Salespeople are trained to find leverage and improve outcomes. Their tendency to critique compensation plans stems from the same skill set that makes them effective sellers. Leaders should view this behavior as a sign of a good salesperson, not just negativity, and address it with transparency.
Many companies mistakenly hire salespeople and then define their job and compensation. The correct sequence is to first determine the business need, then construct the specific job role to address it, and finally design a compensation plan that incentivizes the required activities before ever posting the job.
The most effective way for a salesperson to challenge a perceived unfair quota is not through complaints, but through data. By presenting an analysis of their own average deal size, sales cycle length, and win rates, they can build a logical case for what is achievable and force a more constructive conversation with leadership.
To maximize earnings, salespeople shouldn't just passively accept a comp plan. They should actively engage with the compensation team or their manager to understand the plan's underlying business intent. This proactive approach uncovers the true priorities and reveals the most effective path to higher earnings.
To powerfully reinforce desired behaviors, compensation plans must connect the reward as closely in time as possible to the sales activity. This "proximity principle" is more effective than distant, larger payouts because it creates a clear and immediate link between action and incentive, even if the initial payout is smaller.
When modifying a compensation plan, the primary goal should be to drive a specific behavioral change aligned with new business strategies, such as focusing on new logos or products. The plan's mechanics must be simple enough for salespeople to immediately understand which new actions are being prioritized and rewarded.