Skip to content

Sales Management

What An MBA Didn’t Teach You About Sales

The sales profession is challenging. You need to work hard at it to succeed. You need to learn from the best. You need to improve your skills continuously. If you think you can sell since you are a hit at parties and have a lot of friends, you may soon find that you are a failure as a salesperson. Blunt truth:

because the sales profession is so hard, you have to focus on doing everything in sales very well, or you will be considered a failure.

I call this blog, Skinned Knees because I try to relate all of the learning that I have done over the past 4+ decades (while skinning my knees in the learning process).

I hope that you learn from my mistakes so that your business will grow!

AI Sales Coaching: How to Stop Rescuing Deals and Start Developing Salespeople

There is a dangerous moment in the growth of many B2B companies. It happens when the best salesperson becomes the sales manager.

The promotion seems obvious. This person consistently exceeds quota, understands customers, knows how to close difficult deals, and has earned the team’s respect. Who could be better qualified?

Six months later, that same person is personally rescuing the team’s largest opportunities, handling difficult customer objections, negotiating with executives, and keeping the forecast alive.

The company’s revenue looks healthy. The owner is satisfied. The sales manager appears indispensable.

And that is precisely the problem.

The company hasn’t developed a scalable sales organization. It has become dependent on one talented individual. Artificial intelligence offers an opportunity to change this pattern. But only if we rethink what sales management should accomplish.

The Difference Between Managing Deals and Developing Salespeople

Traditional sales management relies heavily on inspection and intervention. Managers review pipeline reports, examine forecasts, enforce activity requirements, and intervene when opportunities get into trouble. These activities are necessary, but they are not the same as coaching.

Consider a salesperson who confidently announces during a pipeline review that Mary is the Champion for a major opportunity. The manager suspects that Mary is simply a friendly contact who likes the product. An experienced manager might join the next customer meeting, take control of the conversation, and personally secure executive support. The opportunity might close. Unfortunately, the salesperson hasn’t developed the ability to identify and validate a real Champion.

A better manager asks a different question:

“What has Mary actually done that proves she is your Champion?”

Has Mary introduced the salesperson to important stakeholders? Has she explained the customer’s internal decision process? Has she advocated for the solution when the salesperson wasn’t present? Has she taken any personal risk to help the opportunity advance? If the salesperson cannot identify meaningful actions, the relationship remains an untested hypothesis.

The manager’s next responsibility isn’t to take over. It is to help the salesperson determine how to test that relationship. That coaching conversation improves the salesperson’s judgment, potentially affecting every future opportunity.

The objective of sales leadership is not to make the manager better at closing deals. It is to make the entire team better at closing deals.

Read the rest of the article…

AI Sales Automation: Why Your Chatbot Is Not a Sales Process

Imagine preparing for an important customer meeting. You open your favorite AI assistant, give it the prospect’s name, and ask for a summary of the company’s business challenges and the questions you should ask. Within seconds, you receive a beautifully written briefing. The assistant identifies potential operational problems, competitive pressures, and several opportunities to demonstrate the value of your solution.

There’s just one problem. One of those impressive insights concerns an acquisition the prospect supposedly completed last year.

Except the acquisition never happened.

The artificial intelligence fabricated a plausible business event and presented it as fact. Had you trusted the briefing, you might have opened your meeting with a question that immediately damaged your credibility.

This scenario illustrates a much larger problem with how B2B sales organizations use AI.

We’re asking artificial intelligence to perform too many different kinds of work without distinguishing which tasks require intelligence and which require reliable execution.

That distinction matters more than the sophistication of the AI model you choose.

The Problem Isn’t Just Hallucinations. It’s Process Design.

Salespeople increasingly rely on ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini, and other Generative AI applications to prepare for meetings, research prospects, write follow-up messages, and analyze opportunities. Those are legitimate applications of AI. In fact, I’d question why a salesperson with access to these capabilities wouldn’t use them. But consider what happens before the salesperson receives a useful answer.

