Magnus Marketing Blog

Being a nice girl I didn't use the expletive, but buying cycles are a joke. Well, maybe not totally, but that is a manufactured objection. Every sales intelligence company offers a list of decision makers, infrastructure, other junk, and "buying cycles".

You know my buying cycles. I buy milk every week before it expires, I buy gasoline every week for outrageous prices, I buy bread every week. I go to ShopRite cause of my Price Plus card, maybe Quik Chek for milk on occasion.

But, if I have a craving for Reeses, I will buy that, even if it isn't on my list. Suddenly, I realize that my bed is worn and I feel like getting a new bed, not just a mattress. I walk by and see Italian Wedding Soup at Hand and want to try it. No buying cycle, just a craving or suddenly recognized need.

My point is, for commodity items there are buying cycles and most commodity items buying cycles are known. 3 years for tech refreshes, 3 years for recycling - they are linked. Is it possible to circumvent the buying cycle? YES, if the offer or situation is compelling enough.

I mentioned earlier the ability to circumvent RFP's. This ability comes from justifying yourself and maybe tapping into an unmet need or craving or situation. Maybe there is a champion who just likes you or knows your company reputation. Recently, I had a call with my client for a major staffing initiative - there was an RFP, but because of the client reputation, capability, and knowledge - the person in charge pushed us right through. The company which is a Fortune 500 and very well known firm is giving us a shot at delivery. It is possible to find a champion with a need who will push you right through - maybe not for hardware or other real commodity items, but for other offerings and services - it is possible. My other point is even if it is a commodity type item, there always is room to supply it in a specific area. For example, maybe the major tech refresh happens every 3 years, but the salespeople are dying for new laptops NOW because the road warrior nature wears them out quicker (this is true actually) - the VP of Sales is dying, his guys can't upload their CRM notes! Maybe one could convince the VP of Sales to get onboard with the CIO to order new laptops, especially if they have some extra wireless synch capability as an incentive or have a free Adobe Connect - a cool meeting product. A recycler can jump on that as well. You get my point.

Buying cycles, for the most part, are a manufactured objection except for hardware and office supplies. Chances are also, if you encounter this - you are talking to the all controlling Purchasing Department and/or a company with bad financials that has to micromanage costs. Is this a company you want to do business with? I bet they are a slow pay. :)

I ignore buying cycles. I prefer the person to tell me on an individual level about them, I usually don't listen either and assume my pitch/value proposition wasn't strong enough if they go down that road with me. I may revisit the account with a different approach or armed with more research to really get compelling.

Strategic account research should not be used to uncover buying cycles - the point of strategic research is TO CIRCUMVENT buying cycles and find fit and value!

Here is another issue with Marketing illustrated with some stories:
Story 1: Boss insists on having admin do telemarketing. Uneducated in business, products, or offering, admin is to call validate decision-makers name, address, and contact details, send info. Marketing writes email or letter, sales follows up.
Story 2: Boss has admin compile list of decision-makers and names, validates the names.
Story 3: VP of Marketing has admin do research on companies, finding some key points and names.

What a waste of resources and opportunity!
Story 1: This is a two step process that wastes time and opportunity. The salesguy's effort is being wasted on unqualified suspects and needless follow-up, the admin's time is wasted on making calls that are fruitless. A good biz dev/marketing person will be able to cull a validated list with qualified leads in one shot.
Story 2: Having the admin research the names and contact info is OK, calling to validate the names should not happen unless the admin is prepared to pre-pitch or pitch the services.
Story 3: Is OK, unless you really want to get qualified information. One company I know of did this and called it "strategic account research", which it wasn't. If you want strategic account research you need people who can identify sales opportunities and fit.

What if your admin gets someone on the phone? In higher level decision maker cases, you have one shot - your unqualified prospector flubs and you may be out of the race for a while. The ability to recognize buying signals, listen for cues to ask the right questions, and engage in conversation are heralded to the experienced marketing, biz dev, sales person. That is where experience DOES make a difference. Think of the missed opportunity when someone misses an opportunity!

