SPM
#1: You took the buffalo for a walk
Monday, March 23rd, 2009 | EIM, SPM, Top 'n' Lists, Top 5 Mistakes Collecting SPM / EIM Project Requirements, large projects, requirements | 2 Comments
#1 of 5: Top 5 Mistakes Collecting SPM / EIM Project Requirements
You need to be in control and organized. And if you’ve ever tried to walk a buffalo, you can attest to the fact that you are not in control of that situation. In this metaphor, the buffalo is a requirements meeting without an agenda. They can definitely get away from you and cause a lot of damage along the way.
The Problem
Implementations have a natural order of events.
• Scoping/Budgeting
• Resource Selection/Planning
• Project Start
• Requirements
• Design
• Etc…
› Continue reading
Similar Posts:
- #2: You painted the wall from bottom to top - JasonKearns
- #3: You asked the tourist for directions - JasonKearns
Share the Joy (or beneficially commiserate)
Monday, February 23rd, 2009 | EIM, SPM, User communities | No Comments
Are you part of an active user community for your SPM software? If not, you should be. The benefits can be immense. Some of things you might gain include:
• a different perspective on software function ability
• an understanding of how other companies have addressed issues similar to those that you may be facing
• advice on upgrade and feature utilization timing
• recommendations for product and ancillary service providers
• insight on how others have approached contract negotiations with the vendor1
How do you find an appropriate group of fellow customers? Often software vendors will provide references at sales time and beyond including lists of potential groups. User conferences or industry trade shows are another opportunity to find software user groups with which to join or if necessary (and often with even better benefits) to form your own user groups (e.g. Callidus’ TrueConnection conferences, Varicent participatory events,Oracle Users Conferences 2009, WorldatWork’s Total Rewards Conference).
Why do consultants like us encourage user group participation? The answer is that we find we can better provide excellent services value to more knowledgeable customers and that these customers better recognize our value.
Similar Posts:
- Callidus Introduces SPM Community: OpenCommissions - MichaelStus
- SaaS Pricing for Callidus On-Premise Solution - MichaelStus
What’s in a name?
Tuesday, February 17th, 2009 | EIM, Project Direction, SPM, humor, large projects | 1 Comment
As humans, and if you’re reading this you most certainly are a human, we have a biological need to name everything around us. Whether it’s insects, rocks, cloud formations or psychological disorders… it needs to have a name. In fact, upon encountering a new object such as a star, the first thing we humans do is name it.
Manmade creations such as software systems are not immune to this. When we burn long hours putting in a new HRMS, CRM or SPM system we need to put a moniker on it so that we can communicate. The interesting thing is all systems get a name whether we force them to or not; they take on a name in one of three ways:
1. We can’t think of anything.
Most times there isn’t much thought put into naming a system but it takes one anyway. In this case, probably due to the enormous amount of marketing done before and during the project, the overall system takes on the name of the major software vendor involved. We see many SPM clients refer to their system as the Callidus or the Oracle tool. The problem with this naming method is it is often the case that the calculation engine is but a small part of the overall system. Subsequently, the brand either suffers or benefits from elements it can’t control. Basically anytime anything goes haywire all you hear in the hallways is… “It’s Callidus again; that thing never works.” Who cares if the problem was due to bad data from SAP or a botched network upgrade rather than the vendor software product itself? The name gets the blame and the brand suffers. Many front line reps hate their SPM software vendor and have no idea why. This also hurts the IT department in the long run when they need to make decisions about upgrades and future applications. If you choose the same old vendor who everybody hates, you don’t look very smart.
2. We can’t think of anything but we know what NOT to call it.
I’ve been a part of some real initiatives with clients where they really and truly want to come up with the perfect system moniker… but couldn’t. Either they couldn’t agree or they just didn’t get any great ideas. All they know is they don’t want the words Callidus, Oracle or Varicent being spoken in the halls. This noble effort still produces a name, just not a very creative one. Constituents begin calling it what it is, the system that calculates their paycheck. Usually something like: The Commission System or the Bonus Calculator. In some cases the tool takes on the name of one of its creators. This is how you get enterprise level systems with names like: The Jared Tool or The Tom Report. I personally love it when reps refer to the entire SPM system as a “report”. Another de-facto name origin can be the database where your application’s data resides. That’s how you get names such as MRDB (Management Report Database) and ICDB (Incentive Compensation Database). Usually this kind of name would be relegated to the IT department. Then you might have the unfortunate multi-name situation where IT refers to the system as ICDB, the reps call it The Tom Report and HR calls it The Bonus Calculator.
On a side note, I once worked on a project where two months in we put together a nice big workflow diagram with 21 steps represented as boxes. The boxes were numbered 1 to 21. Two of those boxes ended up becoming user interfaces that were developed roughly 18 months later. What were the names of those new applications? The Number 7 Tool and The Number 13 Tool. We hadn’t bothered to come up with better names and by the time we decided to try it was too late. The original names stuck even though very few people on the team had any clue as to what those names originally meant. I bet there are plenty of similar stories out there.
3. Let’s name this thing properly.
Occasionally companies want to name the system and they do it successfully. The “perfect” name apparently is an acronym that cleverly describes the system and also serves to be a decent name for a compensation system. Here are some good ones.
These are the best I’ve seen.
COINS – Commission and Incentive System. I’ve seen this one at least three times.
CECS (pronounced checks) – Commission Earnings Calculation System
Here are a couple I’ve seen that are at least real acronyms.
