Management | The Sales Engineer

Virtual Lab

July 3, 2008 By Darrin Mourer

In the last of my three-part series on the SE lab, I want to cover the concept of lab centralization and virtualization. Once a sales organization reaches a certain size it stands to gain from economies of scale in various areas, labs being one of them. Because of the length of this entry I have divided it into 3a and 3b.

When a sales organization is small, for the most part the SE’s lab is his/her own set up at the office or at home. When the organization grows to the point of supporting regional sales teams with several SEs per region, it usually makes sense to create regional labs where SEs can experience the benefits I outlined in my previous post. When the organization grows large enough, or has extensive technology requirements, it makes sense to take the lab to the next step.

Creating a central lab environment has several benefits:

Focused investment – Budget can be pooled within the organization to invest in hardware that would not be feasible at the regional level.
Better management- Pooling resources allows for the possibility of dedicated personnel to managing the environment, meaning SEs don’t have to.
Formal strategy – A project of this size will require proper planning and maintenance to ensure success. This is often a problem that afflicts regional labs.
Higher utilization – Better resources mean more value for the SE which lead to increased adoption.
Remote access- SEs can leverage the environment from home and at the customer site which may be invaluable for proof of concept.

If you are in the business of selling software, you can also heavily benefit from virtualization. While up to this point I have used lab in a very generic sense, a central lab can be used specifically to enhance product demos and as proof of concept.

Demos
With everyone having access to the same virtual environment, SEs can use this as a launch platform for creating enhanced demos that would not be doable with a laptop. SEs should be able to share these demos with others. Having a standard demo catalog with the best of the best content is a great way to drive additional revenue. SE management/enablement and marketing can also leverage the work that SEs create and incorporate them into the master library. If you really want to get fancy, you can start tracking this in your CRM to statistically determine which demos work better than others. This is all part of building a repeatable sales process.

Proof of concept
Some companies use evaluation and proof of concept interchangeably. Sometimes a customer just wants to kick the tires without an SE. Sometimes the customer needs to see the product in action to validate the technical specs and sales presentation. Allowing SEs to build a environment that matches the specific requirement of the customer can be a huge time saver for both sides. It also reduces risk to the opportunity be being able to run the POC in a controlled and familiar environment.

Microsoft goes even further and has integrated this strategy into their corporate marketing efforts on their website. With many of their products, you can register onlineand get access to a virtual environment with a demo script to evaluate the product remotely–without an SE! This can take a huge load off the channel or SMB SE’s shoulders. It also gives your corporate SEs an alternate option of letting a customer self evaluate in a controlled and scripted environment. This is especially useful for opportunities that you would not deem appropriate for a full SE-led evaluation.

Training
One other very valuable use of this type of platform is as a training aid. Instead of trying to get access to a classroom with a purpose-built set up, or messing around with virtual machines on laptops, you can configure the labs ahead of time, virtually, and allow students to access them through the browser on their laptops. Whereas the demo and proof of concept provide additional revenue opportunity, this is an easy way to demonstrate cost savings to the company.

In the follow up post I will detail the process and considerations for building out a virtual lab.

Filed Under: Demo, Lab, Management, Marketing, Proof of Concept, Roles & Responsibilities, Sales, Training Tagged With: Demo, Lab, Management, Marketing, Proof of Concept, Roles & Responsibilities, Sales, Training

Reporting Structure

June 17, 2008 By Darrin Mourer

Here’s how it typically goes:

A startup hires a VP of Sales. S/he actively sells to customers until enough growth or funding comes in that a team of reps can be hired. The reps will be expected to be very well versed in the product details. In super technical areas, an initial SE or two may be hired to support the sales staff and perhaps participate in services implementations.

The next level of growth changes dramatically based on several variables.

The two somewhat conflicting goals when considering the reporting structure are:

Checks and balances
Sales alignment

Checks and Balances
In a perfect world, reps and SEs would be ideally compensated on fostering deep, long-term relationships with customers. Because this is usually not the case (they end up being purely quota based), sales engineering has morphed into having a check and balance responsibility on the account. Ask any customer which vendor role has higher credibility, reps or SEs, and SEs will always win out.

If I was a sales manager that would stop me in my tracks. I can’t think of a more dangerous symptom as this effectively means a lack of trust pervades the relationship with the customer. Why most sales organizations accept that as business is usual absolutely confounds me, but that’s a separate topic. Because of more frequent turnover, overt focus on quota, changing account assignments, or similar systemic problems, SEs are often the bedrock of the customer relationship. They are trusted. SEs are put in a position of checking and balancing the rep within the account (i.e. the true guardian of the relationship).