Admins play an important role. Doing strategic research and prospecting isn't part of that, save it for qualified professionals.

Hello blog visitor! Expecting tips and tricks? Believe it or not, I have given you some through the posts here:
1. Treat organizations as individuals with unique needs. Tailor your value proposition, solution set, and messaging accordingly.
2. Go beyond the high level surface stuff and dig into the firm, create a real account book.
3. Respect and talk to the salespeople.
4. It isn't about you, your company, your product/service - it is about the unique customer.
5. Quality is more important than quantity of anything determined by how much converted business in dollar value is achieved.
6. Experience means zero with respect to results
7. Hiring the right salespeople, leaders, and team is critical to execution.

Research is only one part of the equation, that is only a foundation to execution. Another interesting thing: I have broken every single rule in business development, yet got the CIO, CFO, VP, CMO, etc. to talk to me and even do in-person meetings.

1. I don't call at 7 a.m., I call at 2 p.m. in the afternoon
2. I leave long-winded messages
3. I talk in a high pitched voice
4. I don't call more than 2 or 3 times a week to one person, if that.
5. I send wordy long emails, my collateral is descriptive and fact based - not flowery, I have done creative things with business research.
6. I did direct mail in December around Christmas and got leads.
7. I sell the gatekeepers
8. I have no technology background aside from a few ERP/E-com classes. In other words, I am not an MCSE, programmer, or other techie. Yet I have had great conversations with Directors/CIO's about the merits of one ERP over another.
9. The best prospecting was in the summer
10. Most companies I worked for had no advertising or other external marketing activity, I had to earn marketing dollars from biz dev efforts.

Best tip: ignore all the "standard" sales/marketing stuff. Doesn't make a difference. Why - it is about THE CUSTOMER! get that, you will have million dollar accounts too.

A website called Companies are People Too details how organizations have different personalities. This is an interesting analysis (which is right on also - I did it for one firm and it was accurate) and brings up another point. In B2B marketing, marketers tend to treat organizations, even those in the same industry, as homogenious when in fact, each organization is unique and an individual. This is true whether the same industry or segment.

Take IBM, Sun, HP, Dell, and Lenovo. On the surface all of these companies do the same thing - they manufacture and sell computer technology. High level differentiators are obvious: IBM focuses on services, SUN focuses on the channel, Dell focuses on direct sales, HP has a mix, Lenovo is run from China. Go another level: IBM relies on an onsite/offshore model, Sun relies on product development (lower cost technology) to sell in the channel, Dell is shifting to retail outlet distribution, HP has a multidivisional focused product orientation, Lenovo is domestically manufactured. Go another level: IBM is a bit inbred and staid in culture, SUN sales/marketing oriented and aggressive, HP is nondescript, Dell innovative and a bit brash, Lenovo somewhat quiet and shrouded. And you could go much further. All of those unique factors in total define the company and how you should sell to them. Consider the following: IBM will value communication technology (VOIP), mobility solutions, and im/ex facilitating software (Vastera) more than SUN which has a focus on product development and channel management or Lenovo which is shifting focus from domestic to offshore supply chain functionality. A compliance solution may mean different things to each company. On the surface each firm is "the same", but how they respond to macro and microlevel factors including competition is unique. The value proposition needs to adapt not only to each firm, but to each person targeted in the firm as their function, focus, and need may vary - not all Supply Chain VP's are the same.

This is even more evident in the SMB market. With the owner or second-hire CEO, the business models are unique and valued for being such. Preference is given to the firm that understands this uniqueness and value. Some SMB's may not want a solution that "everyone else has" as it can erode their position of competitive advantage. Touting a solution that upholds same advantage can turn away business!

An analogy is a two child family. Even though the children grow up in the same household, each child may be different in personality, play, preferences. Both may drink Coca-Cola, but one may eat chicken while the other is a vegetarian! The kids may look the same or resemble each other, but one may live in t-shirts/jeans while the other likes dresses. Some external pressures like friends, school cohort, family situation also may evolve the children a certain way. Verizon and AT&T may look the same, but each firm is vastly different.

