The primary reason sales training fails is...

I've read about salespeople who received sales training and their productivity went up for a short period of time only to see it go back to what it was before - give or take.

The main reasons given for this productivity pitfall were lack of reinforcement and faulty sales processes often labeled as "Traditional Sales Training".

From my own experience I'd say the primary reason sales training fails is the trainee not the training.

Thoughts? -AZBroker

I think the primary reason why sales training fails is the lack of application of what they learned during the tarining. It's easy to learn all the theory in sales marketing but if you don't apply all the skills and knowledge that you've learned, you'll never succeed. -shinningstar

I would say the lack of transfer is often because the training doesn't use exercises, roleplaying, examples etc -- or it just sucks. Training is often mistargetted, misinformed and just plain boring.

A lot of so called training is just rah rah motivational stuff. No techniques. No wonder it fades away. -theglyphon

I have seen salespeople with no training do great and salespeople with a lot of training do terrible. Generally speaking I do not think the problem is the training. -Mikey

There are few reasons for training to fail. One of the reasons is lack of good sales techniques. A salesman must understand those techniques when and how to used them. This brings us to anther reason: Psychology behind every step of a Sales Process. Also, lets not forget: Closing. If a salesman does not closing a Prospect the whole Sales Process is out the window. "Closing" is Not a "dirty" word. It is when a salesman is asking a prospect to Buy.

All those reasons are only about 15% for a salesman to be successfull. The rest, 85%, is salesman's attitude. We have to be realistic that we can not sell to every prospect, which brings us to another issue of Closing Ratio. But this is another subject. If a salesman can not take Rejection the right way, he would not be able to develope a Thick Skin, be immune to rejections. Then, any training would not be able to help him.

When I train salespeople, I am trying to make clear to them that without Thick Skin, without the right attitude, without psychologically understanding the Sales Process, they can not sell successfully.

Thank You. -vista

The primary reason salespeople fail is they don't work hard enough regardless if they are trained or untrained. That's my opinion. -Joe Closer

I agree.

I agree.

I agree. -AZBroker

Without a doubt in an overwhelming majority of the cases the challenge can be traced back to the trainee. -SalesGuy

Huthwaite determined that "...launching a sales force improvement effort will always fail if it relies on training alone to make the difference" and outlined "Four Truths of sales performance improvement".

Here are two of the four truths:

Truth Two: Adults only learn in the context of what they judge to be important and relevant to them as individuals. Just because it’s good for the company does not mean it will necessarily be embraced by individual sales people.

Truth Four: Organizations don’t make change suddenly. Success will only come from an initiative that nests training experience in a process that includes reinforcement, coaching, and quantified, objective, individual feedback. -Liberty

Truth Two: Adults only learn in the context of what they judge to be important and relevant to them as individuals. Just because it’s good for the company does not mean it will necessarily be embraced by individual sales people.

I can really relate to truth two. There are a few Avon selling practices that simply aren't embraced by me. One is getting permission to leave brochures in various business that you do business with and even some that you don't, if they will allow it. In our little town of minimal businesses, it seems another Avon representative has already done that. -ozzie

I think sales training is a broad of a category that covers skills, process/methodology, product knowledge, competitive intel, strategy, market knowledge, stakeholders, etc., so I agree and disagree with some of the previous comments depending on the context.
;co

Generally speaking, top performing sales people are going to get their golden nuggets from training events, regardless of the event quality, and will go on doing what they do - selling more than everyone else.

However, most sales people in any organization are in the middle majority and it is corporate America's responsibility to provide more structure and support for these resources. Merely hoping that all the trainees are self-motivated individuals that will figure it all out is not a predictable or scaleable strategy, and creates an over-reliance on top performers. If a company could move their B and C level talent up a half letter grade the results are significant.

Let's face it, traditional corporate sales training does suck. Corporate America has typically adopted a 3-phased approach to ongoing training:

1. ATTENDANCE: Sales people attend some sort of live or electronic event where too much information is delivered over a short time period without any reinforcement mechanism in place.
2. AVAILABILITY: Then information is made available in large, dusty 3-ring binders and disorganized passive information management systems for later access and retrieval.
3. HOPE: Then everyone hopes the message got through and is being broadly and effectively applied in the field.

