The Clemens Moment

Roger Clemens is currently at 75% at the Hall of Fame Tracker. I realize he will fall quite a bit due to the private ballots, but I still find it interesting that people who are willing to publicize their ballots are not afraid of voting for Clemens (and Barry Bonds, who is one vote behind), while the private ballots don’t tend to list those two. You would think the people voting against the two would want a more public discussion of the matter. I suspect that early public ballots do influence last minute voters (today is the deadline), and seeing Clemens and Bonds do well among a large block of might move people on the line to the pro side. The anti side isn’t getting much say.

from baseballmusings.com http://bit.ly/2RoxkDx

Zero-Based Sales Planning

As we start a new year, perhaps your plans are locked in. But perhaps there is an opportunity to rethink or, even to reinvent what we think about the sales function and how we sell.

So much of what we do is done just because, “That’s the way we’ve always done things.” We think we may have evolved, but in reality we’ve just applied a layer of technology and updated language and jargon. For example rather than being customer focused and consultative, we are insight driven.

But fundamentally, we are doing the things we have always done, but perhaps at a faster rate. We become prisoners of our own experiences.

Ironically, the data and anecdotal evidence shows that we are doing less and less well. So why do we keep doing what isn’t working as well as it has in the past.

What if we took a few moments to think about the sales function and how we sell from a zero-based budgeting approach?

What is zero-based budgeting? Traditionally, when we look at budgeting, we look at what we spent in the past year and we extract it into the coming year. We may look at new programs or increments to our budgets and spending. Then we go through the exercise of arguing for budget increases, or making trade offs on current spending to be able to afford what we want to invest in, for the coming year.

Zero-based budgeting literally starts from “$0.” We build our budgets from that, looking at what we need to do, what we choose to invest in, completely building the budget based on our plans, rather than being limited by what we have done in the past.

In applying this to selling, we might ignore everything we have done in the past. We would start from scratch, we would rethink: What are the problems we are the best in the world at solving? Who has those, consequently, who is our customer? How do they want to be engaged? How do they buy when they look at solving these problems? How do we create the greatest value, both in helping them buy and in implementing our solutions? What customer experience do we want to create, both through the life cycle of the customer?

We’d also think about where the greatest growth opportunities are, what dynamics are happening in our markets, who our competition is and what their strategies are, along with any other things.

We’d then rethink things like: How do we most effectively deploy our resources to most effectively engage the customer and address the opportunity? What does our engagement model look like, how do we most effectively execute it? What skills, competencies, experience do we need to successfully execute? What processes, systems, tools, programs, training do we need to implement the strategy? How do we measure our attainment? How do we compensate our people in achieving their goals?

These are just a few of the things we might think about. But the real magic is that we have the opportunity to think about the best way to achieve our goals, without being constrained by the way we have always done things.

It’s fair to say, “But Dave, we have what we have, we can’t start all over, from scratch. How is this useful?”

What the zero-based approach allows is the possibility to define the ideal way of doing things. It becomes a goal or target that we can migrate to. We can now start looking at what we currently do, starting to assess the changes we have to put in place to reach that ideal goal.

It might cause us to start changing the organization. It might cause us to retrain our people or acquire different talent. It might cause us to rethink our sales processes, programs, and develop/execute new engagement strategies.

Zero-based thinking about the sales function, sales people, and what we do, gives us a fantastic goal and new direction. What’s left is figuring out how we get from where we are to where we need to be.

Related Posts:

• How Will The Customer Pay For It?
• It’s The New Year For Our Customers, As Well!
• Don’t Forget Your Sales Process
• Not Worth The “Paper It’s Written” On
• It’s Plan AND Execute!

from Partners in EXCELLENCE Blog — Making A Difference http://bit.ly/2CIccAe

Predicting Wins With OBP and the Starting Pitcher

This is the second follow up to the post on predicting wins. In the original, a neural network (NN) fed the winning percentage of the road team* and the home team was compared against the Log5 method. In the second post, team OBP was added to the mix, for the batters and the pitchers of both teams. While the NN in the original underestimated the actual wins of road teams, the NN in second over-estimated the road team winning percentage, but not as much as the Log5 method.

*Since this is binary, it’s 1- the probability of the home team winning.

The third try added five parameters. For each starting pitcher, the one and three-year OBP allowed up to that date, (four parameters), plus the league OBP of the season up to that date were included. This did make an improvement. This new NN now predicts 2975 wins versus 2851 actual wins in the test set. With 6149 games in the test set. That’s down from 3054 without the starting pitcher information. In terms of winning percentages, that’s .463 for the test set, .484 for this run, and .497 for the previous run.

The NN is also giving a wider range of values, with the low coming in at 0.30 and the high at 0.66.

The numbers continue to move in the right direction. Power number get added next.

from baseballmusings.com http://bit.ly/2EUtH2l

Mariners Scandal

The discrimination lawsuit against the Mariners keeps getting more interesting:

In a detailed eight-page submission last month to the American Arbitration Association, team lawyers stated that unnamed Mariners employees had warned general manager Jerry Dipoto in March that Martin was ignoring medical advice on treating players and implementing her own treatments despite being unqualified to do so. The letter states that Martin also engaged “in medical and therapeutic practices without a license’’ and “misrepresented herself as a medical doctor to other MLB teams’ staff.’’

The team’s letter requesting private arbitration had been confidential and only became public Friday when Martin’s lawyer, Robin Phillips, filed a motion in King County Superior Court asking it to quash the Mariners’ attempt to have the case heard by an arbitrator. The weeks-old letter was included as an exhibit to the motion and offers the first detailed glimpse at what the team’s lawsuit defense might entail.

SeattleTimes.com

The Mariners are saying the firing is over poor and/or dishonest work. Martin is saying it’s discrimination. Martin and her lawyers seem very willing to air this in open court. This may wind up being the toughest hardball played in Seattle this season.

from baseballmusings.com http://bit.ly/2EXvuDY

Lucroy for a Song

The Angels sign Jonathan Lucroy to a one-year deal for very little money:

The deal, which was not announced by the Angels, will pay Lucroy a reported $3.35 million, with incentives that could lift the value over $4 million. The Angels will need to make a corresponding 40-man roster move before making the deal official.

OCRegister.com

Lucroy is a great example of how the value of catchers can plummet. In his prime, seasonal age 26 to 28, he collected over 13 WAR. In the four years since, he posted a little over seven WAR, most of that in 2016. The Angels are now paying him as a half-WAR player. With this contract, his career earning will be about $26 million. According to FanGraphs, he generated about $170 million worth of value in his career.

This is just another example of why players need to fight for quicker free-agency, especially now that teams are not paying free agents for past performance. Maybe the union should fight for free agency by seasonal age 25, so teams can no longer keep a player in the minors so they capture prime seasons cheaply. Let the best players get paid for their best years.

from baseballmusings.com http://bit.ly/2EVYfQK

On Consistency

I don’t know why, but we never talk about consistency. Consistency is about what we do every day, day after day, week after week, month after month, year after year.

Consistency is a key foundation for learning and improvement. We can’t develop new skills unless we apply them day after day, week after week…..

