as to how he
judged his officers: “I divide my officers into four classes as follows: The
clever, the industrious, the lazy, and the stupid. Each officer always
possesses two of these qualities.

Those who are clever and industrious I appoint to the General Staff. Use can
under certain circumstances be made of those who are stupid and lazy. The man
who is clever and lazy qualifies for the highest leadership posts. He has the
requisite nerves and the mental clarity for difficult decisions. But whoever
is stupid and industrious must be got rid of, for he is too dangerous.”

------
jedanbik
Serious question - what sort of information can be gleaned from a sales
candidate by asking them how messy their room is on a scale from 1-10?

Ability to answer random questions? Ability to compose a narrative? Ability to
deal with seemingly arbitrary BS?

~~~
cc438
In my experience, there are 2 groups of sales reps that can be distinguished
with this question (assuming an honest answer). There aren't many reps in a
middle ground between the two either.

There's the hyper-organized salesperson, their calendar is regimented to the
point that every hour is tied to some revenue-generating activity. Their room,
like their desk, office, and car (if they're in an outside sales role) will be
equally organized. There is variation and I've generalized some common traits,
but the organized rep will fit in a role that requires attention to detail,
time management, and new business.

The other type of rep is the "wing it", off the cuff rep. They are quick to
respond to any request and although they aren't spending every minute selling,
they prefer to juggle a number of tasks at once. A messy room can help narrow
their personality down. The "in-the-moment" rep is a good fit for an fast
paced role that needs the rep to constantly adapt and respond quickly to
customer concerns.

Is one question going to tell you all of that? No, but it is a useful tool for
building a profile of their personality and selling style but you'll need a
lot more than one answer to base it on.

~~~
auxym
Interesting, sounds like it would be a good question for engineering roles
too.

------
at-fates-hands
There were some definite red flags in the article:

 _" Even a win rate of 35% means you lost 65% of your deals. Remaining upbeat
in the face of micro-failures is key"_

This is a total misconception of sales at its core. What if a sales person
closed his 10 largest deals worth multi-millions and the rest got away? Is
losing those other smaller deals making up your mythical 65% considered a
failure? Hardly. Sales isn't about percentages, it's about generating revenue
- period. Thinking like this is dangerous.

 _" i.e. sales staffs that are looking to jump onto their next rocket ship."_

Not sure this is great advice. Why would I want a guy who keeps jumping ship
to the next big thing? If anything, you want someone who's been at a larger
startup who wants more stability as opposed to the "get in and get out" type
of sales person who's more likely to leave you high and dry if things aren't
working out the first two months - making you having to start the process all
over again.

" _Find people who have artifacts of the type of achievement you 're looking
for: quota attainment, activity metrics, etc. Note that salespeople are used
to, well, selling — so don't get spun_"

These salespeople tend to come at a cost.

If you have people getting into president's club and consistently performing,
they're going to cost you. There's only two types of sales people - the
mediocre kind and the high performing kind. As you stated, you don't want
mediocre salespeople, you want the chart toppers. These people know they are
good at what they do and will demand a higher salary, more benefits and bigger
percentage of the company. They also know how to negotiate. Remember, they're
sales people so expect a fight on how much they're going to demand if you
really want their skills.

 _" Another good screening tool is a mini homework assignment involving
account research and voicemail pitching. At the end of the written screen, I
ask candidates to leave me a 30-second voicemail pitching TalentBin as if I
were the head of recruiting at Airbnb"_

When I was in sales, I was taught specifically to not leave voice mails, for
several reasons. If you're asking me to pitch you over voice mail, that's a
red flag in my mind. If you want me to do my homework and then come back for
an impromptu sales pitch, or do a simulated cold call over the phone that's
fine - but leave a voice mail? Not an ideal way to judge someone's sales
ability at all.

------
roymurdock
How to Hire Sales People: A Guide in 6 Steps

1\. Build a great product.

2\. Find people with a good attitude that are genuinely excited about the
product.

3\. Hire those people.

4\. Give them the chance to talk to other people about how excited they are
about the product.

5\. Track metrics and provide sales-based bonuses but don't
overincentivize/gamify the sales process.

6\. Enjoy healthy, sustainable sales growth, happy customers, happy employees.