For the record I don’t think that’s right, but I do understand that that’s how it is most of the time. With that in mind, as the sales organization grows, a separate SE management chain is usually in order to prevent the SE getting steamrolled on the account team.

The 2nd aspect of this system is that most reps and sales managers have never been in the SE role. I personally believe that most sales managers could manage SEs quite effectively. There have, however, been enough that couldn’t that it has more or less removed that as an option for all but the small and/or extremely enlightened sales organizations.

I do understand the inherent difficulty. Good SEs can bring extreme clarity to complicated scenarios. If you’ve never been in that position, it’s very easy to not notice the extent of preparation that goes into it. Things like extensive product and industry training, trade shows, lab time, customer presentation or demonstration prep, technical research, etc. can all seem like time spent not selling. Simple is HARD, and it takes time. Time out of the field is still one of the hottest debated issues between sales and SE management today. Having the SE manager as the gatekeeper to taking this time away from the SE, thus, is a necessity to ensure maximum effectiveness.

Alignment
Removing the need of checks and balances, it makes the most sense to get everyone on the same team and as close to the customer as possible. This means that reps and SEs would report to the regional/district sales manager and be tied to specific accounts. If we need the checks and balances what is the next best thing? Optimally you want an SE leader for every line of business that your sales organization is broken down into and reporting to a sales director or higher depending on the size of the company. Putting SE managers reporting into regional/district managers does not create enough separation to implement the gatekeeper role.

Having a central SE organization under the head of sales can also work, though it can introduce some tough political issues. Sales directors will all feel they not getting enough resources, or will be tempted to lay blame for loss of sales on the SE organization (scapegoating).

Breaking SEs up into more than one group can have disadvantages of less pooling of resources or fewer conversations between areas, though this can mostly be solved with the assignment of central person/team that can act as a coordination point. This is especially important in larger companies that can benefit significantly from combined budgets for training, events, lab resources, etc.

If you’ve had superior results with a particular model, I’d love to hear about it.

Filed Under: Management, Roles & Responsibilities, Sales

The Need for Training

June 10, 2008 By Darrin Mourer

One of the advantages of working for a company highly specialized around one or two products is that it is easier to stay on top of product knowledge. When your portfolio of products grows and begins to touch a lot of other technology is when the issue of training takes center stage.

So how much time should you be spending on training as an SE?

If you ask a rep or sales manager the answer will be astonishingly low. If you ask product managers the answer may be quite high. In reality there are many factors that influence this and will vary from company to company. My criteria include:

How many products are there in the portfolio?
How vertical in nature is the SE position? Does it include implementation and support or is it strictly presales?
How intricate is the technology (desktop apps or ERP for example)?
How many other technologies do the products interact with?
Who is the primary buyer, influencer, etc. in the account? The higher up it goes the less technical the SE needs to be.
How often does the portfolio turn (i.e. new versions released)?

As each of these goes up, the training requirements increase. This is because the SE is increasingly responsible for knowing information that is in flux. That aspect can be part of the allure of being an SE, but without adequate allowance for training it is a huge morale killer. Regardless of the position, people that do not have the necessary tools/information to perform their job feel disempowered and overwhelmed. This makes training a very important consideration for the company and SE manager.

My general rule of thumb is 4-6 hours every week (or 10-15% of a theoretical 40 hour work week). Depending on the answers to the questions above, the slider may move up or down by 5% or so. In a separate post I’ll go into the benefit of scheduling a full lab day every week. Part of that purpose is to allow for necessary training.

So what can each of us do to maximize the value of training?

The Sales Engineer

Know your learning style
Take advantage of down time by always having education resources available on your laptop, Kindle, iPod, etc.
Put yourself in situations to learn from other SEs. No one knows better the key information you need than a fellow SE. The lab day is great for this.
Never rely on others to provide all the training you need to maximize your effectiveness. Don’t be afraid to dive in to product manuals, go through real installs, and test scenarios out for yourself. Good or bad, your ability to learn on your own has to be a skill you hone if you want to be considered one of the best.
Always push yourself to acquire knowledge beyond any narrow confines of your current position. Learn about supporting technologies, business strategy, soft skills, etc.

The Company

Develop and religiously fight for consistent training programs.
Publish everything in multiple formats to support various learning methods.
Subscribe to books online services that allow your folks to go right to the best sources of 3rd party information.
Celebrate learning and ensure all employees have access to the best training possible. A Learning Organization may be the only sustainable competitive advantage.