Somehow consistency seems to be anathema to how we work and behave. We are event driven. We have the new program, we try it out for a few days or weeks, until we are bored (Ironically, we do this even for things that work). Then we move to the next thing, and the next, and the next.

But we never master anything, because we don’t stick with it, we don’t keep doing it consistently, we don’t learn and improve. We don’t create habits.

Our attentions spans are shortening. We are distracted by our devices, we are distracted by the crisis du jour, we are plagued with FOMA.

We focus on that next thing, forgetting how to sustain our performance and grow, over time.

We constantly give up, shifting priorities, chasing the next new thing, never completing what we do and learning from it.

We may put our 10K hours in, but if each hour is different, we have learned and mastered nothing, we’ve just lost 10K hours.

Sustained top performance is about consistency. It’s about understanding what works and doing it every day–no matter how boring or mundane it might seem. It’s about all the little things, every day, all the time.

Consistency isn’t sexy, it isn’t cool. It is remarkably unnoticeable.

Consistency is about courage. It’s about knowing we are doing the right thing and sticking to it, even though we don’t see the immediate results.

But without it, we can’t achieve. Yes, we may have that one thing happen, but without consistency, we can’t repeat it, we can’t sustain it.

Consistency in how we engage our customers is critical. Consistency in how we lead our people is critical, consistency in how we treat our peers and colleagues is critical.

It’s the basis of trust, it’s how they learn they can count on us.

Are you consistent? Is it a habit?

Related Posts:

• Consistency Of Execution
• 3 Questions
• The Power Of “Ritual Questions”
• The Power Of Time Blocking
• We Don’t Drive Performance By “Grading…

from Partners in EXCELLENCE Blog — Making A Difference http://bit.ly/2EVELwo

A Simple WAR Framework

Tom Tango discusses creating WAR for any sport, and makes an important point about measuring the player against the average player to create a won-lost record, or indis.

If there is one thing I did wrong when I rolled out WAR on my blog some 12 years ago was that I did not pause at The Indis level, and went straight to WAR. That’s because that’s what I needed at the time. Had I known WAR would take off the way it did, then I would have ensured that intermediate step would be more forceful. And it would reflect the replacement step is just a secondary optional step.

TangoTiger.com

So it should be straight-forward to take Bill James win shares to WAR.

from baseballmusings.com http://bit.ly/2BPpn0f

What We Think Of Our Customers Colors Our Engagement

Someone called seeking coaching on a specific deal.  He had fallen into traps which blinded him in moving forward with a winning strategy.

He started the conversation with, “The key decisionmaker is really a jerk!  He’s power hungry, his people want to do something with us, they’ve presented compelling arguments, but he doesn’t want to go forward…….   They are losing so much opportunity, if they only they would implement our system……”

A few moments later in the conversation, I learned, “…..He’s relatively new in his role, he’s turning everything upside down, his past experience is with our competitor, so he’s looking at bringing them in.  It’s the wrong thing for them, he doesn’t understand, he doesn’t get the path they were on with us……”

After he went through his dump about this “problem customer,” I asked, “Would you feel the same if he felt that way about you and your solutions versus the competitors?”

His immediate response was, “Of course not….., but he doesn’t and he’s really screwing everything up.  No one likes him, he’s just out for himself and is too political…..!”

I must hear variants of this discussion every day.  People who are aligned with us are great customers, people who are aligned with our competitors are jerks, problems,  A**holes, and worse.

To be honest, every once in a while, I fall victim to that thinking–perhaps only for a few minutes, myself.

There are so many problems with this thinking, not just that it’s wrong and unfair, but this type of mindset colors every interaction we have with these people.

As I talked to my friend, I asked, “How do meetings go with him?”

His response was, “They are OK, I can see him and talk to him, but I know they are a waste of my time–he just is unreasonably biased to the competition, he won’t give us a shot.”

His mindset was closed, he was already defeated, but he continued going through the “motions,” though I don’t know why.

Our mindset influences how we react to every situation we encounter.  If we don’t like or respect the person we are dealing with, we telegraph that–not through our words, but through our attitudes and behaviors, and through how we “hear” what others are saying.

Our customers may be describing a glass that is half full, but if we have a closed mindset or have negative opinions about that customer, we will only perceive a glass that is half empty.  All our responses will be based on that perception.

Customers will start seeing these reactions and, naturally, will react negatively–creating a self fulfilling prophecy.

These are all self defeating behaviors, they shape and influence everything we do, they shape and influence how we interact with others, they shape and influence how others react to and respond to us.

It’s not the customer problem–though we tend to attribute it to the customers–as the individual I referenced at the top of this blog.  It’s always our own problem.

If you can’t change your mindset about the customer, you might as well walk away, you won’t win, and it’s all because of you.

–

Related Posts:

• Getting Feedback Wrong
• Are Skills More Important Than Experience?
• Letting Form Triumph Over Substance
• CRM, The Biggest Sales Productivity Drain In 10 Years!
• Is Your Mindset Limiting You?

from Partners in EXCELLENCE Blog — Making A Difference http://bit.ly/2QZ1MFa

Cruzing to the Twins

The Minnesota Twins reached an agreement with free-agent designated hitter Nelson Cruz:

Cruz, 38, has 203 home runs over the past five seasons, more than any other player in Major League Baseball.

During that time, Cruz hit at least 40 homers in a season three times. When Brian Dozier hit 42 homers in 2016 it was the first time a Twins player reached 40 since Harmon Killebrew in 1970.

Seattle Times

Here is the list of players who hit at least 150 home runs in the last five years. Notice that home run hitting is not just a young man’s game, as Cruz and Edwin Encarnacion are both well in the 30s.

It’s a nice pick-up for the Twins. Cruz will add power without breaking the bank.

from baseballmusings.com http://bit.ly/2So6jO1

Going Short Term

Joel Sherman makes the case for Bryce Harper signing a relatively short-term deal with the Dodgers:

But the other choice, particularly for Harper, is fascinating. Because even if the Dodgers refuse to offer the mega-deal, landing there for four-ish years is what is best for Harper and — not that this should matter to the slugger — the game. Harper is the one player who could walk down a street and be recognized even by the casual fan. He belongs in the star factory because it would extend his brand like no other locale, while being so close to his Vegas home. Is it just me who already sees the Sports Illustrated baseball preview issue with — in full uniform — LeBron James and Harper on the cover with the title, “Oooh, L.A., L.A.?” The ESPN group interview with that duo plus Todd Gurley? That helps Harper and it helps MLB, with its mega-star being associated with the biggest star in sports.

NY Post

I feel that larger average values and shorter time spans benefit both the player and the team. It’s better than the opt-out, that may get a player in the fold, but still hurts the team long term if the contract doesn’t work out. Driving up the average annual value would help arbitration eligible players as well. It’s a strategy the union should encourage.

from baseballmusings.com http://bit.ly/2SnfeiJ

Unanimous

Joe Posnanski writes on the history of non-unanimous Hall of Fame elections, and whether Mariano Rivera should be the first so honored.

