Following the ChatCRO3 podcast with Lee Bierton at Ebsta, I decided to write another blog about their excellent 2024 Sales Benchmark Report. This time they have decided to take a narrower lens, one that focuses on top performers.
With only 31% of reps, according to the 2024 report, hitting their sales targets. The gap between the best performers and everyone else is getting bigger.
This article is for CEOs, CROs and Sales Leaders interested in how to improve performance, it is based on the Ebsta Sales Benchmark 2024 report, my experiences and what I think really matters.
The state of sales in 2024
We saw win rates down -18%, compared to 2022 and budget restrictions really took hold in 2023 with average deal sizes shrinking -21%. Whilst there is good news in the number of opportunities increasing by +23%, this was counteracted by deal slippages rising +44%. When deals slipped this also had a significant effect on win rates, over -67% on deals that were delayed by over 8 weeks. Once again showing that a bigger pipeline hides a multitude of sins.
When digging into the rep performance, the underlying data gives us more insight into why the top performers are so important, only 15% of companies have 50% or more of their reps hit 80%+ attainment and this is against the backdrop of reduced quotas, typically -19% less.
The delta between top performers and the rest is now at 8.9x compared to 6x during 2022. This means that 17% of reps are delivering 81% of revenue. All of which inevitably led to rep turnover rising from 22% in 2022 to 36% in 2023.
The Multiplier Effect
It is fair to say that things are tough. If win rates and deal sizes shrink that has a multiplier effect on quota attainment, when added to expansion of sales cycles the effect is even more significant.
Using the basic quota attainment calculation of Number of Opportunities x Conversion Rate x Average Deal Size, I have overlaid the Ebsta findings over the past 2 years on a fictional starting point. It shows that on average reps will have -55% less yield from their efforts.
| Example | 2022 Change | 2023 | 2023 Change | 2024 | |
| Opps created | 100 | 3% | 97 | 23% | 119 |
| Close Rate | 33% | 15% | 28% | 18% | 23% |
| Ave Deal size | $50,000 | 32% | $34,000 | 21% | $26,860 |
| Total | $1,650,000 | $925,089 | $737,105 | ||
| YoY Yield reduction | 43.93% | 20.32% | |||
| Overall Yield reduction | 55.33% | ||||
| Velocity – days | 90 | 32% | 16% | 16% | |
| 104.4 | 121.104 | ||||
| Sales cycles in year | 4.1 | 3.5 | 3.0 | ||
| Extension of cycles | 34.64% | 14.29% |
In addition there are less sales cycles in a year, over the 2 year period based on this model it is an entire sales cycle. This does not even include deals slipped which is at a massive 44%. All of which makes the success of top performers even more extraordinary.
3 Things top performers do differently
Given all of this information it seems extraordinary that people are hitting targets, so what are your top performers doing differently? Whilst the study identifies multiple areas of difference, I am going to focus on just 3, which can be immediately addressed through coaching and process. These areas of difference are; Qualification, Objection Handling and Deal Management.
1. Qualification
This seems obvious, but there is a lot packed into this one area for top performers. The fundamentals in this stage of the sales process are that the rep is trying to work out if this is a winnable deal, that the customer can be helped and that they meet the criteria of the ICP.
Qualification Quality – Top performers are 588% more likely to use a sales methodology. Yes, read that again, they are 588% more likely. This is not a coincidence, it is the first indicator of competency and capability of a high quality sales rep.
My recommended approach is MEDDIC (Ebsta use MEDDPICC). I have seen many reps see this as homework, rather than doing what top performers do, which is to use the information gathered as insights to drive the deal effectively. The quality of their engagement in qualification is on another planet.
The best reps are at 80% of MEDDIC qualification by the solution presented stage, on average meeting 5.2 people and across 5.6 meetings. This means that by the time they present your solution they have real insight into the account and the various stakeholders. They are engaging influential stakeholders earlier in the sales cycle with the appropriate messaging and building consensus.
Top reps are a whopping 489% more likely to engage the Economic Buyer by the solution presented stage. These reps have not only met the key stakeholder, but other important influencers, they have a handle on the mechanics of the deal and they have begun seeding the core messages into the customer, all before a solution is presented.
Qualifying out – Top performers are 366% more likely to qualify out at the Discovery stage of the sales process. These reps value their time, and they really understand the offering, knowing when they can win and when they cannot. What is more interesting is why they qualify out.
Average performers closed lost deals for the following reasons; lack of budget (22%), not a priority (20%), competitor (14%). When speaking to a rep recently about this information, their view was that these are soft reasons to lose a deal, he’s right. Ebsta classified them as “Indecision” (61% overall), which is a polite way of saying, you were not even close to winning the deal.
In contrast the top rep reasons for closed lost deals are Lack of features (25%) and Lack of a clear ROI (10%), these reps have approximately half the rate of the indecision reasons above for lower performers.
This means that these reps are clear which deals will be winnable and which ones are not. They will not waste time trying to win a deal that they don’t have the features to deliver, a critical element within the SaaS world. And if they cannot identify an ROI, they know they can’t win as they will not be able to drive deals into the Economic Buyer.
