Blog Feed Post

An issue with team building: permanence

There is no doubt that both people and companies are extremely dynamic. It is almost unimaginable that a company or a person would remain static for even relatively small stretches. And yet we have a collective view that roles or functions are somehow more static. This actually creates an unnecessary limitation when building teams: permanence.

To understand how this plays out, consider a company in its very early days that has a prototype of even beta version of a product. You tend to hire one or two sales people early on to start working with customers. This is a critical step in understanding the market, getting specific feedback, and developing repeatable selling motions that will serve you as you grow.

In these early days, the primary objective of sales is less about selling the product and more about developing some sales muscle. When the company is started, you have a hypothesis about what your value is and how you might explain that to people. You have probably developed pitches, but these are aimed primarily at the investment community. And you actually don’t even have a vetted idea of who is likely to want your product.

The first task for your fledgling sales team is to hone the message.

Now think about the kinds of skills required to identify your target market segment and develop a sales message. You need someone who is particularly good at messaging – not delivery of but creation. This starts to look a little bit more like a marketing person than a salesperson. But if you are in a high tech company, your early sales will tend to be technical. So you need to balance that messaging acumen with a solid understanding of the underlying technology. This starts to look like a cross between marketing and product management or strategy.

Of course, to pitch an idea to would-be customers, your salesperson has to also have sales skills. She needs to be able to identify target accounts, make contact, and get the meetings. And unless you are expecting a single-meeting close, she has to be able to manage a relationship over the entire sales cycle.

Basically what I am describing is a mix of sales, strategy, and marketing. And not just a little bit of experience in each. The ideal candidate is actually adept at all three of these. This looks a bit more like a Renaissance man or woman, capable of doing many things.

So imagine for a moment that you find this Renaissance hire. How do you get her to join?

There is the requisite discussion about overall corporate impact. This job is huge, so that is easy. You might talk about the product or the people. Ok. But eventually you get to compensation. How should you compensate this person?

The temptation here is to compensate her as a sales person. You might construct some comp package that is a combination of base salary and commission. To make it attractive, you might even ratchet up the commission plan so that she makes a killing if she sells.

But the objective here is not to sell. The objective is to develop the message, and outline a selling motion that can then be repeated by the next group of sales people who come in. In the early days, sales will be low. In fact, until your company finds the right product-market fit, this is actually the expected outcome. And to make things even tougher, you actually expect this woman to fail more often than not. She will run into countless walls en route to finding the right answer. Failure in this case is not unwanted; every failure helps tune the process that much more.

So if failure is expected, building a compensation plan centered around success means you are likely to have an all-star candidate who is under-compensated and frustrated.

Well, the alternative is to give her a huge base salary and some commission. But the challenge with this is that you end up setting a precedent that is not sustainable as you build the sales organization.

What do you do?

The whole issue here is permanence. As you look for this Renaissance woman, you have this idea that she will be a salesperson for the next 10 years. You end up building assumptions into the role based on the flawed view that this role is forever. But if you take a more pragmatic view, you might draw some different conclusions.

This type of sales role has a lifespan on it. Once you have the selling motions nailed, you want to then hire a bunch of hunters to go execute it over and over. Rather than assuming that the role is forever, you should build into the plan up front the eventual retirement of this position.

It’s hard to do that. When we talk with candidates, we talk about people being lifelong company cohorts. Our interviews assume that the particular job exists over some multi-year horizon that we intuitively know is impossible to predict. How many of our most talented hires remain in the same role for many years? The answer is almost none. We take our best people and we move them around. We might shift them from one project to another, or from one group to another. We promote them. We might even lose them to other companies who put them in bigger positions. Our hiring ought to reflect this reality.

The point is that roles are not forever. When you have a job to be done and you need a new person to do it, then hire someone for that job. And to be clear, I am not talking about hiring people just for 3-month tasks. Developing a selling motion might take a couple of years, especially when you include the training of a new sales team over time. But you don’t need to hire someone who will both develop the selling motion and then hunt accounts for the next 5 years.

Once you remove this long-term burden, then you can be creative with how you attract someone. If you know the job is 2 years, what happens if you change the compensation a bit? Rather than spreading equity out for four years with a one-year cliff, you might consider a two-year vesting period with a two-year cliff. The compensation ought to match the particular job you are trying to get done.

The real punch line here is that once you remove the notion of permanence, you get a lot of freedom to make creative choices about who you hire and how you attract them. By dropping the shackles, you might find that you are more able to create an adaptive team that better fits the dynamic nature of both companies and individuals.

[Todays’ fun fact: Ancient Egyptians slept on pillows made of stone. And I didn’t even know they had Radisson hotels that long ago!]

The post An issue with team building: permanence appeared first on Plexxi.

Read the original blog entry...

More Stories By Michael Bushong

The best marketing efforts leverage deep technology understanding with a highly-approachable means of communicating. Plexxi's Vice President of Marketing Michael Bushong has acquired these skills having spent 12 years at Juniper Networks where he led product management, product strategy and product marketing organizations for Juniper's flagship operating system, Junos. Michael spent the last several years at Juniper leading their SDN efforts across both service provider and enterprise markets. Prior to Juniper, Michael spent time at database supplier Sybase, and ASIC design tool companies Synopsis and Magma Design Automation. Michael's undergraduate work at the University of California Berkeley in advanced fluid mechanics and heat transfer lend new meaning to the marketing phrase "This isn't rocket science."

