Over the past few weeks I’ve been talking to some managers responsible for teams of sales assistants in large retail shops. The task was to show them how they could restructure their team’s approach to customers that would generate an increase in sales.

In this videoclip I tackle two main problems.
The first is the problem with asking “Can I help you?” that too often destroys a sale.
Secondly, how to generate multiple sales

Contact Stephen by email: stephen@assimilating-talent.com

Yesterday I had a great time with some business friends discussing the scandal of the NOTW and Rupert Murdock’s business empire. We all agreed that there have been lots of occasions when businesspeople believe their created image that they then become paralysed when things start to go pear shaped.

“You’re brilliant”
Director paralysis isn’t new. This often comes from having people around you that always tell you how brilliant you are. The more a business leader hears it the more they come to believe it. Murdock’s thousands telling him how brilliant he is seemed, at the start of the scandal, to create a paralysis of understanding of the seriousness of the situation. This, as is so often the case, was translated by the UK public as being arrogance.

Then again I’ve observed Directors of much smaller companies believe their own image and create similar problems for themselves. Like the Sales Director who joined an insurance company saying he had come to “save the company” when most people didn’t know, or believe, that it needed saving.

Or the Managing Director who told me that in twenty eight years at the head of his business he’d not made a “New hire mistake ever”. In fact he told me that he could identify a success when “they walked through the door“. His staff turnover was very high and continually created problems for his sales.

“Remember you are mortal”
As generals drove through the ancient Rome after winning a war a slave at the back of the chariot would whisper in their ear “Remember you are mortal” in case they believed the crowd’s adulation. I wonder how many CEO’s would consider hiring someone to continually question their thinking, just in case they thought themselves infallible?  

You would think that the topics of talent shortage and managing employees productivity were two business issues. I’ve had a few conversations with senior Directors bemoaning the shortage of talent, particularly in IT, banking and technology and both have been linked to how to manage employee productivity.

The Talent Crunch
Most people would think that with the financial crisis that finding good talent would be easy, but in fact this isn’t the case for many specialist areas. Indeed the Manpower Group report that a third of companies report difficulties in finding good talent. There is a talent crunch in India, where it’s reported that sixty seven percent of companies are unable to find the people they need. In Brazil the figure is thirty four percent and the shortage is pushing up wages and inflation.

The skills shortages in these countries is likely to have an affect on our own talent pool and attract our own talent towards high salaries and a better style of living than can be gained within Europe or the USA. This will be true even of bankers who see career progression in terms of London and New York.

Managing Employee productivity
If most businesses can’t find all the talent that it requires, or afford it when it can, then it needs to invest some time and money to improve the productivity of its existing talent. That’s the reason that people have been asking me how to measure, manage and improve their people’s performance and productivity.

It’s been interesting that in the mind of the Directors I’ve spoken to that they seem to have a vision of a “One size fits all” solution. The problem is that there isn’t a one size fits all nor is there an immediate solution to making internal talent more productive. Different strategies need to be employed for salespeople as opposed to IT,  Senior staff as opposed to Non-Executive Directors and so on. In the long-run, however, it might be the only viable and affordable solution. 

I was facinated by Management Today’s article: “Directors seem to have a very different view to the hoi polloi on how business is going…“ and that most senior executives feel secure in their current job and even if they were to be made redundant that finding a new job would be easy.

However, what caught my eye was almost the final line of the article that said, 74% of directors reported a strong collective sense of purpose, compared to a mere 47% of those below them. Not because I disbelieve the statistic but because, in my experience, almost all Directors feel a greater sense of purpose than subordinates.

Most subordinates, on the other hand, have to wade through encouraging and often meaningless “visions, goals and objectives” to determine what’s happening. This was reinforced by a friend who told me last week “There’s no point in being too upbeat and enthusiastic about the company’s prospects, it saves time, tears and disappointment in the long run!”

Perhaps it’s why so many Directors will sigh, run their brow and ask “Why is my team so difficult to motivate?”

Last night I was the invited guest speaker at a Director’s network meeting in London and was speaking on internal networking. Feedback from the talk was excellent and I was delighted that the group seemed to gain so much.

It came as no surprise that those leading organisations find internal networking as difficult as everyone else. The group told me that:

1. There often isn’t enough time to network and complete the daily “to do” list
2. The difficulty is often to get other areas of the business to recognise one’s worth

In this respect the difficulties are shared with everyone else. However, a strategy of internal networking is essential if one is to have two or three vocal and continuous supporters in each area of the business. If one has then one gains support when things are difficult, forgiven more easily for mistakes and job security is increased.

A major challenge for business leaders is to maintain organisational productivity. (Formally defined as the ratio of an organisation’s total output to total input, adjusted for inflation, for a specific period of time).

Yet is this challenge made more difficult during a downturn?

One of the inputs in the formula is the workforce but at this time when many companies are laying off their people talent. The question that should be asked is how this affects the productivity of those that remain and can improvements in productivity be sustained under such circumstances?

During the previous downturn I was involved with a company that made a series of redundancies and each time a new redundancy was announced productivity collapsed in other parts of the organisation. This wasn’t to say that people seemed to stop working, on the contrary everyone seemed very busy.

However, productivity continues to fall as people discussed the worsening situation and the company’s Directors buried themselves in their offices stating that they were busy “saving the company”.

Too often business leaders might assume that they are unable to positively affect the situation and that under the circumstances a drop in morale is inevitable. I disagree with this assumption and advise far greater “management visibility” at such times.