They retrieve information from their CRM, gather previous meeting notes, identify stakeholders, check pricing, and reconstruct details from previous conversations. They paste everything into their AI assistant, ask a question, verify the response, and correct any mistakes.

Tomorrow, they repeat the process for another customer.

The AI may have improved the quality of their analysis, but the underlying sales process remains largely manual.

When twenty salespeople independently reconstruct the same process every day, you don’t have an AI adoption problem. You have a sales management problem.

You’re paying experienced professionals to repeatedly assemble information that your existing systems should already provide.

The solution isn’t necessarily better prompting. It’s better workflow design.

Read the rest of the article…

AI Prospecting Agents: Build More Pipeline Without Adding More SDRs

One of the more frustrating realities in modern sales is that a company can invest heavily in technology and still leave its best salespeople doing work that should never require their time.

The CRM is open. So is LinkedIn. There is an intent-data platform in another tab, a contact database in another, a sales engagement platform somewhere else, and perhaps a conversation intelligence tool running in the background.

The company has a technology stack. What it may not have is a prospecting system.

That distinction matters.

A collection of tools still depends on someone remembering which accounts matter, noticing when a former champion changes jobs, deciding which buying signals deserve attention, researching the account, moving information between systems, writing the message, and following up. When people are the integration layer connecting all those systems, the company has not really automated prospecting. It has simply given its salespeople more software to operate.

The Prospecting Advantage Has Changed

Traditional outbound sales was built around scarcity. Finding contact information, researching a company, and uncovering a credible reason to approach someone required significant effort. That made volume difficult and valuable.

Artificial intelligence changed those economics.

Today, generating another email is nearly free. Finding another prospect is relatively easy. AI can produce hundreds or thousands of messages faster than a sales team could ever review them. That does not make those messages valuable.

When volume becomes inexpensive, volume stops being a competitive advantage. Relevance becomes the scarce resource.

We need to evolve our systems away from asking, “How can we send more outreach?” Rather, we need to be thinking of, “How can we identify the people who deserve our attention right now and give our salespeople something useful to say when they contact them?”

A modern prospecting system therefore has to answer five questions continuously:

  1. Who should we pursue?
  2. Why should we pursue them now?
  3. What should we say?
  4. Which channel and timing gives us the best chance of engagement?
  5. When should a human salesperson enter the conversation?

The fifth question is particularly important.

Read the rest of the article…

Your Sales Compensation Plan Is Quietly Managing Your Sales Team

A salesperson reaches the final week of the quarter with a major opportunity ready to close. Legal has approved the agreement. The customer is prepared to move forward but asks for a 15 percent discount.

The salesperson understands what the discount does to margin. So does the sales manager. Finance knows as well. Yet the salesperson is measured on revenue, the manager needs the deal to make the quarterly forecast, and neither is directly rewarded for protecting margin.

The discount is approved. The deal closes. The commission increases. Everyone celebrates.

The company may have just paid someone extra to give away its profit.

No one acted dishonestly. The compensation plan worked precisely as designed. That is the problem.

Compensation Is a Management System

Most companies treat sales compensation as an administrative process. Leadership creates a plan, finance calculates payments, and managers resolve disputes when the numbers do not match expectations.

That view misses the strategic role compensation plays.

A compensation plan influences which customers salespeople pursue, how aggressively they discount, whether they favor one-year or multi-year agreements, how they collaborate, and whether they prioritize new business, renewals, margin, or market share.

What the company pays for will eventually outweigh what its leaders say they value.

Many sales leaders inherited plans that accumulated years of exceptions, temporary accelerators, regional variations, product overlays, split-credit rules, and special arrangements. The resulting spreadsheet may be technically functional while being strategically incoherent.

The warning signs are familiar:

Salespeople maintain private spreadsheets because they do not trust their commission statements.

Managers spend time resolving payout disputes instead of coaching pipeline.

Quotas are created by adding a percentage to last year’s number rather than analyzing territory potential.

A handful of top performers benefit from every contest while most of the team decides the competition is irrelevant.

These are not motivation problems. They are design problems that consume selling time, reduce margin, and erode trust.

