Why are we still talking about Data? A guide to fixing the biggest problem in your commission system.

Human nature is to fix problems, when and where they begin to manifest themselves. This couldn’t be truer with how people approach commissions calculations for sales people. When data comes into a commission system, oftentimes there are issues that need to be scrubbed, re-worked, debated, denied, among many things. So when we don’t fix the source of the problem, but correct it downstream, isn't it like having a broken window in your house, but turning up the heat so it doesn’t get cold? I mean it corrects the issue, but it’s costly, and opens you up to other issues.

So let's think about how we approach our commission system and implementations. First lets create a map, what does it look like? Then let's set out to ask questions about where the information comes from, where it ends up, and what happens to it along this wonderful journey. My favorite method is to start at the end and work my way back, kind of how I cheat on puzzles.

So when creating a picture of this system, let's start with who consumes the commission data. This would be in the form of reports, data feeds, workflow and math (you know, those crazy things you call plans).

When walking through commissions systems, I often ask for the plans and reports. These are typical end points for information to be consumed. How does this impact data issues you ask? It is the final picture where all the data needed is consolidated to provide the user a holistic view of what the information is going to provide. This could be my commission payments, how my team is doing, how I need to accrue for future payments, and so on. By creating this picture, and then diving into the details (think mock reports with data definitions) one can start to understand where the information needs to come from. Ultimately this is what we are getting to, where is this data coming from, and what does it look like? See, we in the commissions world like to blame others for the inadequacies of their systems and data, but maybe it’s our interpretation and usage that is awry. When we start building these plans for our sales or commissioned friends, we often just come up with natural language, with no thought for how it might be getting used by several other groups.

The overriding point I am making here is that it isn’t always the responsibility of the commission system, or subsequent feeds to that system, to clean the data, but incumbent upon the users and implementations to understand what data they need to display, what their options are, and how to approach. We have come so far from having to create Informatica mappings to do everything, that we should be now looking for better clarity in our upstream systems, namely our CRM, Accounting, and HRIS systems. Most of the time, problems occur when there is a switch over from one system to another, like moving from SFDC to MS Dynamics CRM. When these shifts occur, the upstream system should be responsible for making sure that the data is clean and whole. Two other problems we find are inadequate data entry by either sales or operations, and inability to link sales data to accounting. These issues are a fundamental failure of upstream systems understanding what calculations, reporting and analytics are needed by the organization to monitor company health.

So rather than take the problem on to the commissions or operations organization, why not appropriately identify where these types of problems come from and correct at the source?

One example would be providing a better method of entry for sales and operations people into the CRM, or make them aware of the importance of what they are doing. Why not provide these groups a guided way to appropriately enter the information you are looking for? With the ability to auto fill, utilize workflow, create robotic automations, and utilize AI such as openAI, why shouldn’t we expect our upstream data creators and system providers to get what we need to conduct business correctly? There should be no need for endless transformations to do data checks and massaging. These items should be fixed and outlier reports should be created as a failsafe in case of any problems from the upstream source.

Another example, such as connecting accounting and CRM data can be managed as a data store in either system. Depending on which CRM you use, the data can be stored in custom objects within the CRM itself. So if you have a need to connect Dynamics CRM and SAP Accounting, one could simply create a power app or power automate workflow to store the information in the CRM, or Azure data store. This again allows for the upstream system to own and connect, as they should.

By doing this, you take away much of the headache of errors, delays, disputes, and confidence. This would also push the problems to the people who they affect the most and make them responsible for the correction. When did the commissions department become responsible for bad behavior and bad design? I think it's high time that the systems that feed us become responsible and assist the commissions team in their plight to provide guidance to the sales reps, sound and clean information to the finance department, and smiles around to leadership.