Reality tells a different story. Sales people are overwhelmed with new information and change - and truly struggle separating the relevant and urgent information from the rest of the daily noise. As a result, broad effective field adoption of new strategies and initiatives rarely reaches it's potential.

Traditional training doesn't suck because it is doing something wrong - but rather because it is not doing enough. Ultimately there are three key gaps in the current delivery mechanism: Measurement, Reinforcement and Accountability. We must measure alignment with new messaging to know what needs fixing, we must reinforce frequently to ensure fast, effective field application and we must hold people accountable for knowing what they need to know in order to best do their jobs.

Eric Blumthal, Count5 -Eric Count5

Can you explain what you mean? -Houston

Houston,

It is going to be difficult for me to respond to your question without turning it into a self-serving commercial - so I thought I would be kind enough to use this disclaimer - reader beware.

In your prior reply on this post, you referenced a blog (which I read) - here is one quote from that blog:

"A study at Columbia University found that up to 95% of what is taught in training programs is wasted through a failure to transfer learning to the workplace."

I completely agree with this analysis.

So, what can companies do to ensure that this effort is not wasted?

1. They can reinforce and coach frequently following training - because only with frequent reinforcement and practice will more sales people remember it and apply it effectively while on calls.
2. They can measure alignment with the new information. Here is the answer to your question - alignment equals retention. If you can frequently measure how well people understand information and concepts you then will know if there are alignment gaps with the sales force overall or with individuals - then you can be proactive about providing remedy (focused sales meetings, coaching and other interactions).

If what I described above was easy to do, more companies would be doing it today - it's actually very hard to do. In my tensure as a VP of Sales for various companies, I had tremendous success applying these concepts - there was always a large focus on reinforcement and coaching so effective application of information and skills occurred faster and more broadly - however, I never built or managed a sales force larger than 50 people nationally - and these concepts, while effective, are manually intensive and do not scale very well.

So I founded Count5 (reader beware, self-serving commercial to follow):thup .

Count5 is a software company that automates these best practices. We are not trying to replace human interaction - rather we are providing a valuable management tool. Count5 has introduced a proactive noise-free sales communications channel that "pushes" out a daily 5-10 minute reinforcement & coaching exercise to each sales person, measures their retention on key points, and prescribes additional reinforcement to each individual to close identified gaps. In this fashion, the frequency of coaching, reinforcement and practice is being applied that leads to more people applying information more rapidly - which improves speed-to-revenue on sales initiatives. And management receives real-time reports that show how well aligned people are with this information, which is an early indicator that leads to more focused coaching and follow-up activity.

If the initiative is product, market, competition (etc.)based, reinforcement is often focused on specific knowledge. If it is more skills and process-related, reinforcement is more scenario-based to test skill application. In either case, the sales person knows that the purpose of the exercises is not to "ding" them for getting a question wrong, but rather is focused on improving their confidence and abilities while customer-facing.

Eric -Eric Count5

I can see that you've put a lot of thought into this Eric. Thank you for taking the time to explain and good luck with your software company. :thup -Houston

I was giving this some thought; I think sometimes the biggest problem with any training, including sales training, is that it is expected to go totally “by the book.” What I mean is, if anyone tries to challenge a statement or example, or attempts further clarification of the same beyond the scope of the original statement, frequently the trainer seems to shut down or even becomes annoyed.

An anecdote; I attended a nationally available training course through a previous employer. During one session, a fellow salesman asked for clarification about a “trial close” type of question, and how it might be used to get the customer to reexamine his situation so as to more precisely identify his true problem. Each time the salesman would attempt to rephrase her question so as to make the trainer understand, the trainer would interrupt (making an assumption as to what the meaning of the question was) and give a set “why you can’t do that” answer. It almost seemed as though the trainer was one of those tele-solicitors that calls you at dinner time and goes completely by their script. One deviation from the script, and they frequently go to the closest, but yet not relevant, reply on their script and so give you a nonsensical reply.

Anyway, that’s my story, and I’m sticking to it!
Bill -Bill_Kistner

Bill,

Great point! There is a huge need for training efforts to go beyond the lab and calibrate with realities in the field. When the training function reports directly to the operational unit it serves, I see much better field calibration than when it rolls up to HR.

EB -Eric Count5

This should be trialed on customers……

Good question, I think it's a combination of;

• Lack of continued focus on developing new skills and habits
• Lack of a real desire to actually change the things we do
• The fact that most sales training is based on older strategies
• I believe a sales process is critical and that it must be good for the sales person, customer and company, most miss the mark on at least one of those scores.