2. Handling Objections with Key Stakeholders
Top performers are 843% more likely to overcome objections, this is one of the most striking insights in this report that demonstrates the disparity between the top performers and the rest. It would seem that this is a hurdle that average performers are unable to overcome.
This element is linked really closely to qualification. As established your top performers are significantly more likely to qualify out at the Discovery sales stage. One of their key considerations was identifying an ROI. Ebsta shows that when an ROI is presented early, deals progress quickly, but if the customer’s Economic Buyer raises this after the Solution Presented stage (the midpoint of a sales cycle – typically) then the likelihood of closing drops by 79%.
When this view is combined with the quality of relationship, it deepens the picture. These reps are 519% more likely to have the required high quality relationships, and not only do they access the Economic Buyer more effectively they are 241% more likely to do so by the solution presented stage than average performers. Top reps have 9 contacts engaged by solution presented stage whilst lost deals have on average just 2.
What is happening here? Based on my experience I believe that top reps are actively seeking to drive out objections as part of their qualification. They then continue to test that quality of engagement with an ROI. If they cannot find one they Close Lost the opportunity and move on. However, the key is who they are doing it with, the easy answer would be more people, but to get to economic buyers they will need to find their way around more stakeholders and address more objections. Not only are they addressing objections, they are addressing them early and with the right people. This is a key difference and a matrix moment, when you see it you can’t unsee it.
3. Deal Management
It is no surprise that your best reps manage deals better. They are already qualifying harder and addressing objections early. A simple insight is that top reps are 412% more likely to have a next step or meeting defined. They aren’t doing it to fill in the box in your CRM (sales leaders are obsessed with next actions) they are doing it for themselves, they want momentum, they want to agree what happens next with the customer. You can easily identify the difference just by looking at the notes. If they say, “I need to schedule a meeting” as a next step, this is bad. If they say “next meeting scheduled with Sarah, to discuss the implementation process”, that is good. It’s not that complex to see why they are different in this single lens.
It is this kind of proactivity that sets them apart. Not only do they create momentum and engage more stakeholders but they move through stages quicker. If a deal spends more than 50% longer in qualification it is 120% more likely to slip.
What would I do?
I have long since held the belief that the quality of sales training provided by companies is extremely poor. We see investment into such approaches as automated software for outbound sequences replace this investment in improving the quality of sales people. What is clear from the report is that there are enough opportunities for the best reps, therefore the focus should be on the improvement of the engagement. Train your reps to do the following;
Qualification
When I talk about qualification I am referring to an opportunity, not the decision to accept a lead, that’s a whole other story (blog?). It is clear that top performers are qualifying differently. It is too easy to think you have found an ICP deal from the external firmographics of a company, the real gold lies in what they are trying to do and who owns that problem.
In the context of MEDDIC the key factors in stage 1 are the identification of the Economic Buyer (EB), the clarification of a Metric (M) and the development of a Champion (C). The closer you get to solving the problem that the EB sees the more likely you are to win, and you will need the Metric to formulate the ROI they are seeking and a Champion to help you navigate the organisation.
Train your reps to do these things and understand how to use the information to advance the deal. You are unlikely to complete all of the elements for these 3 parts of MEDDIC in stage one, but there will be a threshold over which you have a deal that is likely to be winnable.
Relationship Mapping
Relationship mapping should have a goal, in the first case it should be to identify the EB, but with the help of your Champion you should be able to identify the other key stakeholders with which you have to gain consensus.
There are too many deals in pipelines that have 1 or 2 contacts only. It doesn’t matter that your one contact is the CEO, there are more people to engage and understand to make the deal.
I would strongly recommend having a clear idea of the key contacts within an ICP. Be specific about what the goals of the different contacts would be, and set about the task of engaging all of them as part of your sales process. A simple exercise to improve this would be the development of a messaging matrix for the key stakeholders within your ICP for your offering.
It would be a good idea to measure the number of these identified contacts that are being added to the CRM, and if they have a meeting against them. It is an improvement that you know who they are, but you need to engage them in the perspective they hold for your solution.
Objection Handling
Your company knows what the typical objections are likely to be, train everyone else on it and play out scenarios with reps, using this as coaching opportunities.
In my experience there is a simple way to bring out those objections in customers, that is to pose them as questions. Some examples could be;
“How successful have you been at bringing about change?”
“What are your other priorities at this time and how would they rank against this area?”
“What is typically the largest barrier to change?”
These questions bring out the objections, and you can then address them directly. Start by having a set of core questions with your answers, and build out from them once your reps start engaging in this way, there will definitely be a lot more to add.
Final Thoughts
Great reps are hard to find, but you can improve all of your reps, by understanding what works and implementing ideas into your sales process. Don’t be afraid to do simulated calls, it seems odd to me that people don’t want to do this, but it gives you a chance to see your reps in action, to coach them and replay with the new insight.
Training reps is a positive move, but if you can train them on these key areas, the gains, as highlighted above, are extraordinary. Sales is not complex but it is hard, in my experience reps want to be better, the responsibility is on you to deliver for them.
The NOT so secret CRO 
Leave a comment