SE Managers

Zealously support your team’s right to take an adequate amount of time out of the field to focus on training.
Give your team a training allowance and let them go crazy on Amazon or attend seminars.
Encourage your people to seek self improvement beyond the confines of their current job. This can include books but also formal education and certification as well.

I consider myself to be a voracious reader/learner and I can’t say enough good things about the personal value I feel I have received by continually pushing this envelope.

Good luck in your own studies!

Filed Under: Certification, Management, Training

Forecasting for SEs

June 4, 2008 By Darrin Mourer

Depending on your sales organization, you may or may not be heavily involved with the official forecasting process. The most optimal forecast process involves the rep working collaboratively with the SE and any other sales team member (e.g. inside rep) to set the forecast. At the end of the day the reps need to have final say as they are the ones directly responsible for quota attainment. The forecast process should be well defined with as little subjectivity as possible. This leads to a far more amicable relationship with sales management. If this is how it works at your company, I would be impressed, as this seems to be a small minority of sales departments.

To me there are three essential ingredients to a successful forecast:

1) Trust – If the sales team does not trust that they can be open and honest with sales management—or will be penalized in any way for doing so—the data input into the process will reflect it. In other words, we’ll lie.

2) Process – If forecasting in your company is an art and not science, the forecast, in aggregate, will have high variance. Just ask your CEO/CTO or stockholders what they think of variance in financial data.

3) Communication – If the person entering the data does not have a complete picture of the opportunity, the forecast will be made based on false assumptions.

At the sales management level, you will have varying influence on all three. Since this focus in on the SE, let’s spend some time on what we have some control over, which is communication. Since you’ve read this far, I’m hoping you already inherently see the benefit of working with your rep to ensure the forecast is as accurate as possible. I can think of a couple tangible benefits:

- Sales teams that have a high degree of forecasting accuracy are (rightfully) seen as having a better handle on the business. This gets folks higher pay and more promotions.

- Management tends to leave you alone and allow you more leeway in your daily routine and with potentially more perks.

- If you really like your rep, it helps ensure they stay around. If they are seen as senior people, they also may get more influence on account selection.

Sales managers are primarily judged on quota attainment, but that is an incomplete statement. Consider manager A that over the course of 3 years comes in at 70%, 140%, and 90% of forecast versus manager B that comes in at 90%, 92%, and 91%. A averages 100% while B averages 91%.

If I was the VP of Sales, I would prefer manager B other things being equal. Why? I’d sleep better at night. What would scare me with A is that I don’t know if we’re feast or famine. I would be spending a lot of time with A in coaching and micro management sessions. If I had the chance, I would promote B to watch over and help the As.

This example is why you can reap benefits helping your rep be as accurate as they can be. Now, I’m not a fan of blaming problems on the “communication” scapegoat. Far too many things can be loosely tied to poor communication to make it very useful for us. So here are some tactical examples of things we can do improve accuracy.

Sales Process

Use the chosen sales technology/process at your company mercilessly. It’s a huge pain in the ass, but long term, forcing your team to use the established guidelines prods you to use the same diction. It also subconsciously forces you to begin thinking the same way. If everyone is always keeping their eye out for the “technical decision maker,” “key product champion,” “sponsor,” etc. you will find that everyone begins to navigate the sales process in similar fashion. What you are essentially doing is adding more rigid process to the sales cycle which improves forecast accuracy.

Continuous Review

After every meet and greet, presentation, demonstration, etc. spend 5 minutes after the event breaking down the meeting with your rep. Talk about what went right, what went wrong, next steps, and generally work toward making sure what both of you heard from the customer is consistent. If there is ambiguity, address it in your follow up communications with the customer. What you’re doing in creating a habit of having micro dialogues that help keep you in sync. Trying to do this in email after the fact is a sure way of ensuring it never gets looked at. You can reinforce with writing (especially since you’ll want to do it anyway for your sales tool), but get in the habit of doing it in person right after the fact. Quarterly Business Reviews (QBRs) are fine, just make sure they happen in addition to frequent dialogue

Learn the Process

In most companies forecast reviews are not pleasurable experiences. It involves reps saying the least amount of words possible that allows them to leave the meeting without two black eyes from the sales manager (one is acceptable). Most of the time SEs are not required attendees. Most reps do not even want their SEs present to remove the possibility of providing the sales manager with conflicting data. Even still, you need to go to a few of them. The purpose is nothing more than to become as familiar with the forecasting process as your rep. Even if your reps dislike you for doing it initially, they should at least respect you. This is other side of the coin in terms of the sales process. Common terms, common process, and common experience should equal better and more effective communication.