What Needham (and plenty of others) have questioned is this: Should Rivera as a closer be the first to be unanimous?

One answer to that question is no, of course he shouldn’t be first. As stated: Ty Cobb should have been first. Joe DiMaggio should have been first. Ted Williams … Stan Musial … Willie Mays … Henry Aaron … Jackie Robinson … Tom Seaver … Cal Ripken … Greg Maddux … Ken Griffey … all of those guys and more should have been first. But they weren’t.

And there’s no going back to get any of that right.

The Athletic

So Posnanski is basically saying that someone should be first, and it might as well be Rivera. That’s not going to happen, as there will be plenty of writers who believe a closer does not belong in the Hall of Fame and not vote for Rivera.

The real issue, I believe, is “why doesn’t everyone think like me?” The answer is, if everyone thought the same thing, the world would be pretty boring.

It also may be more mundane that that. In the section on Ted Williams failing to be named on all the ballots:

“The one writer who bypassed Williams in the poll,” The Sporting Newsexplained, “did so because of a personal grudge that he will never forget.”

The Athletic

I bet that happens more times than one might believe. Posnanski goes on about Ken Griffey was charismatic and cool, but early in his career I heard more often than not that he was rude to the press. I can believe two or three of them left him off the ballot for that reason. Most elite athletes are not the nicest people to be around. All’s that needed is for one or two writers to really despise a player.

Of course, we have the history of the votes. The 15 people Posnanski mentions as the near unanimous selections are at the top of the Hall of Fame. We as the public understand that. We know that Ken Griffey, Jr. is well above Harold Baines when it comes to Hall of Fame standing. Griffey, and those that garnered over 95% of the vote on the first ballot are the greatest of all time. Then comes first ballot, second ballot, three to seven ballots, eight ballots or higher, and finally some kind of committee. It’s not perfect, but it works pretty well.

So let Rivera get 96% of the vote, and be amazed that a closer did that well. For all intents and purposes, a vote at that level is indistinguishable from unanimous.

from baseballmusings.com http://bit.ly/2GHqwgl

“10 Years Of Experience…..”

I spend a fair amount of time helping clients hire managers and sale people.  Usually, I’m in the final round of interviews. 

I look at their CV’s and LinkedIn profiles.  Usually, they are talking about their years of experience in selling.  “I’ve been selling complex solutions for 10, 15, 20…..years.”

As I look at their job histories, I see tenures of 1-2 years, every once in a while maybe they become “old timers” with 3 years in the same role.

You can probably guess what I’m going to say, but I have to say it.  As I look at their experience, I think to myself, “Do they have 10 years of experience, or 10 experiences of 1 year each.”

Some of you may be saying, “Dave, you don’t get it, I’m a millennial, we are supposed to change jobs all the time, it’s part of our DNA….”  or  “Dave, it’s not my fault, those were start ups….”  or “Dave, the world has changed…”

I get it, I understand those and the dozens of other responses I get when I look I talk to these individuals.

But it might be useful to look at what people like me think as we speak to candidates like this.

First, we know onboarding takes, on average about 10 months.  For the companies I tend to work with, often it’s much longer.

Second, the sales cycles are usually 9-18 months.

Third, unless they had a pre-loaded pipeline with the most qualified prospects, it takes time to build a pipeline.

Now add all that together, and people like me start asking the question, “How many sales cycles have the gone through?  How much experience do they really have?  Is it the success they’ve had a result of their experience, or did they get lucky and pick up an opportunity there predecessor had started?”

Of course, every once in a while, there will be job tenures of 1-2 years.  Things happen.  But when the majority of jobs a person has had have been for short periods of time, then one can’t help but wonder the depth of their experience.

What’s this mean for ambitious people who want to grow in their careers?  People are struggling to find great sales people.  The demand for talent is really high and people are willing to pay for the right talent. 

It’s tempting to hop from job to job, upgrading your pay as you go.  But you do this at the risk of building real skill, capability, and experience.  And that eventually will catch up with you.

As my friend, Andy Paul suggest, “Sometimes, it’s best to stick it out.”

As you build your career, you need to focus on continually learning and developing your skills and capabilities, you need to increase your depth of experience.  You need to see things through several cycles to understand what it takes to be successful and sustain success. You have to have failed and taken the time to learn from it.

As a hiring manager, I’m always concerned with people who move from job to job. With each hire, I’m making a multi-million dollar decision. I worry about being able to retain people as long as possible. The opportunity costs of open positions and ramp times are millions. Of course, it’s critical to have a retention strategy, to make our companies the “desired” places to work, that we are actively challenging and growing people. But I always, ask myself, “Will the person stick around long enough to recover my investment?”

There have been a number of times, where i have passed on a great candidate, purely because their track record shows consistent job hopping. When confronted with this concern, candidates always say, “Well this time it will be different…..” And I always ask, “Why…….”

Talent acquisition, development, retention will be the biggest issue sales leaders and sales managers will face in the coming years. It’s something that impact both hiring managers and those seeking new jobs.

Related Posts:

• What’s More Important, Experience Or Experiences
• Do You Have Experience Or Experiences?
• Are Skills More Important Than Experience?
• A Frightening Look At The “Cost Of A Sales…
• Letting Form Triumph Over Substance

from Partners in EXCELLENCE Blog — Making A Difference http://bit.ly/2VbMJWY

Early Returns

The Hall of Fame Tracker is alive and well. With a bit under 25% of the vote made public, Mariano Rivera, Roy Halladay, Edgar Martinez, and Mike Mussina are doing very well.

What continues to impress me is how well Roger Clemens and Barry Bonds do among the early public ballots every year. The are both hovering just under the 75% level needed for enshrinement, and each picked up one vote from a returning writer. In addition, the four first-time voters all voted for these two tainted players.

The large amount of time players spend on the ballot allows for a change of thought, and a change of generation. The first time voters of these years grew up watching Bonds and Clemens perform; they did not cover them on a day-to-day basis. Their frame of reference is different, and that difference is leading to more votes. We’ll see if three more years on the ballot will bring in enough voters to send them over the top.

Edgar Martinez and Fred McGriff are picking more support in their last years on the ballot. Martinez may actually get elected, which will pave the way for David Ortiz to go in quickly. McGriff won’t make it, but he likely will go off the ballot on a high note. I suspect he will get in eventually in a special election, as Harold Baines did this season.

from baseballmusings.com http://bit.ly/2Rj7Ya9

Protecting Young Pitchers

Japan takes a step to limit the work of high school pitchers:

A pitcher may not start another inning if he has thrown more that 100 pitches. It is still unclear whether he can pitch the next day but it is a start. Gone will be the tournaments in which a pitcher throws 881 pitches in six games, such as Kosei Yoshida did last year. Depending on the rule he may now be limited to 600 pitches unless they also have provisions that require a couple days rest between outings.

MyWorldOfBaseball.com

The author hopes this leads to forcing high school coaches to develop more pitchers.

from baseballmusings.com http://bit.ly/2rWV7fI

Merry Christmas!