When doing research it is critical to uncover the nuances and latent needs unique to each firm. This is why generic profiles, cursory website reviews, and 10K's don't cut it. Research relies on facts, intuitive or deductive interpretation and analysis, and involves more of "observable playground behavior". This is why canned surveys, scripts, and quantitative analysis don't cut it for real business development. This is also why account analysis can run to 70 or 80 pages! But it is worth it and decision-makers do respond to it.

Following what is broken in marketing, another point. Too often marketing is rewarded or compensated on "QUANTITY" not "QUALITY". CEO's, VP's fall in love with people who say, I generated X number of leads per quarter or exceeded the quota/goal. Too often they fail to ask the follow up which is of those X leads, how many turned into actual business? The answer is "I don't know". Why?

1. Lack of communication between sales/marketing. As a marketing manager, I was privy to all the sales reports, forecasts, and meeting notes, plus I called the guys regularly to ask "what happened to such and such a lead". Joint sales/marketing meetings were held every Monday with the responsibility of the salesperson to discuss his accounts and leads.

2. Lack of ownership and point people. One person over each activity or an aggregator should be responsible for lead management. This person should assign the rating to the lead, decide if it should pass to sales (follow up on who received the lead), place it back into the marketing "warm up", decide if it is worth more research and specific targeting. They are accountable for the lead's management.

3. Lack of process. Conversion process mapping helps move leads through the process of qualification and closure. Leads attracted by advertising or "run the list" campaigns, need further qualification by telemarketing. Qualified leads in telemarketing can pass to sales and/or be tagged as invites to events/tradeshows for in-person meet-up. Leads from events/tradeshows need follow up calls and can pass to sales. Various support communications at each stage need to be implemented at each lead level to stay in front of the group targeted. Process or a programmed approach creates efficiencies in tactical deployment.

Sales always has quantifiable measures in place, so it is a matter of linking those measures back to the source and the "work" done to achieve it. Sometimes deals do fall thru due to client changes, sales deficiencies, or other issues. That should be tracked and known also.

Rewarding people for QUANTITY isn't the answer, quality is more critical.

The other approach is to eliminate a lot of extra activity and implement a research-based approach. :) That works also. When I was at Hexaware, I managed to drop about 1/4 of the budget using the targeted approach. That is for another post.

Don't get me wrong, advertising, telemarketing, branding, all have a place and a right time. I think another problem with marketing folks is that they just don't get the gist of what they are being compensated for. A salesguy I used to work with at Hexaware drilled into me - NO LEAD IS A GOOD LEAD UNLESS IT RESULTS IN CLOSED BUSINESS. Sometimes, salesguys mess up and don't close a good lead, but usually a good lead will result in closed business. Marketing is about getting leads and generating revenue, it is an investment in more future business. Expend money on tactics to generate 1, 2, 3, 10X the amount. Tactics, activities, aren't done for FUN - they need to generate business in the end. How do you measure tradeshows? Amount of leads that resulted in tangible dollars. How do you measure advertising? Amount of leads that resulted in tangible dollars. How do you measure branding? The amount of leads that resulted in tangible dollars. Hard to do, but doable. Tracking the actual cost of a lead, that is hard also.

Anyway. This is my new marketing ecosystem for business development:

Layer 1: Advertising, Branding, and Telemarketing
Generate company awareness and pull low-hanging fruit business in. The messaging should be about the company and its differentiators, positioning, reasons why one would do business.
Layer 2: Tradeshows and Events
Generate the face-to-face with warm prospects and visibility and positioning to the marketplace. Generate second-level leads.
Layer 3: Research-based marketing/account-based marketing/strategic prospecting
Select target companies, select low-hanging fruit leads, or target accounts within a vertical and deep-dive on them.

Sales is busy nurturing customers and closing on warm to hot opportunities. Sales provides feedback to marketing consistently to help refine the lead definition, customer profile, and driver definitions. Sales helps uncover customer patterns and needs.