 _Disclaimer: I have little to no experience in sales. This just seems like
common sense to me._

~~~
rsync
Actually, this is correct. I know because I've built two companies that match
your description and it did indeed work that way.

The problem is that a company built like that will eventually hit an
equilibrium point wherein the natural, organic market plateaus. This may not
be a problem, but if for any reason you want to grow beyond that you will need
to cross over to the dark side and start dealing with salespeople.

~~~
roymurdock
Thanks for the validation. I was surprised that I got to -3 within 5 minutes
of posting. I agree that the dark side of sales is forcing/tricking people
into buying things that they don't necessarily need or want, which happens
once you attempt to expand outside that natural market for your product.

------
JSeymourATL
> Not skimping when negotiating fees. If you try to talk a recruiter down to
> 20% or 17.5% of a first-year compensation fee, you're actually incentivizing
> them to only show you candidates they don't think they can place elsewhere.

True - better service always commands higher fees. Offer to pay a full 30% if
they promise to deliver and make me happy. * Hat-tip Stuart Diamond.

------
AndrewKemendo
>we focused all our energy on landing new, hungry grads out of high-caliber
universities like Stanford, Berkeley, UCLA and more — with preference to
athletes and others who had demonstrated grit and success on a team.

All they did was replicate the Financial Industry model. Goldman et al. do
exactly this, nothing new or hacker about that at all.

~~~
exelius
I think it's posted on HN exactly because it's a topic that is foreign to many
engineers. Nothing wrong with it if it works.

------
normloman
Sport, Sports, Sports! Yeah, this is still a guessing game.

~~~
totalrobe
Haha...this whole article...."we got a bunch of cheap and hungry kids to sell
our product that pretty much sells itself to other kids just like them and
they did it! Yay us!"

Now why don't you try this out in an industry you actually need domain
knowledge in and let us know how it works out.

------
cc438
>We also looked for proactive junior staff out of companies like LinkedIn who
were ready for the next step, but not afforded the opportunity.

This is the more efficient way of hiring a sales team IMO. I've been in both
categories and although I've only been in the game for a few years, I've
learned the pitfalls of the "fresh grad" approach.

The author is right in considering sales "Mission Critical" for startups and
other small businesses looking to grow and then goes on to explain the various
ways in which an open or ineffective sales position will damage the position
of the company. Despite that display of wisdom, they advocate a "fresh grad"
approach which is just about the fastest way to ensure high turnover and low
productivity. Every salesperson has to start somewhere and a fresh graduate
with a sales personality and love for the job often be the best kind of
salesperson for this kind of role for the reasons stated by the author. The
problem is that candidates can't know if they'll like the world of sales until
they've lived in it. Even if they have an amazing ability to filter out
applicants without "the right stuff", they'll still end up with a high % of
new reps that just don't like the responsibilities of their role.

That can manifest itself in a lack of interest for the industry (boy did I
hate copiers, talk about a dead-end market), a lack of interest in the product
(some people love sales but hate selling intangibles like services), a
mismatch in the selling style required by the market (relationship vs.
technical), or a preference for stable income (depends on compensation
structure but sales can be very feast or famine).

The company I work for now faced this issue and we've had incredible success
stemming from the switch to the strategy of hiring young reps with a few years
of experience. We're all "fresh" enough to go after new business with
enthusiasm but we were also a known quantity in that we had all proven that we
would stick it out in sales. Prior to this switch, we had 50% turnover for all
the reasons stated above (some reps wanted to sell tangible products, others
wanted a relationship sales style, others wanted a guaranteed salary, and
other realized marketing or operations was a better fit for their personality)
but none of the "new group" has left in the past 12 months and I doubt anyone
will for a while.

The post-2008 stagnation has created climate with a lot of talented reps stuck
near the bottom of the ladder. Offer them the next rung or an honest path
toward advancement and they'll jump over in a heartbeat. Let the churn n' burn
companies (ADP, Cintas, office equipment dealers/manufacturers) do the hard
work of weeding out the fresh grads that won't cut it or don't want in. You
avoid the biggest risks and although you'll have to pay more, you'll be more
confident that you're getting value out of that "Mission Critical" sales
position.