Here is wishing all the readers of Baseball Musings a wonderful holiday season. Best wishes for a marvelous day with your family and friends!

from baseballmusings.com http://bit.ly/2SlmQSK

Blog Headline of the Day

U.S.S. Mariner starts off their analysis of the Brewers trade with the Mariners with this:

Mariners, Brewers Swap Extraneous OFs; Brewers a Good Team to Swap Extraneous OFs With

U.S.S. Mariner

Ben Gamel and Domingo Santana are good players. I was a bit surprised to see Santana traded, but as Marc W points out neither fit on their current team well. The Brewers need a good, part-time outfielder, and the Mariners needed a good every day bat. It’s a nice example of trade benefitting both parties, and the players involved. They are both going into situation where they can find more success.

from baseballmusings.com http://bit.ly/2V4kLMP

Stent Give Sabathia Another Stint

CC Sabathia needed a stent to clear an artery blockage:

Sabathia’s agent, Kyle Thousand, told The Athletic the procedure took place Dec. 11. Yankees general manager Brian Cashman said the 38-year-old pitcher is expected to report to spring training on time in mid-February.

StarTribune.com

My best wishes to Sabathia for a quick recovery. Fifty years ago this might have killed him. Thirty years ago he would have needed bypass surgery, which would have ended his career. Today, doctors insert a tiny metal tube, and you’re good to go. Don’t let anyone tell you we’re not living in the best times ever.

from baseballmusings.com http://bit.ly/2Gy1znr

Salary Stagnation

MLB salaries were down slightly in 2018:

The average major league salary dropped this year for the first time since 2004 and for only the fourth time since record-keeping started 50 years ago, according to the players’ association. 
The union said Friday its final average was $4,095,686, down $1,436 from $4,097,122 last year. 

Since the union started keeping track in 1967, the only previous declines had been by $66 in 1987, when owners were found to have conspired to hold down salaries among free agents; a 4 percent decline in 1995 following a 7½ -month strike that wiped out the World Series for the first time since 1904; and by 2.5 percent in 2004. 

AJC.com

For those of you scoring at home, that a miniscule 0.0003% drop; basically salaries stayed the same. Clubs have figured out they can get better value with younger players, something that was fairly clear for a long time.

For a long time, conventional wisdom in the game thought players peaked at age 30, not at age 27. (Players, front offices, and the media all bought into this despite people like Bill James saying otherwise.) That’s one reason teams were willing to give large contracts to older players. In the age of number crunching front offices, however, that is no longer the case.

The union owns a big part of this. When the players started negotiating CBAs, a lot of the owners were stuck on getting the reserve clause back, instead of adjusting to the new reality. So the players in conjunction with owners who were willing to exploit the system to win, drove up prices.

Now the union is stuck in the past. Instead of constantly fighting for shorter time periods to free agency, they worry about days off and club house food spreads. For salaries to go up, the union needs to get players to free agency early. They should fight to cut free agency time down until the reserve clause is completely gone. Level the playing field by making everyone free agents all the time, and salaries will go up again. The young will be making money instead of the old, but the young deserve it.

from baseballmusings.com http://bit.ly/2LzMDEg

Dodgers Making Room?

The Reds got a lot better today as the Dodgers appear to be making room on their roster:

The Los Angeles Dodgers are trading outfielders Matt Kemp and Yasiel Puig and pitcher Alex Wood to the Cincinnati Reds for pitcher Homer Bailey and prospects, according to multiple reports.

Also reportedly headed to the Dodgers are shortstop Jeter Downs, who was a first-round pick (No. 32) in the 2017 draft, and right-handed pitcher Josiah Gray, a second-round pick (No. 72) this past summer who turned 21 on Friday.

ESPN.com

So the Dodgers trade three good players for the oft injured Homer Bailey. Downs is very young, but does an excellent job of getting on base. Gray played in rookie ball this year and struck out 59 in 52 1/3 innings, walking just 17.

This looks like a deal that foreshadows the the Dodgers signing someone big. Given that an outfield spot is now open, I’m assuming they are going after Bryce Harper.

For the Reds, they get a strong starting pitcher, someone who can be the ace of the staff. Kemp gives them a good veteran presence to go along with Joey Votto, and Puig can generate two to three WAR. The Reds are sending the message to their fans that they are trying to win, and they should put a better team on the field in 2019.

from baseballmusings.com http://bit.ly/2V0XcEt

Cobb at the Top

Paul Moehringer publishes his all-time Tigers team. It’s an impressive squad, with Ty Cobb as the team’s best hitter. Interestingly, when Meohringer creates the lineup for the team, Cobb is at the top of the order.

In his day, Cobb was a middle of the order hitter. He slugged .512 for his career, but his isolated power was a bit low due to his .366 career BA. During the best years of his career, power consisted of doubles and triples and Cobb hit both of those frequently, combining for 1019 of the shorter long hits.

In today’s game, and on a super team, Cobb’s .433 OBP, his speed, his ability to put himself in scoring position with doubles, triples, and steals would make him the perfect table setter.

from baseballmusings.com http://bit.ly/2A9UMdO

He Might Hit .400

It looks like Daniel Murphy and the Rockies reached a two-year deal for $24 million. If Murphy’s knee is completely healed, this could be money very well spent by the Rockies. Of course, that Murphy took that kind of money for two years says to me that he doesn’t expect a season like the kinds he had in 2016-2017.

Murphy is a gap hitter, and in his time at Coors he hit .330/.358/.536, with 10 of his 37 hits going for doubles. Dropping line drives all over the big outfield should lead to a lot of hits, and his gap power may bring him a doubles title. It’s going to be fun to watch him hit in Denver.

from baseballmusings.com http://bit.ly/2rMh54G

Colwood Corners by Onni in Victoria

Colwood Corners by Onni Group is a new 5 storey condo development located in Victoria, BC. This project will offer 284 units. Upon completion, Colwood Corners has the potential to provide 125,000 square feet of retail as well as multi-family residential.

The post Colwood Corners by Onni in Victoria appeared first on Vancouver New Condos.

from Projects – Vancouver New Condos https://ift.tt/2A5mWqs

Russell’s Transgressions

Via the Chicago-Sun Times, Melisa Reidy tells details the abuse inflicted by Addison Russell. This struck me from early in their relationship, before the abuse started:

“He was never loyal,” Reidy says. Russell was sleeping with someone else from the beginning of their relationship, which resulted in an unintentional pregnancy. When Russell arrived home from Arizona after playing in the Fall League, Reidy found him to be standoffish, and a friend told her she had heard rumors about Addison. A few days later when she was at Russell’s home, she was shocked to see what seemed to be a sonogram sticking out of his bag. “I have nephews, I know what a sonogram looks like,” she says, “I went outside and smoked a cigarette…I went back up there and my heart’s beating out of my chest. I’ve never done that before. I looked and it was a sonogram. I’ll never forget that gut feeling.” After seeing the mother’s name on the sonogram, she looked it up on Facebook. They had one mutual friend, Russell. They’ve since become friendly and developed what Reidy describes as a deep respect for each other as mothers. “We were thrown into a situation with each other that was not truthful. We were both played,” Reidy says of the connection she has with Mallory. “To make her feel like he wanted to be with her…get somebody pregnant, leave them, get a girlfriend, then keep lying…it was very hard for her.”