Marcom should be a support mechanism. Let's can the features/benefits and "optimize the efficiency" b.s. that no one cares about and make it relevant to the company, industry, and market operated it. Marcom should be about value and business, not about flowery language. Someday, I will tell the story about a Marketing Manager who actually wrote "Hexaware puts the "O" in outsourcing" and burned more than $300,000 on metallic brushed brochures highlighting Y2K services that would not be needed 1 year from the date of printing.

I put the "B" in business development or maybe the "M" is more appropriate. M = money! ha-ha.

When anyone asks what is broken in marketing, read the dialouge on the American Marketing Association marketing boards. While it is a super forum, it also highlights issues that are prevalent in marketing. Today, for example, a Marketing Executive wrote in about his CEO demanding 2000 warm leads in a month. The Executive was asking "what do I do", but not without first highlighting: 1) He has 20 years experience, 2) whose responsibility is it for leads anyway? Instead of asking the group "what do I do" or "what is wrong with what I am currently doing", he instantly asked "whose responsibility is it for leads". I responded with two thoughts: 1) analyze what you are doing and focus on the message (because he has exhausted his channels of reach) and 2) it is both sales & marketing and even the receptionist's job to supply leads. Having 20 years experience means nothing, it could even mean that you are irrelevant today and living in the past. Results are what matters, not experience!

Because the person did not supply his industry, customer situation, brochures, research, etc. it is impossible for the group to give him any real advice. Yet, people responded with the following : 1) do more telemarketing, 2) I leverage customer pains across customers so should you, 2) talk to customers, etc. Great tactical advice without any context. Not one person asked what industry are you in, how many leads do you usually generate, what is the industry standard, buying cycles, salesforce size, success of channel tactics, etc. Nope, they just supplied do more tactical. And these people are marketing managers and executives? One or two were like - I generate the leads for the company - well, what a burden! I guess the salespeople have no prospecting skills to speak of and don't bring any clients to the table. Very few companies operate like that. And lets not finger point and divide sales and marketing further!

One lady responded with in addition to my duties, I profile customers and use their pain points with other customers, they respond to that. I am glad to see someone doing something I did 10 years ago. I hope she doesn't tell the companies about what their competition is doing, because she could violate NDA's. You can only talk in general terms usually to be legally safe.

Another consultant, "with a market research background", was inquiring about creative CRM systems to track leads. As I said, market research people are clueless usually about business development. I used Excel, Goldmine, ACT, Salesforce, Telemagic, and host of other programs and did a fine job of developing a lead management and process system - which is because I had a great lead profile, process, and system in place. And I consider myself a market research person as well as business development expert. I am not good with sales or marcom - can't write the flowery stuff well.

I get so discouraged with the seemingly commonsense and obvious answers to questions on the boards. Even a semi-competitor of mine was asking about how one could justify the ROI of account research, sales training, and telemarketing or something. If he couldn't answer those questions, he shouldn't be in business. I can, by the way, answer those questions. No one on the boards bothered to supply info, I sure would have liked to see that!

Until many marketers (not all) can learn to solve problems and ask the right questions, it will always be broken. I hope there are more people out there who get it.

My client development manager and I were discussing go-to-market in the diner last night. We agreed that looking for new business is like going after a job. It seems the analogy is so obvious, yet marketing still operates as if that isn't the case. Let me explain:

Job Search:
1. Candidate prepares a resume tailored to the job he wants. Resume highlights core competencies as they relate to the job he wishes to do.
2. Candidate researches a short list of companies he wants to work for and tailors his cover letter to address the job posted or desired job he'd like at the company. Highlights how his skills and knowledge will add value to the position and advance the company in some manner.
3. Candidate sends resume + cover letter, then follows up with recruiter/hiring manager.
4. Candidate is likeable, intelligently speaks about company, proves his skill fit and may get shortlisted.
5. Selection is made, performance is measured. Best candidate with skills and likeability is hired.