-Tony Dunne

I've had several training exercises where the trainers never bothered to contact any of the sales people beforehand. What this forces them to do is show you their 'system' and figure out a way for you to fit into that system.
I remember one 3 day session (that had to cost tens of thousands) where the first hour of the training was about mapping your prospect (influencers, etc). I evetually raised my hand and pointed out that 90% of the time wee were talking directly to the decision maker, so the model they were presenting wasn't relevant to our sales process.
After a very mean look, he proceeded to tell me why we should still fill out 10 forms to talk to one decision maker.

If management takes the time to make sure the program is relevant to the sales force, then follow up coaching should reinforce everyhting that was learned.

Susan -susana

I see four scenarios where training is likely to fail. First, trying to fit a square peg into a round hole (see Susan's example). Second, training that doesn't take into account the learning styles of the trainees. Third, the trainee's ability and willingness to learn the material. Last, the map doesn't match the territory. -Gilbert

I believe you're close if not there Gilbert. In the end there isn't any one reason why training (including sales training) fails across the board. -BossMan

Working for an organization that sells training, it is my experience that anytime the trainer does not understand the needs of the people he/she is training, it is likely the training will not be successful. Looking at it from the other side, organizations are oftentimes too busy to really take the time to understand exactly what their employees need and just throw them into a class that they think they will need. Organizations that do take the time to more carefully evaluate their employees needs, and design the training from what they find out end up with better results. The trainer is better prepared, going into the training understanding what the trainees need, and the trainees are more satisfied with the training because it more closely meets their needs.

So to sum it up, if the training session fails, the manager who set it up is just as much to blame as the trainer is. -MarkS

You need to go to the ROOT.;wi Yes.....it does come down to the CONSISTENCY of use, and it does have a LOT to do with reinforcement....but MORE than that...I think it boils down to the individuals that the information is given to.
ALL the tools in the world are USELESS if you don't have someone who will OPT to use them even though they DON'T HAVE TO.
I think the answer lies within the "laziness" that most of us (conciously or unconciously) have adapted our lives around, and it is not until we learn to ENJOY THE HARDSHIP that is linked along with "going the extra mile" as these sales trainings would emplore their students to put into practice.

Once again....it all comes back to LOVING WHAT YOU DO.....it's surprising how many people don't LOVE their jobs....and WHY would anyone "go the extra mile" for something they consider as a "means to justify an end?".

I know...because I have been there;wi .

Hope this contributes something useful!

-David -truesaxman

I have read most but not all of the post but let me put a different spin on this. Instead of asking why sales training fail. Ask what it would take to make a sales training succesful. After all I think the industry has the failing down to a "T"

So what would make sales training successful.

1. Proven methods - methods that have been proven to work by the speaker as well as others. I prefer to hear from someone with experience not just ideas.

2. Role play - during the training. My mind learns by doing something not by reading a book or listening to someone speak, that is just where I read, hear ideas.

3. Follow up - This is where coaching and accountablity partners are so useful. We as humans are creatures of habit good and bad. We will turn back to habits every chance we get. Once you make the methods you have learned in the training part of your personal habits, your training will be a success. -Jorel

I believe the reason people fail in selling is simple.
Traditional sales training as we know it just does not cut it any more and research by a number of major companies have borne this fact out. Most sales people I speak with still have no idea what a benefit is, they are confusing benefits with advantages and advantages do not sell. Asking the correct questions and LISTENING sell. Not the "Gift of the gab" as many people think.

Regards

Steve Hilliar -stevehilliar

Let me give my observations as another sales trainer. Over the past twenty some odd years, I've had the opportunity to train thousands of salespeople, managers, executives, business owners and professionals. Although they have represented virtually every industry you can think of, most have come from real estate, mortgage, insurance, securities, and financial planning. They have been the absolute top of the top performers--and the lowest of the low; the most experienced--to the newest of the new; from the most educated, to the least; from the most motivated, to the least. This simply to say that I've met, trained, talked to and worked with all types, all levels, all kinds.

Before I talk about why training doesn't seem to work, let me give some really sad statistics: 40% of all salespeople will fail and be out of sales within two years of when they entered sales (much higher for the industries I work with most often); 45% of all salespeople will never advance beyond simply being average or slightly above average for their industry. That leaves only 15% of all salespeople making a truly superior income for their particular industry. This is pretty distressing.