Russell denied his involvement at first but eventually, Reidy says, he broke down and confessed. “He’s teary-eyed and I’m trying to put myself in his shoes…he’s a twenty-year-old kid. Everybody makes mistakes. Nobody’s perfect. I was like, you know what? You’re gonna be fine…my heart, it hurt for him, seeing him so distressed.” Melisa remembers consoling Russell, and then helping him tell his family later that day.

Expanded Roster

I put very few restrictions on my daughter’s life growing up, but one of the things I told her at a young age was that she could not marry a professional ballplayer. I understand that there are very good men who play the game, but my prior probability for them being faithful to their wives is extremely low. I understand the attraction; their drive to win at all costs makes them successful. If you have a daughter, however, show them this article, talk to them about the warning signs, and don’t let them marry someone like this.

from baseballmusings.com https://ift.tt/2GwYRyD

The “Real Cost” Of A Salesperson

What would you think of a front line manufacturing manager failing to address problems that consistently cost millions of dollars in scrap and rework (not to mention customer sat problems because of missed deliveries)?  Or an engineering manager that missed product launches that caused millions in lost revenue?

Most people would say these are real problems and if they happened repeatedly, these managers would be fired!

Yet, within sales, this practice is common, yet people, that is leaders seem not to care about it, instead the squander millions in mis-hires or in failing to retain top talent.  Stated differently, I’ve never seen a manager fired for consistent lack of attention to talent acquisition, development, and retention.

In sales, the raw ingredients are people.  We hire people, we shape them through onboarding/training, we provide them systems, processes, tools, programs to help them perform.

We invest time and money in those people.  Average onboarding of a sales person is about 10 months.  For some very complex solutions, buying environments, it’s much more.  After they are onboarded, there is the time involved in generating pipeline, and the time involved in managing the pipeline opportunities through closure.  It’s not unusual to see sales cycles of 6, 12, 18 months, or longer.

As a result, after they are onboarded, it can take a year or more to start seeing a consistent flow of business.  And that’s assuming you have the right person, doing the right job, ramping up their performance at the right rate.

If you have the wrong person, they may never ramp to the right level of productivity.

The costs to this are huge.  Most people think only of the direct costs.  The cost of hiring, the salary, some training, onboarding costs.  Too often, managers think this is pretty small.  $100-200K.  But the real cost is much higher.  It’s the opportunity cost.  Customers don’t stop buying just because you might have an open position or open territory.  They just buy from your competition.  Customer don’t buy from sales people that aren’t competent, so the wrong person, has is actually costing you business.  These costs are in the millions, sometimes 10’s of millions.

Now layer on top of this sales person churn.  The average tenure of a sales person (voluntary/involuntary attrition) is 22 months.  If they’ve spent 10 months onboarding, in the subsequent 12 months, they are ramping their productivity, and may be getting to be fully productive–but then they leave.   As a result, we’ve probably not recovered our investment in the person, and we have continued opportunity costs of millions.

And this is common practice!!!

I ask again, how many sales managers are fired because of bad talent management?

Instead, I see exactly the opposite behaviors.  Managers thinking of sales people, as “disposable, replaceable, commodities.”  As I speak with too many managers the attitude is, “I’ll try him out for a few months, if he doesn’t work out, I’ll fire him and find someone new…….”

This is irresponsible.  We need to start thinking about firing sales managers and executives who do not put talent acquisition, development, retention as their top priority.  Managers say they need to focus on hitting the numbers, but if they don’t have the right people performing at the highest levels possible, then there is no way they will hit their numbers.

Related Posts:

• A Frightening Look At The “Cost Of A Sales…
• Talent Still Matters!
• What About Sales Person Retention?
• 7 People In 10 Years!
• Would You Trash A Multi Million Investment After…

from Partners in EXCELLENCE Blog — Making A Difference https://ift.tt/2EI6P6a

Sales Training And The “Forgetting Curve”

Scouting Information

Tyler Cowen at Marginal Revolution is looking for good books about baseball scouting.

from baseballmusings.com https://ift.tt/2EuEgIs

Less Danger

Major League Baseball is contemplating moves to make it easier and safer for Cuban baseball players to sign with teams:

The plan, which resembles the posting system for Japanese players, stipulated major league teams would pay 25% of a player’s minor league bonus or 15% to 20% of the total guaranteed value in a major league deal to the Cuban Baseball Federation (FCB) as a release fee, possibly in addition to other fees, none of which would count against clubs’ international amateur bonus pool money.

Defectors would face “a waiting period” and major league teams still would be required to pay a release fee to the FCB to sign a defector. Scouting on the island would remain prohibited.

Los Angeles Times

So the plan is to bribe the Cuban government to release players.  I’m good with that.

I sometimes think that big bribes are an effective way to deal with difficult governments, and a way that is not tried often enough.  I understand the moral repugnance of the practice, but sometimes it is  the lowest cost solution.

from baseballmusings.com https://ift.tt/2BwmAcr

Looking Phorward to Philly

Andrew McCutchen spoke about on playing in Philadelphia at his press conference:

“I’ve never played an entire season in a hitter’s park. I’m looking forward to that,” McCutchen said of hitter-friendly Citizens Bank Park.

McCutchen posted a .278/.331/.541 slash line at the park in his career in 145 plates appearances (PA).  That’s not a large number of PA, so take the numbers with a grain of salt.  Seventeen of his 37 hits there did go for extra bases.

from baseballmusings.com https://ift.tt/2EtJh40

Start/Stop/Pivot/Restart Sales Strategies

Sales, as with most things, is something that demands regularity in execution.  By that, I mean, there are many things a sales person or manager has to do to perform.

Some of the obvious:  Prospecting, working deals, planning calls, developing proposals, developing territory/account plans, pipeline management/forecasting, time management, learning/training, one on one’s  with managers (hopefully for coaching), and yes, even administrivia.

All of these are components of the “whole job.”  We have to do all these things, all the time.  If we skip one, for example, prospecting, it eventually impacts all  other areas.  Skipping prospecting means eventually our pipelines run dry and we don’t have deals……

Great performers, carefully balance their time, focus, activity across each element, because they understand all are interconnected and impact their performance.

Unfortunately, too often, managers and sales people don’t recognize this.  Priorities and work activity are shifted to focus on the latest “crisis du jour.”  Managers are worried about pipelines, so the focus is on prospecting.  Sales people are directed to spend all their time prospecting, spending too little on the other areas.  Or we need to hit quarter end numbers, so the entire focus of the whole organization is on closing deals or bringing deals from future quarters into the current quarter.  Or we have a new product launch and all efforts are diverted to launching that product.

Recently, I worked with a sales organization.  They were having pipeline and deal problems, but suddenly, management had a different initiative and priority.  It was important, but the problem was it totally consumed all the time of the sales people for several months.  In the mean time, already anemic pipelines became even more anemic.  Deals that were struggling were either lost or threatened, due to lack of attention.

As one might expect, the discovery of these challenges led to another “crisis,” this time with another focus on filling the pipeline.  And this will lead to another and another.