Call a resume an introductory collateral piece and a cover letter a direct email or phone call and what is the difference?? Isn't performing a task for someone, whether as an I.C. or a group or a company - "doing a job"? Aren't you applying for a job every time you bid on an opportunity or solicit for business?

Then why do marketers pump so much mass messaging? Why all the generic messages, broad telemarketing, endless noise of communication? Blogs, podcasts, webinars, mass comm - noise that empowers the buyer with more information to consider competitively. The best job seekers know how to fit their skills into a company in a targeted manner. A seeker who broadcasts on multiple job boards is considered relatively "undesirable" (active vs. passive candidates). Don't you appreciate interviewing someone who really understands your business and shows the value they can bring? So why don't companies do the same? That is why RFP's are "cattle calls" and price is the driver in decisions - many companies just lay it all out evenly.

Side note: I recently listened to a broadcast on MarketingPowers station on account-based marketing. The vendor/presenter was advocating webinars to a group of companies and kept talking about content. Content is derived from research and webinars are still mass marketing, unless you do a custom webinar for a team at ONE account. In account based marketing - the target company is a market of 1, the "brand" is what it means to THAT company. We need to stop talking about brand, webinars, telemarketing and other traditional marketing tactics in terms of account-based or research-based marketing. Brand is mass, telemarketing is mass, advertising is mass - good for awareness and low-hanging fruit lead gen. Qualified lead gen, proactive opportunity identification, strategic selling is one-to-one targeted, targeted, approach.

Two days ago, I called a major Heath & Beauty company and caught the VP of Talent Management. I started off jokingly apologizing for using his first name because I would have butchered his last name and began introducing the company. My client actually has done a lot of work for this company and we were recommended to call by the other region. The gentleman answers the phone and haughtily announces, "Who are you? I am in the middle of an interview!! I don't have time to take a call from a provider." He proceeds to hang up. Notice a few things:
1. He answered the phone during an interview. So much for respecting the candidate he was speaking with. If he didn't want to be interrupted, he should not have answered the phone.
2. He rudely hung up on me. Think of the impression he left with the candidate, I am sure he would not have considered that I might have been referred by a Division head (hiring manager) in another region.
3. All he had to do was say that this isn't a good time and could I call him or his Admin at XYZ time/day to discuss procedures.

I hope whomever he was interviewing doesn't work there, I sure wouldn't. I don't even want to do business with this company given the rude treatment. Today, you never know who you are talking to, where they end up, who says what where. I won't buy any French company hair care products from now on.

There are some companies that make it impossible for ANYONE to do business with them. One such firm, a noted healthcare provider in NJ that manufactures gloves for hands and for men, has a "policy" that you need to physically send information. As does a major airline with the Red, White, and Blue. Well, I don't live in the dark ages and have no paper anything to send - plus, their people actually have paper supplier vendor files! My, my, how behind the times. In both cases, I found the email addresses and phone to the right people - difficult, but not impossible. At least, these dinosaurs should set up some electronic vendor procedures. Sigh. I guess they are aware of every vendor with every offering.

The other thing I love is when Admin's or first-line gatekeepers decide who you should talk to, when they can't pronounce your company name or understand your service/product. I received a referral from a VP's office to talk to another VP - even his admin would have been fine. Even though I told the operator that I was referred, she still directed me to whom she thought was the right person. In fact, the person she directed me to WAS a good start. But, unless an admin or gatekeeper really knows the business, her bosses function, and understands what the company does he/she should not make decisions. A few notes on that: I have spoken to some super helpful and great people who knew their stuff and developed relationships. I myself was an admin and a super screener at one point, long ago. There are some wonderful people who have the best interest of their organization at heart and will help if it makes sense.

Granted, I am being "rude" by calling unsolicited into companies. But that is no excuse for hanging up or using dinosaur tactics to block me. Especially me - I will find a way in and through regardless anyway. And, your rudeness will be broadcast - can't tell you how many salesguys we share info with.

