As a sales manager, you need to design your sales territories in a way that maximizes your team's performance and efficiency. But how do you decide whether to use a balanced or unbalanced territory design? In this article, we'll explain the benefits and challenges of each approach, and how to choose the best one for your situation.
A balanced territory design is when you assign your sales reps to territories that have roughly equal potential, workload, and difficulty. This means that each rep has a fair chance of reaching their quota, and that no one is overworked or underutilized. A balanced territory design can help you create a more motivated, productive, and satisfied sales team, as well as reduce turnover and conflict.
Yes, this is balanced and is really only good for the manager who struggles to manage and needs rules to use a s a crutch. Balanced territories look good on presentations. But your teams aren’t balanced so why should the territories be. Let your best take on more. They earned it and will need to work to keep it. For those not at the top a smaller territory gives them time to improve and less pressure. You will have to manage a little harder and the territory may look like a bucket full of minnows, it will be worth it on pay day
Once an organization understands account quality; revenue potential and propensity to buy, it can fairly distribute accounts, based on tenure and track record in order to maximize the performance of the organization.
An unbalanced territory design is when you assign your sales reps to territories that have different levels of potential, workload, and difficulty. This means that some reps have more opportunities and challenges than others, and that their quotas and compensation may vary accordingly. An unbalanced territory design can help you align your sales resources with your market opportunities, and leverage the strengths and preferences of your sales reps.
In my experience having an unbalanced territory design can be more profitable for the organization. It also allows for representatives to have different levels of skills and ability to work with a customer that best fits strengths and preferences of reps. There are ways to compensate based on skill, type of business, and account growth.
In my decades of sales leadership, having unbalanced territories with "haves and have-nots" is one of the single most common killers of performance. Reps with too many great accounts never seems to reap enough of the potential and others with too little are constantly struggling to make numbers and contribute to the team's success.
A balanced territory design can offer several advantages, such as promoting a sense of fairness and equity among your sales reps. This can help reduce the risk of burnout, frustration, and boredom, which can improve performance and retention. Furthermore, it simplifies your sales planning and forecasting by allowing you to use the same metrics and assumptions for all territories. Additionally, it encourages collaboration and teamwork among your sales reps, as they can share best practices and learn from each other.
Having fair and balanced territories is simply the best way to balance the workload and set each individual and the team up for success. Having fair and balanced territories is one of the most critical factors that will facilitate repeatable and predictable success. Having balanced territories is also a great way to improve sales culture and minimize frustration.
Balanced territory design can present a number of challenges, such as not reflecting the reality and diversity of your market, limiting sales growth and innovation, demotivating or discouraging sales reps, and requiring more frequent adjustments and reallocations. This is because some territories may have more potential or competition than others, you may miss out on high-value or emerging opportunities, sales reps may not feel rewarded or recognized for their efforts or results, and market conditions and customer needs may change over time.
Without a methodical way of scoring and ranking account potential, creating balanced territories is very challenging. An organization must have a modeling technique in order to measure and prioritize account revenue whitespace.
An unbalanced territory design can offer several advantages, such as allowing you to match sales representatives to territories that best suit their skills, experience, and interests. This design enables you to allocate resources according to strategic priorities and goals, and it can foster a culture of accountability and meritocracy among reps. Additionally, it can stimulate sales creativity and agility by exploring and exploiting new or niche opportunities in certain territories.
In my experience the benefits of unbalanced territory is Happier representatives. More team work. Sales does not have to be rep vs rep. It’s rep vs their goals. It allows for reps to be CEO of their territory.
The only logical result of unbalanced territories is frustration and spotty performance. Certain sellers will consistently beat numbers and make money while others will be starved out of the organization. Territory balance is one of the key factor's to organizational success.
An unbalanced territory design can present a number of challenges, such as creating a sense of inequality and resentment among sales reps, increasing stress, complicating sales planning and forecasting, and requiring more careful monitoring and support. These issues can lead to a decrease in trust and cooperation between sales reps, as well as an impact on their well-being and quality of service. In order to ensure success, it is important to make sure that sales reps are adequately trained, equipped, and motivated for their territories.
benefits of a balanced territory design? A balanced territory design can offer several advantages, such as promoting a sense of fairness and equity among your sales reps. This can help reduce the risk of burnout, frustration, and boredom, which can improve performance and retention. An unbalanced territory design can present a number of challenges, such as creating a sense of inequality and resentment among sales reps, increasing stress, complicating sales planning and forecasting, and requiring more careful monitoring and support.