Now, as to why training doesn't work. What I'm about to say comes from not only my personal observations over the decades but from talking with a good number of my trainer friends, so this is based on more than just my impression but isn't a formal study by any means.

Although there are a number of reasons training fails, there appear to be two primary reasons:

1. The Sales Training: (this is actually a poor second to the one to come, but I'll start by picking on my own segment of the industry). There are a huge number of great trainers and training programs in the market. But there are some really bad ones out there also. The bad ones seem to fit within one (some more than just one) of these sins: all hype, no delivery--they talk a great game but give no real world applications what-so-ever (this is the easy way to train); all entertainment, no content--some have tried to make their seminars and presentations so entertaining that there is no content left, just tons of jokes (this isn't to say there isn't a place for fun or entertainment in training, but a training session isn't half hour or hour comedy special either); the con men who promise an easy way to get rich--the secret that will change your sales career--there are new and highly valuable selling ideas in the marketplace and they can have a dramatic impact on your career, but they are never "easy" or "quick."

Training is one of the most important aspects of becoming a top producer. Every top producer I've ever met spends more time and money on their training than any new or average salesperson--and don't think of the excuse that they have more money to spend. They simply take it much more seriously. And they recognize that companies don't train their salespeople. Companies spend their time and money on product training, not sales training--which kinda makes some crazy sense considering sales training is transferable from company to company, industry to industry and to some extent, product training isn't--and besides, what the company knows best is their product or service.

2. The Attendee (this is by far the number one issue). And there are several variations on why attendees don't gain from the training they receive. In no particular order: A) many will go to a top notch training seminar and walk out thinking "that wasn't bad, but I know a better way." Their better way, of course, fails like everything else they've done. B) Many others will walk out and think "that was good" and then never think about it again--gone--too much work you know. C) Others will walk out and think "there has to be an easier way." These are the guys that keep the "sell a ton without any effort" scam guys going. D) Some will think the training was great, begin to implement it and then decide it's just too much work. E) Many have all kinds of excuses as to why it won't work such as, "that's so outdated, it won't work in the new market place" (yeah, right. When there is a change in human nature, maybe this excuse will be valid); or, "that may work for (fill in the blank), but it won't work for my customers" (wow, your customers are that unique? Where do find so many unique people that on one else finds?); or, "if only I were a little more experienced (or in a different industry or sold to a different demographic, or whatever) maybe I could us this;, or, "I know so-n-so used this technique and it took him three months to see results, I'll find a quicker way"; or any number of other excuses. F) Others daydreamed or slept through the seminar anyway.

There are a few, however, who will take it to heart, implement it, work through the tough part of learning and honing new skills and becoming successful with it. Unfortunately, these tend to be the top producers to begin with.

So, from a trainer's perspective that's what I see. Of course, there are a few non-top producers who do fully implement and within a reasonable period of time they're--guess where? They're on their way to becoming a top producer too.

The fact is there are no miracle training programs, there are no "secrets" that will change your life without any effort from you, and there are no easy fixes--if any trainer tries to tell you their's is the great easy, no effort, get rich secret to success--get away from them and don't be suckered in. There are tools, techniques and strategies that work and work very, very well--but they must be learned and fully and completely implemented--and it's hard work.

Oh, and by the way, there is a "secret"--it's called effort. -pmccord

Nothing against you personally, but I hear this from every trainer out there. I am sure you are different though.

Wow that means I have a better than one in ten chance of being really successful? I am glad I got into sales instead of opening my own restaurant. And it is great to know I don’t really need to worry too much about my competitors.



Maybe your ABC's are right and sales people should adopt them. I am sure a salesperson who goes back to his sales manager and says that lead was not very good, he just daydreams, or he thinks he is so smart he thinks he is going to do it his own way. The customer says our product or service is too outdated. Or my favorite the customer said he really liked it but he never called me back.

Or maybe so many trainers got so tired with actually selling or never even did the selling in the first place they figured training would be easier, and they are right. After all who do they have to be accountable to? Heck they can always just blame it on the sales person, saying well you did not try hard enough. Or you need to develop more skills at this or that.