Latest Stories
Both SaaS vendors and SaaS buyers are going “all-in” to hyperscale IaaS platforms such as AWS, which is disrupting the SaaS value proposition. Why should the enterprise SaaS consumer pay for the SaaS service if their data is resident in adjacent AWS S3 buckets? If both SaaS sellers and buyers are using the same cloud tools, automation and pay-per-transaction model offered by IaaS platforms, then why not host the “shrink-wrapped” software in the customers’ cloud? Further, serverless computing, cl...
You know you need the cloud, but you’re hesitant to simply dump everything at Amazon since you know that not all workloads are suitable for cloud. You know that you want the kind of ease of use and scalability that you get with public cloud, but your applications are architected in a way that makes the public cloud a non-starter. You’re looking at private cloud solutions based on hyperconverged infrastructure, but you’re concerned with the limits inherent in those technologies.
With the introduction of IoT and Smart Living in every aspect of our lives, one question has become relevant: What are the security implications? To answer this, first we have to look and explore the security models of the technologies that IoT is founded upon. In his session at @ThingsExpo, Nevi Kaja, a Research Engineer at Ford Motor Company, discussed some of the security challenges of the IoT infrastructure and related how these aspects impact Smart Living. The material was delivered interac...
The taxi industry never saw Uber coming. Startups are a threat to incumbents like never before, and a major enabler for startups is that they are instantly “cloud ready.” If innovation moves at the pace of IT, then your company is in trouble. Why? Because your data center will not keep up with frenetic pace AWS, Microsoft and Google are rolling out new capabilities. In his session at 20th Cloud Expo, Don Browning, VP of Cloud Architecture at Turner, posited that disruption is inevitable for comp...
Wooed by the promise of faster innovation, lower TCO, and greater agility, businesses of every shape and size have embraced the cloud at every layer of the IT stack – from apps to file sharing to infrastructure. The typical organization currently uses more than a dozen sanctioned cloud apps and will shift more than half of all workloads to the cloud by 2018. Such cloud investments have delivered measurable benefits. But they’ve also resulted in some unintended side-effects: complexity and risk. ...
It is ironic, but perhaps not unexpected, that many organizations who want the benefits of using an Agile approach to deliver software use a waterfall approach to adopting Agile practices: they form plans, they set milestones, and they measure progress by how many teams they have engaged. Old habits die hard, but like most waterfall software projects, most waterfall-style Agile adoption efforts fail to produce the results desired. The problem is that to get the results they want, they have to ch...
IoT solutions exploit operational data generated by Internet-connected smart “things” for the purpose of gaining operational insight and producing “better outcomes” (for example, create new business models, eliminate unscheduled maintenance, etc.). The explosive proliferation of IoT solutions will result in an exponential growth in the volume of IoT data, precipitating significant Information Governance issues: who owns the IoT data, what are the rights/duties of IoT solutions adopters towards t...
"We are a monitoring company. We work with Salesforce, BBC, and quite a few other big logos. We basically provide monitoring for them, structure for their cloud services and we fit into the DevOps world" explained David Gildeh, Co-founder and CEO of Outlyer, in this SYS-CON.tv interview at DevOps Summit at 20th Cloud Expo, held June 6-8, 2017, at the Javits Center in New York City, NY.
In 2014, Amazon announced a new form of compute called Lambda. We didn't know it at the time, but this represented a fundamental shift in what we expect from cloud computing. Now, all of the major cloud computing vendors want to take part in this disruptive technology. In his session at 20th Cloud Expo, Doug Vanderweide, an instructor at Linux Academy, discussed why major players like AWS, Microsoft Azure, IBM Bluemix, and Google Cloud Platform are all trying to sidestep VMs and containers wit...
"When we talk about cloud without compromise what we're talking about is that when people think about 'I need the flexibility of the cloud' - it's the ability to create applications and run them in a cloud environment that's far more flexible,” explained Matthew Finnie, CTO of Interoute, in this SYS-CON.tv interview at 20th Cloud Expo, held June 6-8, 2017, at the Javits Center in New York City, NY.
While DevOps most critically and famously fosters collaboration, communication, and integration through cultural change, culture is more of an output than an input. In order to actively drive cultural evolution, organizations must make substantial organizational and process changes, and adopt new technologies, to encourage a DevOps culture. Moderated by Andi Mann, panelists discussed how to balance these three pillars of DevOps, where to focus attention (and resources), where organizations might...
The Internet giants are fully embracing AI. All the services they offer to their customers are aimed at drawing a map of the world with the data they get. The AIs from these companies are used to build disruptive approaches that cannot be used by established enterprises, which are threatened by these disruptions. However, most leaders underestimate the effect this will have on their businesses. In his session at 21st Cloud Expo, Rene Buest, Director Market Research & Technology Evangelism at Ara...
No hype cycles or predictions of zillions of things here. IoT is big. You get it. You know your business and have great ideas for a business transformation strategy. What comes next? Time to make it happen. In his session at @ThingsExpo, Jay Mason, Associate Partner at M&S Consulting, presented a step-by-step plan to develop your technology implementation strategy. He discussed the evaluation of communication standards and IoT messaging protocols, data analytics considerations, edge-to-cloud tec...
New competitors, disruptive technologies, and growing expectations are pushing every business to both adopt and deliver new digital services. This ‘Digital Transformation’ demands rapid delivery and continuous iteration of new competitive services via multiple channels, which in turn demands new service delivery techniques – including DevOps. In this power panel at @DevOpsSummit 20th Cloud Expo, moderated by DevOps Conference Co-Chair Andi Mann, panelists examined how DevOps helps to meet the de...
When growing capacity and power in the data center, the architectural trade-offs between server scale-up vs. scale-out continue to be debated. Both approaches are valid: scale-out adds multiple, smaller servers running in a distributed computing model, while scale-up adds fewer, more powerful servers that are capable of running larger workloads. It’s worth noting that there are additional, unique advantages that scale-up architectures offer. One big advantage is large memory and compute capacity...