When we’re managing a rep, we don’t just sit and wait to see if they hit their number. We don’t rely on a lagging indicator to find out if they’ve done a good job after the quarter is over.
Right?
We look at their activities and behaviours day in, day out. We spend time with them in 1:1’s to understand what really makes them tick. We look for consistency and repeatability in their actions.
So why do we only seem to measure managers after the fact by “did your team make their number” or “how accurate was your forecast”?
Shouldn’t we take a similar proactive approach to understanding, guiding and measuring what they do? We need to understand how they got the team to the number, rather than just IF they did (or not). Once we know the “how” we can replicate across teams, drive consistency, and improve performance.
But there’s a reluctance to bring that kind of scrutiny as if it undermines the work that managers do. There’s even more sensitivity to micromanaging at this level. There’s a lot of “I just expect them to get the job done”.
Is that a legitimate fear though?
What’s the worst that could happen? 😉