Issues in OBM Service Delivery

1
Paper Session 20
Issues in OBM Service Delivery
Please hold questions until invited by Session
Chair

• Do Companies Really Know Who Their High
  Performers Are? CHARLES R. CROWELL (University
  of Notre Dame) SESSION CHAIR
• Getting Results in Todays Business. JUDY JOHNSON
  (Continuous Learning Group)
• Inside the IRS Its Not Just the Tax Code Its
  the Missing Instructional Design. MARILYN GILBERT
  (Performance Engineering Group)

2
Do Companies Really Know Who Their High
Performers Are?
Dr. Charles R. Crowell Department of
Psychology University of Notre Dame ccrowell_at_nd.ed
u 574.277.4774
3
Performance-Care Model
Did we get better?
FOLLOW-UP
DIAGNOSIS
TREATMENT
What do we need?
How do we address it?
Did it take?
4
Performance Diagnosis
DIAGNOSTIC ACTIVITIES
Assessment
Exploratory
Prescriptive
Research
New Knowledge
Treatment
5
Static and Dynamic Standards
STATIC STANDARDS
ASSESSMENT
TREATMENT
DYNAMIC STANDARDS
ASSESSMENT
TREATMENT
6
Performance Imaging
Management
Environment
PERFORMER
Customer
7
Performance Imaging Short-term Objectives

• Establish a current snapshot of company field
  sales operations in a region or subsidiary
• Identify strengths and developmental
  opportunities
• Provide specific recommendations for immediate
  actions to promote gains in sales effectiveness.

Multi-national Company X
8
Performance Imaging Longer-term Objectives

• Establish a long-range development plan for the
  company field-sales operations.
• Provide a basis, through repeated Images, to
  assess progress toward developmental objectives.
• Identify factors that promote success in company
  top performers.
• Enable the company to movetoward ongoing
  self-diagnosis.

9
Performance Imaging General Methodology

• SAMPLE SELECTION
• Identify representative sample of High and
  Averagesales performers balanced for tenure and
  type
• OBSERVER TRAINING
• Prepare a team of experienced "outside" observers
  to record performer-customer and
  performer-manager interactions
• FIELD WORK
• Spend one day in the field with each performer
  and his/her manager capturing behavior, outcomes,
  and issues

10
Company Classification

• Differentiating Factors
• Percent to Plan
• Performance Evaluation
• Common Factors
• Tenure
• Time on Territory
• Sales Potential

11
Behavior/Outcome Categories

• Pre-Call
• During-Call
• Post-Call
• Call Outcomes

Positive Negative
12
Observer Training

• Takes 2-4 days
• Builds progressively
• Focused on behaviors and sequence
• Computer-assisted
• Criterion-based

13
Observer Training
14
Observer Training
15
Types of Findings

• Behavior frequencies
• Interaction statistics
• Interaction balances
• Call results
• Sequential patterns (lag 1)

16
Two Behavioral Profiles

17
Needed a Profile Summary
Skill Areas
PRODUCT/ INDUSTRY KNOWLEDGE
COMMUNICATION SKILLS
TERRITORY/ ACCOUNT MANAGEMENT
18
Daily Summary Categories

• COMMUNICATION SKILLS
• REP HAD DEFINED CALL OBJECTIVES
• PRODUCT-ORIENTED OPENINGS WERE USED
• DRS. WERE ACTIVE DURING THE CALL
• REP KNEW OR DISCOVERD DRS. NEEDS
• PRODUCT FACTS WERE TIED TO BENEFITS
• REP PRESENTED TO DRS. NEEDS
• REP INITIATED DISCUSSION OF COMPETITION
• PRODUCT PRESENTATIONS WERE BALANCED
• REP ESTABLISHED RAPPORT WITH DRS.
• REP ASKED DRS. FOR SPECIFIC COMMITMENTS
• DRS. AGREED TO SPECIFIC COMMITMENTS

Yes or No
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
19
Observer Classification

20
Observer Daily Findings
Communication Skills
Drs. agreed to
commitments
Rep asked for commitments
Rep had rapport with Drs.
Presentations were
balanced
Rep initiated talk of
competition
Rep presented to needs
Facts were tied to benefits
Rep knew/discovered
needs
Drs. were active
Product-oriented
openings used
Defined call objectives
21
During-Call Behavior Frequencies
REP BEHAVIOR CUSTOMER
BEHAVIOR 1 SOCIAL 26 SOCIAL 2
IRRELEVANT 27 IRRELEVANT 3
INTERRUPT 28 INTERRUPT 4
PRODUCT 29 PRODUCT 5 FACTS
30 FACTS 6 EVIDENCE
31 EVIDENCE 7 REF PRIOR SPC
32 LIMITS 8 REF PRIOR GEN 33
LITERATURE 9 PARAPHRASE 34
COMPLY 10 SUMMARIZE 35
NONCOMPLY . 11 GEN BENEFITS 36 CONCERN
12 SPC BENEFITS 37 NEEDS 13 LIMITS
38 BENEFITS 14 LITERATURE
39 NEEDS Q 15 OPEN Q
40 BENEFITS Q 16 CLOSED Q 41
FACTS Q 17 CLOSE 42
EVIDENCE Q . 18 READS NVB 43 LIMITS Q
19 LIT POSITIVE NVB 44 NON-ATTEND NVB 20
NON-ATTEND NVB 45 RE-ATTEND NVB 21 RE-ATTEND
NVB 46 AGREE NVB 22 AGREE NVB 47 DISAGREE
NVB 23 DISAGREE NVB 48 PONDERS NVB 24
PONDERS NVB 49 WRITES NVB 25 WRITES NVB 50
READS NVB
34 Comply
15-16 Open/ Closed Questions
12 Specific Benefits
17 Close
Drs. More Active
22
Discussion Balance
Product-focused
Customer-focused
23
Interaction Statistics
Product Mentions
Product Discussions
Call Duration
Coaching Time
24
Positive Call Results
Positive interest in Literature Rep was
consultant Rep left samples Cust. asked for
samples Cust. agreed to increase use Cust.
agreed to use Expanding use Consistent
use Trial use Interest but not yet using
25
Classification Correspondence
Company
Observers
26
Replications
Other Places
Correspondence

• Country B 50
• Country C 45
• Country D 58
• Country E 45
• Country F 56

27
Comparing Classifications
Companys
Observers
28
So, what Does All This Mean?

• Traditional metrics of success may not adequately
  define a performers contribution
• Performance to plan and manager evaluations can
  be problematic
• De-valuing important contributors will drain
  company of talent
• Over-valuing unimportant contributors will drain
  the company of morale
• Companies need good ways to measure what they
  value
• Valuing what is easily measured is a temptation
  to be avoided
• Getting people to do the right things is one
  major way to enhance organizational success
• Positive results are the by-product of positive
  behavior

29
Paper Session 20
Issues in OBM Service Delivery
Please hold questions until the QA period

• Do Companies Really Know Who Their High
  Performers Are? CHARLES R. CROWELL (University
  of Notre Dame) SESSION CHAIR
• Getting Results in Todays Business. JUDY JOHNSON
  (Continuous Learning Group)
• Inside the IRS Its Not Just the Tax Code Its
  the Missing Instructional Design. MARILYN GILBERT
  (Performance Engineering Group)