For the SE Managers out there, it is your job to help your SEs see the benefit of becoming active in the forecast process. It’s not necessarily intuitive even for many senior SEs. Spend some time during your next meeting going over some best practices. Even better, invite a sales manager or director to deliver a talk about the importance of this process from their perspective. Most folks don’t know what happens to the forecast after it goes to the sales manager, so it could be quite an eye-opening experience to see the process end-to-end.

Filed Under: Management, Sales, Terminology

Value of Certification for SEs

May 21, 2008 By Darrin Mourer

Almost all of us at one point have had to get certified in a particular product. In some industries it is job critical and others it can be seen as nice to have. I’ve run into very few certifications that have actually been a detriment to advertise—though 8-10 years ago my Microsoft certifications got me uninvited to a couple UNIX shops.

Some SEs live and die by their certifications, even though it is not a job requirement. I know some that would rather schedule a visit to the dentist than Prometric. As with most things there is not a clear answer to the debate. Here is my take.

In the workplace, everyday, big decisions are made, deals are won and lost, and events take place that hinge on the slimmest of margins. An associate of mine likes to call them tie breakers.

You can not afford to be losing the tie breakers.

There are many different types of tie breakers: your dress, your speech, your likability, reputation, trust, credibility, etc. If you take a look at ways you could influence some of these (especially the last 3), I think certification definitely plays a positive role.

There are several situations to consider. If you walk into an account right after an SE from a different company pitching the same type of solution, who might a customer believe is more credible? Someone with no industry certifications or someone with 6 acronyms after their name. If you’re vying for a promotion and it comes down between you and someone with similar credentials, the certification may be the tie breaker. The same thing will play out in a job interview. These are some big factors in your life and is why I take every opportunity to stack the deck in my favor.

Having said that, this doesn’t necessarily come down to a yes or no discussion. You can draw the line in different spots. 1 certification or 5 or 17. Here are some things to consider:

- Are you a good test taker?
- Can you breeze through technical manuals?
- Are you still early in your career?
- Are there highly respected or coveted certifications in your field?
- Will your existing company pay for classes and/or tests?

The more yeses you have the more beneficial certification will be for you and the more of them you should seek. If you’re late in your career, like where you are, and have difficulty passing tests, you’re better off just obtaining 1. The sweet spot for most people is between 3-5. Holding too many certifications might make some people think you are compensating for other weaknesses. Of course hold as many as you like, just be more particular about which ones you publicize on your business card, email signature, and resume.

One other factor I’d like you to consider is interindustry certification. What I mean by that is pursuing a certification that is well respected and recognizable but falls outside your day-to-day job function. If you’re a desktop/server guy seek some network experience and certification. I would even go so far as to recommend certifications outside technology. You’d be amazed at what happens when you can put a CPA, CFP, Esq, etc. on your card. Not only is it a conversation starter, but invariably you’ll find others now in technology who once worked in these other fields as well. This practice works best when you already posses this knowledge from school or former profession or is a hobby of yours—otherwise it’s not worth the time investment.

Finally, as a manager, I think it is good practice to encourage your people to seek certification—and pay for it within reason. Not only are you contributing to their knowledgebase, you’re also contributing to general career growth and development. You’re also likely benefitting from a confidence booster as tests are passed. Most companies recognize this benefit and subsidize certification. If you’re not you may be taking a hit for it that you don’t realize.

So as an individual or company, don’t miss out on the tie breakers. You’ll find time/money here is well spent even if not immediately quantifiable.

Filed Under: Career Growth, Certification, Compensation, Management

Sales Engineering Specialization

May 14, 2008 By Darrin Mourer

I’ve been thinking a lot lately about how Sales Engineers pick the positions they occupy. Depending on the company you work for, the SE role can involve very different day-to-day tasks. There are some obvious and more obscure reasons to choose one company (or type of company) over the other. I don’t know that I need to cover basic aspects such as salary, benefits, culture, travel, etc. While they are important, I’m sure they have been covered elsewhere. What I’m more interested in is what aspects of being an SE draw certain people to certain roles.

To begin with some type of logical progression, let’s start with a startup. Certain products are so complex companies need to begin hiring SEs at the same time/pace as reps. In this environment the SE is able to deeply specialize in one product. The SE will probably even be a key determinant of product direction and will have a close working relationship with the developer. At the same time the SE will also be spread very thin between accounts and will be acting in a sales capacity a large portion of the time. New companies have poor territory coverage and therefore reps and SEs are not always at the same account at the same time. This situation is what I refer to as product specialized; business generalist. The SE intimately knows the product, but covers many business angles between engineering, sales, support, services, etc. From past experience (and only a slight psychology education) I am positing that this SE either 1) really enjoys or gets comfort from understanding all aspects of a product, or 2) really likes being involved in all parts of the business, or seeing the product all the way through the lifecycle as it were.