To get an idea of what we actually do at Magnus - click on the title "What is Sales Intelligence" and it will take to you ITSMA (Information Technology Services Marketing Association) website. ITSMA works with a lot of large companies designing programs around account-based marketing. I went to a seminar they hosted last year and was probably the most vocal in support of their programs. The seminar was great as an introduction and I would recommend marketers attend it. One of the ITSMA members acknowledged me as one of the people who was doing this method for a long time. That is why Magnus exists also - IBM, Sun, Hitachi, Hexaware all belong to ITSMA and have access to resources. We bring the same expertise to midmarket/SMB! Account-based marketing is not JUST for technology companies, research can be key to any vertical.

Executing an account-based marketing program is not a day-to-day event. Account based marketing, which is highly selective target account identification, penetration, and upsell should only be applied to specific accounts and a limited number. In a small/midsize company - telemarketing is used to do broad based awareness/lead generation, marketing (which is usually marcom) builds branding and awaress. Research-based marketing is the next level up. It is focused on select accounts or one vertical. Prospecting is one-to-one, multilevel (target messages to decison-makers and next level), business driven, and based on research uncovered about the account. Research is NOT a cursory sweep of the website or 10K, it is business analytical. More than a list of recent news, business description, and list of key contacts - it tells a story about the company. What it is doing, what the suggested pain areas are, what is important, it is like building a case study and analyzing it in business school. If it is done right, it is possible to identify sales opportunities very early, find a fit with the company that bypasses RFPs, and differentiate your company as one that "is in the know". A sales rep, empowered with the right information, will be able to have a meaningful dialouge with the C-Level/VP level person and provide value.

A story:
Most reps call companies with scripts highlighting features/benefits which is very "I,me,my" focused. Hi, I am Bill, I am calling from XYZ reseller, we have geographic presence in YZQ area, are certified in PDQ, and have done work with LMN. Are there any projects that we can work with you on?? Response: Send info, RFP is in June, we have many vendors.

True Story:
Researched target client. Read 15 articles or more about client. Noticed a lot of global hiring, found numbers of people hired, trends, uncovered some issues about global hiring and candidate tracking, identified latent issues. Found head of global hiring. Crafted specific email highlighting issues uncovered, discussed how my client's services can help solve or mitigate issues, sent email. Waited two days. Called head of global hiring. Left message. Waited a week. Caught global head on the phone. He remembered email, voicemail, and asked me questions. Two weeks later, in discussions with overseas division head. Opportunity: estimated at multi-million dollars.

Not the first time that happened to me. Most companies cannot have a biz dev, sales, or marketing person taking hours of time to research a company at that level, which is why they don't do it. Plus, people who can research at that level, call C or VP's articulating info, and secure meetings are not a dime-a-dozen. Most sit at IBM, Accenture, McKinsey. I managed to find a bunch of great analysts, call us McKinsey rejects, who can do this efficiently. That is why you outsource that type of research, prospecting, and sales support. Your telemarketers can go thru the list finding low hanging fruit and inviting people to webinars, your marketing manager does ads, brochures, and puts on the webinar/tradeshow, your salesguys close and work on keeping existing customers happy. Magnus does the rest!

I just got off the phone with a highly recognizeable technology company. I was introducing one of my clients training/consulting services. This client is a superstar in his industry and has done for his industry what I intend to do in marketing. The response from this person was:

I heard of {the client}, but we have an in-house system for training and brainstorm frequently to share practices. We do webinars and have seasoned professionals".

I heard this type of hooey from others also who seem to feel that they are so superior they don't need any additional training or knowledge transfer.

You do not rise to the top without constant learning and education, period. I have an MBA, post-MBA, attended many webinars and training sessions. My clients and previous employers use the word "brilliant" when describing me and say that they learn a lot from hanging around with me (the same term I use to describe my team of analysts and biz dev people). And you know what? I still attend webinars, training, and would go back to school for ANOTHER degree or certificate in a minute! I read everything in business, sales, marketing that I can get my hands on and would welcome the opportunity to learn from industry experts.