Read the rest of the article…

How to Build a More Stable Pipeline with a Better B2B Sales Outreach Strategy

Full-cycle salespeople create pipeline instability when outreach is treated as a series of individual efforts instead of a managed operating system.

The issue is rarely enough effort. Most salespeople will work hard when the pipeline gets thin. The problem is that reactive effort results in uneven revenue generation. Activity surges when opportunities dry up, then slows when active deals demand attention. That cycle produces the familiar pattern: intense prospecting, temporary pipeline relief, missed follow-up, then another gap.

A diversified outreach strategy gives the salesperson a more stable demand-creation engine. It creates multiple entry points into the market, reduces dependence on any single channel, and keeps opportunity creation moving while deals are being advanced.

Diversification does not mean random activity across email, phone, LinkedIn, referrals, content, and events. It means each channel has a role, a message, a sequence, and a management cadence.

The starting point is a defined target contact universe. Salespeople need a clean, accurate list of the right companies, titles, buying roles, and relationship paths. Tools such as LinkedIn Sales Navigator, Seamless AI, and KnowledgeNet can help build that base, but the tool is secondary. The discipline is knowing exactly who belongs in the outreach system and why.

Read the rest of the article…

How to Build a Sales Organization That Survives a Founder Exit

Navigating the complexities of business transitions can be quite a journey, especially for those in sales and leadership roles. When a founder chooses to pass the baton, whether through selling to someone outside the company, passing it within the family, or setting up an employee stock ownership plan, each option comes with its own unique challenges and chances for growth. For salespeople, sales managers, and CEOs of small companies, understanding these dynamics is really important.

When a business owner considers selling to an external buyer, they often experience a surprising realization: the valuation shock. It’s common for owners to overestimate their company’s worth, only to encounter a reality check during the valuation process. This moment is so important because it influences all future negotiations and strategies. Buyers don’t just look at the numbers; they also carefully examine the business’s sales processes and the owner’s involvement. Here, the owner’s role as the main salesperson can be both a strength and a challenge. If the owner accounts for a large share of sales, such as 30%, it can worry potential buyers. 

The key is to build a business that can thrive even when the owner isn’t around, supported by a solid sales system and a talented team eager to keep everything running smoothly.

For the owner contemplating a sale, preparation is key. 

The question to ponder is: what if you were suddenly unavailable? 

Read the rest of the article…

Build a Repeatable Sales Process Using Buyer Personas

In the world of sales, consistency is a cornerstone for success. Salespeople, sales managers, and CEOs alike strive to find a sustainable way to grow their business, and one effective strategy is to focus on buyer personas. Identifying and understanding these personas can streamline the sales process, making it easier to target the right customers and tailor your approach to meet their specific needs.

Consistency is key. When you consistently sell to profitable companies that see value in your solutions, you can standardize your sales processes and messaging. This consistency allows you to tweak and improve your methods incrementally, rather than making wild changes that may not lead to profitability. Many small companies don’t have the luxury of unlimited cash flow. They need to be mindful of their line of credit and ensure that their accounts receivable don’t get out of hand. By focusing on companies that are easy to sell to and where your product or service fits seamlessly, you can make your clients successful and maintain a steady growth trajectory.

The entrepreneurial operating system (EOS) is a valuable framework that helps businesses achieve consistency. By setting firm foundational corners, such as data, people, and core processes, businesses can create a structured environment where everyone can succeed. For sales departments, this means formalizing not only the messaging but also the reporting structure, job descriptions, core goals, and key behaviors. Consistency in these areas leads to reliable and repeatable results.

A repeatable sales process is crucial. If everything is custom, nothing is standardized, and this can lead to chaos. Sales leaders must set the standard for consistency, and both business owners and salespeople need to align themselves with these consistent behaviors. Standardizing the sales process enables better forecasting and a more predictable customer flow.

Read the rest of the article…

The Buyer’s Clock Starts Before Your Sales Team Notices

A buyer does not become urgent when your CRM creates a record. The buyer became urgent earlier; at that moment, they decided the problem was worth interrupting their day for.

