assessment

Some companies don’t learn their lessons. Others don’t want to learn their lessons. Still others think that writing out a check replaces learning lessons. When it comes to hiring salespeople, most of the lessons have already been learned and are out their to be shared. We share them every day with our clients but, despite their miserable track records, some would still prefer to hold on to their favorite ineffective methods that failed them in the past, instead of just trying what would more than likely work for them today.

Since I am an expert on assessments, I get asked to assess the assessments that are out there on a regular basis. Most assessments are quite good as long as they are used as intended. However, users, motivated by marketing and salespeople, are often lured into using an otherwise good assessment in an inappropriate way. This compromises the value of the assessment that now fails to provide the in-depth information, answers and actions that a more appropriate tool would give.

One sales manager indicated that he had a salesperson who wasn’t motivated by money but was motivated by providing great customer service and making people happy. I told him that I was certain that he could not possibly be describing his best salesperson and, after a moment of consideration, he completely agreed.

There is a tremendous amount to learn about any assessment and most are not motivated to learn everything there is to know about an assessment, never mind 5, 10, or 20 assessments. Here are some of the many things to consider:

I received another call from a CEO who couldn’t believe that his salesperson was as weak as the assessment indicated and the assessment did unveil a very weak salesperson. The CEO contended that Billy was doing quite well.

We collect some additional data from salespeople for just these scenarios.

A sales VP from a Fortune 500 company asked what it takes for a company to embrace assessments when the company’s culture was not to use “such things.” Surely, there are some assessments that do fall into the category of “such things” but let us first separate the assessment into two categories: Pre-employment, where most of them fit, and diagnostic, where most don’t fit well unless someone learns how to connect dots that can’t be connected.

The candidates are out there. But when you offer to pay little more than entry level money yet expect your candidate to have a $250K pedigree, you will consistently fail to attract, select and retain top talent.