I see so many people who call themselves sales coaches. A coach takes a part on the win and the loss. These so called sales coaches just take money and take credit in a success and then put blame somewhere else when there is a failure.

One more thing about sales trainers is that they think there way is the only way, and that if the salesperson does not do it that way they are wrong and going to fail. Instead a good sales trainer would do a psychological review and find out what type of personality the sales person is then show the sales person a system that is more than likely to work for them.

Oh and BTW, just because someone gives a speech that makes people laugh or puts them to sleep and has some sales techniques built in, does not mean that person is a sales trainer. All they are in my book is a sales presenter. And in most cases I can get the same information from a book.

Paul this is not aimed at you, rather the so called, as you put it con-men who promise an easy way to get rich with a secret that will make me millions. -Jorel

It isn't that difficult to determine whether a trainer knows what they're talking about or not and whether their training is applicable to you or not. Many of us have at least one book published, some are self-published, others of us are published by major publishers, but either way, you can gain a lot of insight into a trainer through their writing. All of us have dozens or hundreds of published articles--you can find some of mine, or reviews of my book in SellingPower Magazine, Adviser Today, Sales Magazine, RainToday, The Dallas Morning News and many other newspapers, Hotel and Motel Management, and many, many other places--just read the trainer's articles if not their book. There are many trainers on this forum. Simply look at their posts. Do their posts indicate they know what they're talking about or do they just give fluff? Virtually every trainer has a website that should give more than just a sales pitch about their training--there should be real value on the site.

Neither I nor most of the trainers I know would ever say that their training is the only training and that if you don't take their training you'll fail. If you run across one that does claim that, move on to someone else. That doesn't mean shouldn't make strong statements about the value of their training, just that they won't be claiming to be your sales life saviour.

And the statistics regarding sales success--yep, not very comforting. And I don't know what the success rates of restaurants are, but I wouldn't be surprised to find that about 40% are out of business within two years, about 45% generate just average sales, and about 15% are truly top performers. So, you'd have about the same percentages if you'd opened your own. But you have much more control of your life in sales than you do with a restaurant--you have the luxury of going and finding the clients you need rather than spending a ton on advertising and hoping they find you.

And regarding the performance and application of salespeople--if you work in an office with other salespeople around--just take a look at what's going on and it becomes pretty obvious why many--most--salespeople aren't as successful as they could be. It is estimated that the average salesperson only works one week a month (that is, they spend about 2 hours a day doing things that make them money--prospecting, in front of a prospect selling or creating a contract for a client. the remainder of the day is spent on lots of busy work or driving or whatever. 2 hours a day times 5 days a week is 10 hours a week times 4 weeks in a month is 40 hours--or one week a month actually making money). The top producers turn this around and are spending 6 to 7 hours a day making money (6 hours a day times 5 days is 30 hours a week times 4 weeks is 120 hours or 3 weeks a month making money). It doesn't take much to figure out why one group is making superior money and another group isn't. (if you'd like I can find out which university did this study--I've forgotten which it was, but I'm pretty sure where to find the specifics again).

And don't feel bashful about addressing me if you feel I'm wrong or if I've made statements you strongly disagree with. I take you at your word that your comments weren't directed at me, but if they had been, that'd be OK to. -pmccord

I agree that sometimes it seems like more than a few sales trainers push their word as the gospel.

Example... when a sales trainer writes a book or articles claiming that, "Cold calling is a waste of time" and then go on to defend that position in my opinion that sales trainer is basically saying "My way is right and your way is wrong". -Liberty

There is the occasional sales trainer who acts like their word is the gospel but I agree with Paul, if you come across one doing that move on to someone else. -Marcus

Hmm, I trained under the largest most successful Real Estate trainer in North America and that is exactly what he did. I also listened other trainers who did the same thing and while your suggestion is useful, the issue is that it is all too common. -Jorel

When someone temporarily "improves" and then goes back to his prior level, I have to question whether a valid study was even done.

Ask yourselves what is the right sample size to use? Are you able to rule out other influencing factors (e.g. seasonality or weather). Can you use at least two different, independent ways of telling whether someone actually improved? How do you measure the performance? (e.g. in carpet cleaning, do you go with the order you place before or after the tech works on it?)

These are just some of the considerations. -Wonderboy

This thread appears to have run its course and is now closed.

_____________
"Understanding" is to "Education" what "Behavior Change" is to "Training". -Jeff Blackwell