That distinction matters because too many B2B companies design their inbound process around internal workflow rather than buyer momentum. A prospect searches, compares, reads, evaluates, talks to a peer, visits your site, reviews your proof, and finally raises their hand. Then the company they contacted responds as though the buyer has agreed to wait patiently while marketing automation, CRM routing, territory logic, rep availability, and inbox notifications sort themselves out.

That is not a speed problem. It is a revenue system problem.

The real issue is not whether a sales rep should call faster. Of course they should. The deeper question is whether the business can detect, interpret, prioritize, enrich, route, and respond to buyer intent while the buyer still cares. When the answer is no, the company loses revenue without realizing it. The lost buyer does not announce their departure. They simply book with someone else, cool off, or decide the issue can wait.

This is why inbound orchestration deserves executive attention. High-intent inbound activity is not a generic lead flow. A demo request from a target-fit company is not the same as a newsletter signup. A pricing inquiry is not the same as a content download. Treating all of them as “leads” may simplify reporting, but it destroys commercial judgment.

When every lead looks the same, nothing feels urgent.

Read the rest of the article…

Revenue Forecasting Should Be Built on Evidence, Not Hope

Most sales forecasts are not really forecasts. They are seller opinions, manager adjustments, CRM fields, historical averages, and optimism packaged into a number that leadership is expected to trust.

That may have been acceptable when forecasting was mostly an internal sales exercise. It is not acceptable when the board, finance, hiring plans, customer success capacity, and investor expectations are all tied to the revenue number.

The core problem is not that sales leaders are careless. The problem is that many revenue teams are still using an architecture that cannot produce predictability. Spreadsheets, commit calls, and stage rollups organize information, but they do not necessarily reveal the buyer’s truth.

The better question is not, “How confident is the rep?”

The better question is, “What did the buyer actually do?”

That shift changes the entire operating model. Forecasting moves from hope-based to evidence-based. Deals are no longer judged by the confidence in a seller’s voice but by observable buyer behavior: recent engagement, executive involvement, mutual action plans, legal or procurement movement, real next steps, and date-driven urgency.

This is where artificial intelligence and revenue intelligence become useful, but only if the management system is ready for them. AI can identify patterns, detect risk, surface stalled deals, and compare buyer behavior against historical outcomes. But it cannot compensate for weak sales processes, vague stage definitions, poor CRM hygiene, or managers who refuse to inspect the evidence.

Read the rest of the article…

How Bad CRM Data Breaks AI, Sales Processes, and Pipeline Growth

Most sales leaders do not have a prospecting problem. They have a data-confidence problem disguised as a prospecting problem.

The team is working. Reps are calling, emailing, sequencing, researching, and updating the CRM. But when the data is stale, duplicated, incomplete, or legally questionable, every downstream motion becomes weaker. Outreach gets slower. Messaging becomes less precise. Sales processes become harder to manage. Forecasts become less reliable. AI recommendations become faster, but not necessarily smarter.

That is the real issue with B2B sales intelligence today. Too many companies still evaluate data providers with a phonebook mentality. They ask who has the most contacts, the biggest database, the broadest coverage, or the lowest cost per seat. Those questions are easy to compare, but they rarely answer the question that matters: will this data perform against our ICP, in our market, inside our sales stack?

Artificial intelligence raises the standard. AI tools depend on clean, structured, identity-resolved data. If the CRM has three versions of the same person, five versions of the same account, outdated titles, invalid email addresses, disconnected phone numbers, and inconsistent fields, AI will not fix the problem. It will operationalize the problem.

Identity resolution is the missing discipline. It is the ability to recognize that the same person or company appears across multiple systems and create one authoritative record. Without it, lead scoring, personalization, enrichment, intent data, pipeline analysis, and Revenue management all become suspect.

This is why sales management must treat data infrastructure as a strategic operating issue, not a software-administration issue. Bad data burns money in several directions at once. You pay for the data subscription. You pay reps to manually verify what the subscription should have solved. You pay sales operations to clean up the mess. Then you lose revenue because your team is working on bad records while competitors are already in the right relationships.

Read the rest of the article…