As you move in to medium size businesses, the product mix is likely still such that it is easy for the SE to maintain deep expertise across the entire product line of maybe 1-4 products, especially since there is almost always a dominant product. There is, however, much more clearly defined infrastructure to support the sale and accompanying process. The SE would be spending much more time tied to the rep and the majority of work is within a stricter definition of the SE role. To me this is product specialized; business specialized. This SE would enjoy or be more comfortable within the confines of the job description and still be able to have ultimate mastery of the technology. It also likely provides additional stability not found in startups.

When you get to large business, it gets more interesting because there is likely a continuum of responsibilities inside the SE organization. You can “specialize” as a generalist meaning you are the big picture guy/gal. You can work channel, SMB, top tier accounts, product specialist, industry verticals, etc. In that sense you can define your career (or market) as anywhere from product generalist/specialist to business generalist/specialist. If you’re at a large company you are probably there for a reason: job stability, great benefits, variety in positions available, etc., but the interesting questions to me are 1) Does the average SE understand this continuum and market themselves purposely? and 2) On what basis are they making decisions (i.e. why choose one over the other)?

Again, going back to experience to try and answer these questions, my belief is that most SEs do understand this facet, though mostly at a subconscious level. This means that for question 2, the answer is mostly instinct and not a result of careful/thoughtful planning. If you’ve never thought specifically about this concept before, it would be very beneficial for you to understand your current and desired path to see if they align. If I had my eyes set on a product manager position, it might behoove me to seek SE roles that allow me to specialize in a product line but give me wide berth in terms of business areas I touch. If your goal is try out being a rep, you’ll need wide business exposure along with a broad understanding of the portfolio, competition, marketplace, etc.

This process isn’t only about complementary skills but also about setting yourself up to meet the right people and build the right network. For example, being seen as a technology leader inside your company for a product is sure to get noticed by the product manager.

As you gain rapport with the right people and build the right skills, doors mysteriously find a way of opening.

The implications for SE managers should be clear. I think it is our duty to have these conversations with our people. Once we understand (or get our people to understand) what path they would like to take, we gain deeper insight into personality types. We can point people to roles that will set them up for success and greater satisfaction. Even if you don’t do it for the right reason, do it because your competition (internal and external) will.

Filed Under: Career Growth, Management

Sales Engineer Process and Methodology

April 30, 2008 By Darrin Mourer

I think, or at least I hope, that if you are part of any company that has made it beyond the startup phase you will have some type of sales methodology in place. I have come across my fair share of reps and SEs that see little value in such a process-some will go so far as to say it hinders their ability to sell. I’ll be the first to agree that implementing sales methodology does add some overhead to your sales team, especially at first. It would be a bad idea though to judge anything just based on the negative without looking at the positive. For those who actively resist, I pretty much guarantee will never have been accountable for anyone’s forecast except his/her own.The bottom line is that a forecast is a promise, especially from the viewpoint of the CEO, CFO, and shareholders. The company doesn’t really start operating without the sales forecast for the year. If the company’s forecast is based on anything other than science and repeatable process, you’re gambling pure and simple. Variability is your worst enemy. Minimizing it fosters stability-and thus trust-in your company.

I believe this trust is worth the extra effort.

For SEs that are reading this, it probably isn’t hard to step back and agree that reps should be doing thing. But what about SEs? Whoa, hold on a sec. How does this impact me as the SE? I participate in the account review sessions and I work with my rep to even develop the requisite account plans. Aren’t I doing my part?

As an SE you manage a technical sales cycle within the sales cycle. The technical portion of the sales cycle is mostly yours alone to manage and move forward. So here are some questions to ask yourself. Do all SEs perform the same basic demo (allowing for some tailoring) to the customer? What about presentations and product evaluations? Is everyone emphasizing the same 3-5 competitive differentiated benefits of your product to the customer and are these consistent between all touch points with the customer?

When you can answer yes to these questions you have the basic building blocks of a repeatable process with your customers. When it’s repeatable (good or bad) at least you’ll have a pretty good idea of what the outcome will be. This is how an SE organization builds trust within the sales organization.

So as a leader in your SE organization, I say it is your responsibility to drive towards the same level of process and consistency as our peers. If we want to think of ourselves as pivotal to the sales team (of which I whole heartedly believe) then we should not except or expect different treatment in the level of professionalism we bring to the table.

It’s just too damn important to ignore.