I see this in too many organizations–Start, Stop, Pivot, Restart, Stop, Pivot, Restart, Stop, Pivot……

In organizations that have long/complex buying/selling cycles, these actions are devastating.  Working out of them, stabilizing performance can take years.    And in our rush to results, the reaction is simply doing more of Start/Stop/Pivot/Restart…….

It’s impossible to drive consistent performance with this approach to managing time.

Selling, like anything, requires us to do the whole job–all the time.  We can’t pick and choose the parts that are our favorites.  We can’t do just the easy/fun stuff.  We can’t constantly shift our priorities and focus.

If we started doing the whole job, all the time, there would be less need for Start/Stop/Pivot/Restart.

Related Posts:

• Sales, You Have To Do The Whole Job, All The Time!
• Running To The Edge Of A Cliff At 200MPH!
• Starting And Stopping
• You Don’t Fix Pipeline Problems In The Pipeline!
• We Need More Wins!

from Partners in EXCELLENCE Blog — Making A Difference https://ift.tt/2S5LUwP

Brantley Joins the Astros

Michael Brantley signs a two-year deal with the Houston Astros:

The Houston Astros have agreed to a two-year, $32 million contract with outfielder Michael Brantley, according to multiple reports.

Brantley adds a needed left-handed presence to the middle of the Astros’ lineup, which is heavily right-handed with key cogs Jose Altuve, Alex Bregman, Carlos Correa and George Springer. 

The 31-year-old Brantley, who missed most of the 2016 and 2017 seasons with injuries, enjoyed an impressive bounce-back season with Cleveland in 2018, hitting .309 with 17 homers and 76 RBIs. He also scored 89 runs in 143 games and posted an .832 OPS.

ESPN.com

The Astros are paying for about two WAR a year, which is what Brantley averaged over the last two seasons, one of them incomplete.    What I like is that Brantley went for a two-year deal.  That pays him enough to make him comfortable for life, but is short enough that if he plays well, he can can probably get a another two or three year deal at a much higher average value.  I still believe today’s free agents would do better driving up the average annual value with short-term contracts.

from baseballmusings.com https://ift.tt/2BoWOqs

Sales Talent Is A Problem, Is It Worth Solving?

I just read a provocative post. Sales Talent Is A Problem, Is it Worth Solving, by the folks at CSO Insights.  It’s an interesting view, in the spirit of “Yes, and…..” I’d like to add to the discussion.

I suppose answers to the question depend on your mindset.  A closed mindset would probably say, “No!”  The article presents a few points of view that reinforce that.

People with closed mindsets would tend to address things from an internal orientation.  How do we structure the sales organization to be most efficient?  How do we reduce the variability in sales people and what they do, creating the lowest cost ability to acquire customers.

Many would also cite technologies that, supposedly, diminish the need for sales talent.  After all, AI and ML will solve all the problems of the selling world.  It will tell us who to call, when, what their problems are likely to be.  It will scripting the perfect conversation making sure we limit our discovery questions to 4, and our discovery pitch to 9.1 minutes  (some how the concept of a discovery pitch seems odd, how do you do discovery if you are pitching.  But one AI vendor has the data supporting this.  You just do one for 9.1 minutes and you win.  If it stretches to 11.4, you lose.)

If we structure our engagement process to be more transactional, the assembly line process becomes very attractive.  We specialize our various sales roles, moving customer widgets from sales specialist to sales specialist.  SDR to BDR to Demo’er to AE to Closer to Customer Care—-rinse, wash, recycle.  This mechanized view of selling, means our view of talent is very different.  We are looking for people that can execute their specialized roles very well, train them to do those without deviation.  Ultimately, we can look at displacing many of these with Chatbots, and as buyers develop their capabilities, our Chatbots will engage with their Buying Chatbots.

People with closed mindsets will interpret the data, “Buyers are used to getting minimal sales involvement,” or other data that says “Buyers will leverage 3+ channels through their buying process,” (Gartner), coming to the conclusion that buyers have a preference to minimize sales involvement.

But dive into the research more deeply, what it really tells you is that buyers are agnostic on channels.  They have no preference of digital, sales, or any other.  What they want is great insight, timely, accurate and relevant to their specific needs.

If anything, one could interpret the data as sales having driven the customer to the alternative channels because of our inability to do the things they need.  Which, at its root is a talent problem—do we have the right type of people, are we equipping the with the right skills/tools/processes to create value in every interaction with the customer?  It seems the customers are voting by their actions and they are voting no.

A closed mindset will lead you to certain conclusions about sales talent, inevitably, it will lead to an answer , “Meh!”

A growth oriented mindset would approach the question slightly differently.  First, people with a growth oriented mindset would start in a completely different place.

Rather than starting with an internal, efficiency oriented focus, they would start with an external focus.  They would start with customers,  They would ask the question, “What are our customers facing?”  They would follow that with the question, “How can our sales people best help our customers deal with what they face?”

We would see two major trends emerging.  Many “buying processes,” are, in fact very transactional.  In looking at the transactional buying processes, much of what I’ve discussed will apply–ultimately, these should all be handled untouched by human hands–on both the buying/selling sides.

But the major issue we would see confronting our customers is massive turbulence.  This turbulence is characterized by all sorts of terms, a few or which are:  Transformation (digital and otherwise), complexity, disruption, information overload, overwhelm, confusion, distraction, massive change, confusion.

They would also see that no customer, no market, no function is immune to this turbulence.  It impacts every organization, every individual.

Growth mindset people would see that helping our customers make sense of what they face, helping them navigate their way to solving these problems, is what great sales people and organizations do.

If anything, they would see a massive increase in the demand/need for help from their customers.

At the same time, they would recognize, it takes a different kind of sales person to be able to deal with these issues.  Different skills, capabilities, experiences.

They would also come to the conclusion that the sales talent problem isn’t just worth solving, it becomes a key differentiator in capitalizing on the demand from customers looking to make sense of the turbulence they face.

The organizations/leaders that recognize this opportunity, that want to provide leadership in helping customers address “turbulence,” will capture huge share.

The organizations/leaders that recognize this opportunity will recognize that  sales talent is THE problem worth solving!

—

Related Posts:

• Is Your Mindset Limiting You?
• 2018 Sales Management Critical Issues, Part 1
• Sales Success Starts With Your Mindset
• Sales Enablement And Talent Management
• Buyers Aren’t Killing Sales, Sales People Are…

from Partners in EXCELLENCE Blog — Making A Difference https://ift.tt/2R1vFUe

Streaming Flood

The New York Post gets word that MLB may be moving toward a model where individual teams get local streaming rights:

The prospect for change is happening because MLB’s current contract with 22 Fox regional sports networks expires at year-end. As part of that deal, each RSN pays the league $2 million for those streaming rights.
Disney is in the process of selling the 22 RSNs as a condition of its $71 billion deal to buy the majority of Twenty-First Century Fox entertainment assets.

Now, though, the individual teams want in on the action, The Post has learned, which could mean the name of the game for baseball fans would be cutting cords and beefing up their broadband.

