| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
The
Last word
|
 |
| |
|
|
The
Harvard Business School identified the cost of inferior selection
of sales representatives, at 3X the rep's annual compensation, including
expenses, training, benefits, wages and commissions/bonus. Thus
a $60,000 per year salaried/commissioned sales rep hiring mistake
actually costs the company more than $300,000
|
|
In
hiring a sales representative, What is the cost of a poor hiring
process?
There
are hard and soft costs to consider. The hard costs include, but
are not limited to, time from dispatching the job order to hire.
For instance, a sales territory is open an extra week, or month,
or quarter, the reduced revenue and profits can be calculated according
to the following formula: annual quota, divided by the time period,
divided by gross profit-less salary, recruiting fees, travel and
administration expenses. All numbers are annualized to the week
or month or quarter.
|
| |
Example:
Annual
quota $2,000,000.00
Gross
Profit 35%, = $700,000.00
Salary+ commissions = $175,000.00
Recruiting
fees= $25,000,
Adminstration, Benefits, Travel and Entertainment=$25,000
Gross
Profit: $700,000
Total Costs:$225,000
Net Profit:$475,000
Net Profit loss per week:$9,500, Net Profit loss per month:$39,583.
|
|
| |
| |
Presented
here is a simple and true case study highlighting additional hard
costs not easily evident in the equation above.
"During
FY2000, Lisa, a recruiter, presents a sales engineer to a International
software company. The company, in business since 1985 has annual
revenues in excess of $50 million. The company hires this candidate,
2 years later the same person is still employed (the definition
of a good hire). The Software Company requires another sales engineer
(in the same territory)to compliment the employee placed 2 years
ago. Does the hiring manager call Lisa? NO! The position is still
open 2 weeks later, the employee calls Lisa and suggests she call
his boss. The boss acknowledges the opening but insists they have
it handled using internal recruiting efforts. Meanwhile, Lisa presents
an on-target candidate. One month later, the boss/hiring manager
calls Lisa and asks about the candidate. The manager agrees to pay
the fee. Discussing the hiring process, Lisa learns the hiring manager
is interviewing eight additional people. Five managers from around
the country fly into the territory to interview these 8 candidates.
Lisa's candidate makes 9. However, her candidate is the only one
that the hiring manager is excited to meet. Five upper level managers
fly into a city, stay in hotels and spend a complete day meeting
8 candidates when they only need one. At what cost? Six weeks have
gone by. The hiring manager knew Lisa was competent. Has he saved
any money? Based upon the example above he has already lost close
to $60,000. If we attempt to equate the cost of one day of management
hours of a Software company, the equation looks like this: $150,000
times 5(managers)= $750,000 divided by 200(days)= $3,750. Plus,
what revenue generating activities could be accomplished instead
of a complete day in front of 7 or 8 people they will never see
again? How frustrated will these managers be (by the end of the
day)?. How many will quit if the company continues this wasted effort?
How much revenue is losted annually because of this type of behavior?
Additional,
definable soft costs: The hiring manager has spent 10 hours minimum,
reading resumes and speaking to candidates over the phone. An additional
5 hours coordinating with the other managers. What activities could
the manager have done instead? If I gave you back 2 full working
days, every 6 weeks what would the time be worth to you?
|
| |
Superior human capital practices are not only correlated with financial
returns they are, in fact, a leading indicator of increased shareholder
value. ...superior HR practices are a key to attraction, retention
and more and more, business outcomes, message: If a companys
goal is to improve shareholder value, a key priority must be its
approach to human capital.
The business case has been building, and Watson Wyatts Human
Capital Index research makes it airtight. The linkage between superior
human capital management and superior shareholder returns has been
proven. Moreover, proof that superior HR practices drive financial
results, more than superior financial results drive HR practices,
supports our theory: By hiring the right people, create an environment
that supports creative thinking and increased productivity, leveraged
by technology, youll reap the rewards.
Dr.
Bruce Pfau, Watson Wyatt
During
the last ten years I have carefully studied the recruiting and human
resources management practices of techology companies. The organizations
I included in my observations span the gamet. 5 person companies,
50 person companies, 500, 5,000, 50,000 plus person companies. 10
year old firms, startups, etc.
My research included tracking their share-holder value. The share-holder
value was usually tied closely to the career movements of the candidates.
Early
on, I noticed that many of these firms did not value their employees.
In the early 1990's I witnessed (publicly traded companies) 'the
90 day mentality'. Hiring people in an attempt to build sales and
firing them in an attempt to
reduce costs every quarter. When the issue of fees was introduced
many of the firms stood fast! They negoiated low fees. I wondered,
If they don't value their employees they certainly won't pay to
hire the best! Then I read the resumes. Very few people were employed
at the same firm for more than 3 years. Most less than 2. An an
alarming rate less than 1 year.
What
was the problem? The hiring process? The on-boarding process? The
products? The management? The marketing? The business model?
The
individuals who ran or still run these companies are smart! So why
do they act so dumb?
Another
simple and true case study: One of my close recruiter friends works
closely IBM. She placed over 25 sales reps in a short period. The
interview to placement ratio, less than 3 to 1. Usually 2 to 1.
Another friend worked closely with Sun Microsystems. His interview
to placement ratio: 22.5 to 1. He placed over 100 sales people with
Sun Microsystems over a 3 year period. In the last 2 years IBM stock
is down from $130 to $50 in a terrible tech market. Sun Microsystems's
stock down from $60 to $3. IBM needs a 260% increase in stock price
to recover, Sun, 2000%.There is a reason for everything!
|
|