CABS – Commission And Bonus System
SCARAB – Sales Commission And Reporting And Bonuses.
On the lighter side, here are some names that didn’t pass either because they’re border line vulgar or downright mean spirited.
CRABS – Commission, Reporting, And Bonus System
CRAPS – Commission, Reporting, And Payment System
MAGIC – Mostly Accurate General Incentive Comp
CLOSE – Commissions and Liabilities Operations System for Employees
ALMOST – Automated Liability Management Of Sales Transactions
ENOUGH – Employee Operational Unit Gage Heuristics
GUESS – Genuine Underwriting Employee System
SCARI – Sales Compensation And Reporting Infrastructure
ACE – Almost Calculates Exactly
CRASI – Commission, Reporting And Sales Incentives
OPTIC – Over Pays Their Incentive Compensation
UPTIC – Under Pays Their Incentive Compensation
No doubt there are many more out there and we’d love to hear them. We’re fascinated by the genealogy of system names.
Similar Posts:
Compensating for the Recession
Friday, January 30th, 2009 | Compensation Plans, EIM, SPM | 1 Comment
The economy is in a state we haven’t seen for a very long time. Every segment is affected; every number is down. Imports, exports, manufacturing, retail, finance, and housing are all feeling the pain. This probably isn’t the greatest time to be a sales person on a commission plan. People and businesses just aren’t buying. So, of course, this got us thinking about compensation plans. This downturn really started to get everyone’s attention the last half of 2008, so it’s reasonable to assume that managers have had enough time to adjust their expectations for 2009. We’re seeing that as well; the forecasts are bleak, but sales and compensating for those sales must go on.
So what happens to compensation plans when expectations are lowered? What should happen? Should you invest more in sales to boost production? Should companies expect to spend more per sale in this climate? Or should sales take a hit like everyone else and work for less?
We can’t answer all these questions so we decided to ask around. Here are some interesting comments made by people in the field faced with these decisions on a regular basis.
“We’re not modifying our plan in any way relative to the economy.”
- Cable Business Services.
This business unit works on long cycle sales, so the expectation is to rarely make changes. Some might say this company believes variable plans should in fact be variable. Sales people know what they’re getting into when they pursue this line of work. They reap the rewards during the good times and share the pain during the not so good times.
“The plans are not changing; we’re handling it through operations.”
– Cable Residential Services.
This unit sells primarily through a call center, i.e. with a very short cycle. They are seeing a decrease in calls and consequently a decrease in sales. Sales management can simply reduce the headcount whenever they need to boost individual performance. So they’ve decided to handle the situation that way. Usually this is done by moving reps to part time or letting attrition take place. The management here can feel confident about doing this knowing that it will be easy to increase headcount when things turn around; the sales positions don’t require extensive amounts of training. On the other hand, if the positions required years of experience, they might not have gone this way.
“We’re letting a few people go who we wanted to let go anyway. For the remaining reps we want to keep them happy and loyal, so we’re lowering quotas based on the new forecasts. Also, we’re raising the commission rates so they should end up making close to what they were making.”
– Financial Management Company.
Obviously this industry has been hammered and this company has decided to keep most of the sales organization “whole” while the rest of the financial industry crumbles around them. Obviously it requires considerably more training and experience to sell financial products to investors and pension fund managers than to sell residential cable TV service. We have to think this was a factor behind making quota adjustments here rather than for example letting attrition take place.
We also received some feedback from a major automotive retailer. That industry has also been hit hard and it has never had a reputation for being especially compassionate toward front line sales staff. Not surprisingly, the response here has been to leave compensation plans mostly intact allowing the plans to pare the lower performing sales personnel via attrition. No quota relief is being given to the remaining reps albeit the deals that are, despite the economy, still closing are divvied among the fewer survivors. This is very similar to the residential cable sales example.
In addition to clients, we posed the question to a colleague with considerable experience consulting on issues like this. We wanted to get his thoughts and also to confirm the relationship we noticed between sales person skill set requirements and company reactions to a downturn.
Here’s a quote from Shawn Rossi, VP of Sales Force Effectiveness at Sibson Consulting:
I have seen a wide range of tactics as well. The changes are typically reflective of / influenced by:
• Industry and the level of impact the economy is having on it.
• The supply of good/proven sales talent for a company and its key competitors.
• Financial stability of the company.
For the most part/the general trend, is companies trying to be fair by adjusting quotas to balance CCOS (Compensation Cost of Sales) with realistic revenue generation expectations given the economy and its pressures. I have not seen people raising rates too often, but have seen keeping people in the game through the use of cost conscious SPIFFs.”
Rossi makes some excellent points here and his second bullet speaks to our observation related to experience and skill sets required for a particular sales role.
One additional observation we made during our very informal survey was that corporate culture in no small way influences how these decisions are made. Different companies, sometimes even within the same industry, look at their issues from widely varying perspectives. Having worked with all the companies we spoke to, we were not surprised by any of the answers we received. Knowing the culture of the organizations and having a good feel for how they generally respond to issues allowed us to anticipate the answers we received.
The reality is external factors affect sales all the time, not just during a global recession. Events such as an earthquake in San Francisco or a power outage in Cleveland might impact the sales of businesses to the point that plan adjustments and quota relief are considered. Prudent companies will consciously consider their corporate culture as well as the other more objective factors mentioned here when shaping their responses. We’d love to hear what your company or clients are doing.
Similar Posts:
- Recession Coming to a Close - MichaelStus
- Travel Costs: Incent to Save? - MichaelStus