MLB favors a plan to transfer in-market streaming rights from the league to individual teams, three sources close to the talks said.

NY Post

Right now, in order to stream local market games, one needs to subscribe to a cable provider that broadcasts those games.  I assume under the model proposed above, anyone in the market with a broadband connection could subscribe.

The other interesting tidbit is the market for the games:

“The cord cutting is not the issue, it is the cord nevers,” a second source said.

Up to 30 percent of America’s 130 million households do not subscribe to a pay-TV service, a growing business segment that individual teams see as a rich source of new revenue.

This would be a welcome development.

from baseballmusings.com https://ift.tt/2QWkyfw

Bullish on Catching

The Mets sign Wilson Ramos, the Baby Bull, to a two year-contract.  New York catchers hit poorly in 2018, posting a .208/.297/.355 slash line.  Ramos hit .306/.358/.487, in a bit over .400 plate appearances. That was well above his .273/.317/.439 career numbers, but even if he reverts to that, the Mets will be doing better.  A very nice signing.

from baseballmusings.com https://ift.tt/2BmxaTk

Let the Shift Evolve

Ben Fredrickson talks about Rob Manfred’s wish to ban the shift.  His first point is funny:

There is new evidence to introduce to my argument that attempts to prove Major League Baseball commissioner Rob Manfred likes the idea of changing the game of baseball more than he likes the game of baseball.

St. Louis Post-Dispatch

I don’t think that’s true, but it’s a great opening line.  Football tinkers with the rules a lot, because they know the sweet spot for fan interest is 42 points per game.  They change things subtlety, however, moving hash marks or changing when a defender can bump a receiver.  Baseball can change the ball, or the height of the mound, but other changes effect the fabric of the game in ways fans might not like.  Limiting managerial moves with the shift might be one of them.

Fredrickson gets it right here:

The argument for it bemoans sinking batting averages and rising strikeouts. It’s not fun to watch hitters hit into a shift, they say. Well, at least we can agree on something.

What the ban-the-shift crowd ignores are the lack of adjustments hitters have made to try to combat the trend. Defenses no longer worry about opening up swaths of the field to hitters, because hitters continue to reject the invitation to hit (or bunt) into wide-open areas.

St. Louis Post-Dispatch

These adjustments take time.  The pendulum will swing back when someone wins an MVP hitting against the shift.  Bill James like to say in his Baseball Abstracts that every strength hides a weakness. At some point, the weakness of the shift will be exploited.  Baseball just needs to wait for it to happen. 

from baseballmusings.com https://ift.tt/2UPaRhN

Hydee, Hydee, O

The Orioles made it official, hiring Brandon Hyde as their new manager:

“I believe that we have found the ideal leader for the next era of Orioles baseball,” Elias said of Hyde.

Hyde worked as Chicago’s bench coach this year under manager Joe Maddon. He was in the second of three seasons as Cubs first base coach when the team won the World Series in 2016.

Before that, Hyde served as Rick Renteria’s bench coach in Chicago in 2014. He previously served as Chicago’s director of player development from August 2012 through 2013 after joining the Cubs in December 2011 as their minor league field coordinator.

Houston Chronicle

That last bit is important, as Hyde will lead the rebuild of the team.

from baseballmusings.com https://ift.tt/2A1gFft

High and Low Priced Talent

A very busy week at work left me behind in the my baseball news, and it appears the White Sox are all in on Bryce Harper.  Daryl Van Schouwen wonders what happens if the White Sox get out bid.  There is plenty of outfield talent in the system:

“We have an abundance of outfielders I would consider average to above average prospects,’’ director of player development Chris Getz said. “We have some impact talent in the outfield.’’
That they do. There is prized prospect Eloy Jimenez, a star in the making in his own right who would form an imposing pair alongside Harper in the middle of the lineup and wrapped around center field prospect Luis Robert in a future outfield. Jimenez, ranked No. 3 among all prospects by MLB Pipeline, and Robert, No. 44, top a classy crop of outfielders in the Sox system.

Four more outfielders are ranked among their top 14 prospects: No. 9 Luis Basabe (acquired in the Chris Sale trade), No. 11 Micker Adolfo, No. 12 Steele Walker (their 2018 second-round pick) and No. 14 Luis Gonzalez.

That’s a deep class, which could, should Harper get signed, be dipped into as trade assets for a finishing piece or two down the line when the Sox are ready to win. There is your best-case scenario.

I would not mind seeing Harper go to a rebuilding team.  Harper is still young enough that he will be in his prime when this talent matures.  It could make for a very interesting decade on the South Side.

from baseballmusings.com https://ift.tt/2QRmh5E

Kelly to the Dodgers

Dodgers Digest was somewhat surprised by the Dodgers agreeing to a three-year, $25 million contract with Joe Kelly, and sees the risks and rewards with the deal:

So there’s a ton of upside to the Joe Kelly signing due to the quality of his stuff and potential tweaks that could maximize his ability. That said, as of now, they are investing three years and borderline setup man type of money into a pitcher that has achieved his upside for around the final 11 innings in 2018. That is the harsh reality of the deal at the moment and inevitably what makes this signing a significant risk, while also being something to get excited to watch.

In the end, this deal surely represents the Dodgers taking steps towards building a sturdier bridge to Kenley Jansen in the off-season for once. Historically, that plan of action hasn’t worked out all that well for teams with the exception of elite-level relievers, so surely that’s what the Dodgers are hoping they’re getting in Kelly.

Dodgers Digest

Kelly’s high strikeout rate the last few seasons came at the expense of less control.  Through 2015 he average 6.4 K per 9 IP and 3.3 BB per 9 IP.  Since then, the strikeouts are up to 9.2 per 9 IP, and walks are up to 4.6 per 9 IP. Given his age, if his strikeout rate goes down and he doesn’t adjust the walks, he could be in trouble.

from baseballmusings.com https://ift.tt/2zXVHhp

Letting Form Triumph Over Substance

One of my favorite authors/thinkers is John Gardner.  About 35 years ago, a mentor introduced me to his work about 35 years ago.  One of his most profound books is entitled Excellence, Can We Be Equal An Excellent Too.  I reread the book at least once a year.  There is one phrase in the book that I’m obsessed with, “Do not let form triumph over substance.“

Too often, I see sales people, sales managers going through the motions.  They are doing the things they think sales people or sales managers should be doing, without understanding the purpose, why they are doing these things, why or if they are even important or the right things to do.

Too often, we have a picture of doing things:  “We have to do pipeline and reviews because that’s what sales people/managers do,”  “We have to do this many prospecting emails and calls, because that’s what we are supposed to do,”  “We have to use the CRM system because my manager tells me to—but when you talk to the manager, the manager doesn’t know why,”  and on and on.

Recently, I had a conversation with a manager.  He was outlining things he wanted to do in the Sales Kickoff Meeting.  I asked him, “Why are you doing those?  Why are they important to what you want to achieve?  How will they contribute to the ability of the team to achieve their goals?”  He paused, then said, “Well we’ve just always done that, I thought that’s what we should be doing….” 