These people, these companies, who feel they know it all and wouldn't benefit from additional work are in danger of losing competitiveness. After all, my industry-leading client will provide his advanced training to their competition because I am selling to them also. I may even make it a point of saying, your competitor thinks they know it all - so you can have something now that they don't!

Same with Magnus - stick with your traditional agencies, old-line research firms doing focus groups or compiling data, "give the list-bang the phone" telemarketing companies because that's "who you always use" or your team does it in-house. My clients will be winning your accounts because I and my team will be taking them away from you.

I can't understand the managerial decisions of some companies. A former employer of mine who shall remain un-named fired its Sales Director in November 2006. An affable guy who failed to make the numbers (which was not his fault entirely). His buddy, a Sales Rep, was stationed in India, barely spoke clearly enough for anyone to understand, plus I can't tell you the number of prospects who were so put off by his pushy, illknowledgeable, manner! The company tends to use a very technical positioning geared toward the direct end-user (who has limited budget and needs approval from at least 2 or 3 people to buy). Their software, while great for what it does, evolved with a multiplicity of customer feedback and became so over-engineered, it is too complex for most users needs. The market consists of a limited number of very specialized users who tend to use multiple software products to address daily operational challenges. In terms of marketing, they have limited user forums, attend a couple technical tradeshows, do no advertising, thought-leadership, or branding. They believe that word-of-mouth will promote sales alone. A competitor to this company who has local presence, a clean layperson communication style, and simple software owns 2/3 of the marketshare.

So, they fired the Sales Director and his buddy. One month later, they bring in a VP of Sales who is industry knowledgeable. This guy was the ONLY candidate they interviewed. Guy joins the company in December, proceeds to take a few days off here/there to do shopping, clean up things, etc. He proceeds to trash the prior Director and his buddy blaming everything that is wrong on them. He then puts in some sales processes. Around January 15, we are notified that said VP is changing his status to 1099 and will be working with another company as an employee assisting us with oversight and processes. He proceeds to conduct phone calls, meetings, and spend some time with us at our company while on the payroll of the other company - an unethical practice known as "double-dipping". Said VP goes 1099 and is in and out. He also begins to horribly micromanage me - even telling me (the only person in the company's history to get callbacks from net-new suspects) how to make a phone call! After he nitpicks on a quote and rudely hauls off on me for leaving the ".com" off an email address (which was simply covered by another column in Excel) and more micromanagement, I decided it was time to leave.

I proceed to tell the CEO that this is not an ideal situation for anyone. A 1099 VP is crazy! Not only is there a lack of commitment to the organization, the practices were unethical, plus the micromanagement would drive away the best employees. I suggested that he bring a Sales Director over from another office to help build the team while he searched for a new Director/VP. And, find someone more experienced who had run a division and built a team. The VP hired a salesguy who later quit in disgust because of abusive behavior, account misappropriation, and micromanagement. It is unlikely that any type of high performing team will result from this situation. In April, the VP of Sales rejoined the company full-time (again), clearly his other employment situation didn't work out.

Net of it is:
1. No VP of Sales or VP conducts himself in that manner. Any manager is supposed to work with the team to reach goals and empower them. This guy clearly is NOT a VP or, for that fact, a manager. Lesson: Don't confer titles or go by titles, make sure a candidate really is a VP (strategic, capable of managing a team, and driving).
2. The CEO needs to be more strategic in hiring practices. Lessons: 1) Take your time hiring, especially for critical positions, 2) A bad manager can ruin the entire team or suppress performance, 3) listen to employees feedback. The micromanagement and abusive language isn't going to stop. Two good people left and will not associate with that firm ever again.
3. The CEO is also advocating some odd things. The unethical behavior, the lack of commitment, trash-talking, and unprofessional behavior is inexcusable. Does this give insight into the advocated practices of the company? They will deal with clients unethically or trash-talk clients? That is the message being sent.

The CEO told me he had no choice, that he had to rely on this guy. That is a cop-out. Hiring for a quick fill or to keep the numbers up, is a short term solution that will only bring long term destruction. Lesson: Don't settle!