As we talked about it, it turned out those things hadn’t produced results in the past, but out of “form,” he and the management team were doing more of the same.

The problem is, focusing on the “form,” we can get mindless, robotic behaviors, doing the things we’ve always done, because we’ve always done them, or we have some image in our minds of what sales managers/sales people should be doing.

Too often, we stop looking at the substance of what we are doing—Why should we be doing these things?  Are they the right things to do?  Should we be doing different things, or doing things differently?

Those of you who are Simon Sinek fans will recognize this as a variant of “Start With Why.”

But this is a critical concept, not just in tactical sales execution, but as we look at what we do over the long term.  We are wasting our time, our customers’ time, and our people’s time just be doing things because we have always done things this way. 

We have to constantly examine why we are doing these things–getting to the underlying substance.

In each interaction with customers we should think:

• Why is this important to this customer now?
• Why am I choosing to do these specific things for this customer or this situation? 
• Is this the most effective way to do this?  Could I have a greater impact by changing my approach?
• Does this create the most value for the customer in this interaction?

As managers, we need to think of these same types of issues with our people/teams:

• Why is it important for them to do doing these things right now? 
• Does this help them improve their performance, producing the outcomes we expect?
• Is this the most effective/impactful thing for them to be doing?
• Does this help them grow, professionally?
• Why is this important to them?  What’s in it for them  (to often we focus on our own needs)?
• What should we be changing about what we do and why?
• How can I be most helpful to each person on my team right now?

Our customers, our companies, our markets, our competition is dominated by change/turbulence.  We will not thrive if we let “form triumph over substance.” 

Related Posts:

• Letting Form Triumph Over Substance
• Driving “Volume,” Are We Letting Form…
• Creating Social Business Success
• It’s Not About The Form/Template
• When Should Your Company Consider Global Expansion

from Partners in EXCELLENCE Blog — Making A Difference https://ift.tt/2PAJ6Wu

Cedar Walk by Polygon

Cedar Walk by Polygon Homes is a new high rise condominium and townhouse development on the UBC Campus on the West Side of Vancouver near Point Grey. This project is the first high-rise on a new 21-acre masterplanned community, “Lelem”. Cedar Walk will feature 1, 2 and 3 bedroom apartments and townhomes, bringing contemporary living to the lush nature that surrounds UBC. Nearby amenities includes walking trails, a retail plaza, highly-ranked elementary and high schools, along with being located on the world-class University of British Columbia Campus.

The post Cedar Walk by Polygon appeared first on Vancouver New Condos.

from Projects – Vancouver New Condos https://ift.tt/2RVoo5y

399 East 1st Ave by Onni Group

399 East 1st Avenue is a new two tower condominium development by Onni Group of Companies, located in the Olympic Village neighbourhood of Vancouver. The 7 and 15-storey high towers will feature 220 units ranging from one to three bedrooms.

The post 399 East 1st Ave by Onni Group appeared first on Vancouver New Condos.

from Projects – Vancouver New Condos https://ift.tt/2zTfPBy

Hydeing the Manager

News of the Orioles hiring Cubs bench coach Brandon Hyde as their new manager came from the Cubs, not the Orioles:

An announcement should be coming real soon if only a signature is needed on a contract. Of course, Elias insisted yesterday that he hadn’t made a decision or extended an offer to anyone, including Cubs bench coach Brandon Hyde, who’s going to become the 20th manager in club history.
Elias is adhering to the policy of secrecy in the organization, saying that he fails to see the benefits in not keeping things close to the vest. And he’d certainly like to reach out to the other candidates.

…

News breaking of the Elias hiring, at whatever stage of the process, was followed by denials from multiple people in the organization who insisted that nothing was final, and executives and personnel throughout baseball saying that the Cubs confirmed it.

School of Roch

With little news coming out of the winter meetings, reporters may have jumped the gun on a story.

from baseballmusings.com https://ift.tt/2EqPnmw

Stupid Works In Sales

I’ve been writing a number of pieces looking at the future of the sales profession.  I’d be remiss not to include a discussion of stupidity in selling.

Stupid works, and as long as stupid works, we will continue to see organizations invest in doing things stupidly.

Stupid behavior exists everywhere, and selling is no more immune to stupidity than every other sector.

People respond to stupid emails.  After all, people purporting to be Nigerian Princes are making money.  There will always be some people that will respond to scams.  And enough respond that the people exploiting these tactics to make money.

While that may be an extreme case, people will respond to bad emails, bad phone calls, bad pitches.  They respond out of their own ignorance of alternatives, out of inexperience, out of haste, distraction, or for any number of other reasons.  As long as “enough” respond, sales people will continue to leverage those stupid tactics.

As these techniques don’t produce enough, the easy answer is “crank up the volume.”  Just do twice as many emails or twice as many phone calls.  Managers will go to their management, with the argument, “Here’s what we’ve produced in the past, if you just enable me to double, triple, I can produce more……”

Sometimes, stupidity works or at least appears to.   Smart buyers buy from sales people doing stupid things.  The issue is, “do they buy as a result of what the sales person has done, or in spite of what the sales person has done?”  For example, hot products/solutions don’t need great sales skills.

Too often, we continue to do stupid things, thinking it was because of what we’ve done, rather than in spite of what we have done.

Customers will, and should, take advantage of stupid.  If they have determined the product will solve their needs, despite how they’ve been sold, it’s usually very easy to exploit stupidity to get the best possible price.  Be careful here, I’m not saying that sales people, even great ones, don’t have to discount.  But usually, this is a considered decision or after they have exhausted everything else.  Stupidity enables discounting, as a standard, because they don’t understand value or don’t value what they sell.

However, while stupidity will always exist, it is not a strategy for growth, it is not a strategy for market leadership.  It is a strategy exploited by followers struggling to survive.

Some times smart organizations do stupid things, just look at the bad emails in my Inbox.  These, usually are corrected–it may take some time for these stupid things to get the right visibility.  Sometimes, they run under the radar for a long time, but eventually, they get visibility to people who recognize what it is, stupid.

Stupid is sustainable only in organizations that are driven by performance.  At some point, in any performance driven organization, stupidity reveals itself to be a low performance strategy.  But despite, the lip service of many executives, many organizations just want to get by.  So stupid can thrive in those environments.

While stupid works, it doesn’t work as well or as profitably as smart.

Stupidity will always have a place in sales, hopefully, it will always be threatened and, over time, represents a smaller percentage of sales behaviors.

Having said this, stupid is uninteresting and a waste of thoughtful people’s time.  Yet it’s amazing how many smart people get sucked into discussions driven by the stupid–you can’t fight stupid or argue with the stupid.  You just crush it not being distracted by stupid.

I’m surprised I’ve invested about 613 words in this  (perhaps I’m being stupid).

 

Afterword:  Thanks to Dr. Howard Dover for provoking this idea.

 

Related Posts:

• Automating Stupidity
• A Little Whining—When Will We Stop Thinking…
• The Email Query
• SPAM Works!
• We’ve Met The Enemy, It’s Us

from Partners in EXCELLENCE Blog — Making A Difference https://ift.tt/2SKnsRN