Business Ownership and Management
Shouldn’t Sales Forecasting be Easy?
Of course it should… or maybe not.
First, what are you measuring? The answer to this seemingly simple question is something that anyone with a sales quota should be able to succinctly answer, since this is what you are being paid on.
But context matters, too. People at different levels of the business are likely reviewing multiple forecasts for multiple reasons. So, the first rule is to never assume.
So, what are you measuring?
- Bookings – Finalized Sales Orders
- You have a PO, but has the deal really been closed? What else is needed in your business to finalize an order?
- Billings – Invoicing Completed
- This includes dependencies that may introduce unexpected delays and/or be outside of your control, such as a deal that bills on October 31st versus November 1st. Are they still part of the same period (October)?
- Revenue – An in-depth understanding of Revenue Recognition rules is key.
- How much revenue is recognized and when it is recognized varies based on a variety of factors, such as:
- Is revenue accrued or deferred? This is especially key for multi-year prepaid deals, or when services are packaged with software as part of the deal.
- Is revenue recognized all at once – such as for the sale of Perpetual Software Licenses? (even this is not always black and white)
- Is revenue recognized over time – such as with annual subscriptions that are ratable on a monthly basis?
- Is revenue based on work completed/percentage of completion? This is more common with Services and Construction. How is that percentage determined?
- Are there clauses in a non-standard agreement that will negatively affect revenue recognition? This is where your Legal team becomes an invaluable contributor to your success.
- Cash Flow – Is this really Sales forecasting?
- The answer is ‘no’ in terms of Accounting rules and guidance.
- But, if you have a start-up or small business, this can be key to “keeping the lights on,” in which case the types of deals and their structure will be biased towards cash flow enhancement and/or goals.
- How much revenue is recognized and when it is recognized varies based on a variety of factors, such as:
- Profitability – In this case, what expenses are factored in that offset revenue?
- Cost-Volume-Profit (CFP) analysis tends to be one of these exercises where you learn that there are often several takes on what is or is not a related expense.
When I was a VP running two global regions, I would meet with the CFO prior to the end of a quarter to discuss what mattered most for the coming quarter. Sometimes the goal was more upfront cash; other times, it was guaranteed multi-year revenue. Sometimes it could be both, and I would be authorized to provide additional discounts on prepaid multi-year deals. The goals would change based on our banking covenants (revenue, investments, cash on hand), investor goals, valuations, etc. I often tracked multiple goals at once for various reasons.
My advice is to work closely with your CFO, Finance Team, Sales/Revenue Operations Team, and Legal team to understand their goals and guidelines, then take that one step further by creating policies approved by those stakeholders and share the highlights with the Sales team to avoid any ambiguity around pricing rules, process changes, and expectations. Great communication and a common understanding of the goals and rules help you and your team win.
So, now the hard part is over, right?
It could be that easy if you have one well-established product, a stable install base, no real competitive threats, a steady, predictable growth or decline rate, and consistent pricing and average deal sizes. I haven’t seen a business like that yet, but I’m sure at least a few exist.
Next, what are you building into your model to maximize accuracy? Every product or service may be driven by independent factors, so a flat model that evenly distributes sales over time (monthly or quarterly) is likely to be inaccurate when you have royalty revenue or progress-based billings.
For example:
- One product line that sells perpetual licenses may depend on release cycles every 18-36 months to maintain a steady revenue rate, with peaks and valleys within that window.
- A second product line may be driven mainly by renewals and expansion on fairly stable timelines and billings. In this case, annual uplifts may be needed to maintain profitability.
- A third product line may be new with no track record and in a competitive space – meaning that even the best projections will be speculative and likely optimistic.
- Finally, services could be associated with each product line and driven by more dependent and independent factors (new implementations, upgrades, implementing new features, platform changes and modernization, routine engagements, training, etc.) How and when are the revenue and expenses recognized, and what impact could they have with related items sold with (or close to) that deal?
Historical trends are one important factor to consider, especially because they tend to be the things you have the greatest control over (i.e., they should not change that much). This starts with high-level sales conversion rates and goes down to average sales cycle, seasonal trends, organic growth rates, churn rates, and more.
Having accurate sales and customer data over time that can be accurately correlated is extremely helpful. But factors such as Product SKU changes, licensing model changes, new product bundles, etc., increase the complexity of that effort and potentially decrease the accuracy of your results. These self-inflicted issues are often introduced without considering downstream implications. Fun!
Correlating those trends to external factors, such as overall growth of the market, relative growth of competitors, economic indicators (inflation metrics like CPI, interest rates, foreign exchange rates, corporate indicators (profits, earns per share, distributions, various ratios, ratings, etc.), commodity and futures prices (especially if you install base tends to skew towards something like the Petroleum Industry), specific events, and so forth increases the complexity of the model but can add an extra level of accuracy.
The best case is that those correlations increase your forecasting accuracy for the entire year. In all likelihood, they provide valuable inputs that allow you to dynamically adjust sales plans as needed to ensure year-over-year success. But making those changes should not be done in a vacuum, and communicating the potential need for changes like that should be done at the earliest point where you have a fair degree of confidence that change is needed. Simple, eh?
Unexpected events will always negatively impact your forecasts and plans. Changes to the competitive landscape, reputational changes, economic changes, etc., can all occur quickly and with “little notice.” That is especially true if you are not actively looking for subtle indicators (leading and trailing) and nuances that highlight potential problems and give you time to do as much as possible to address them proactively. The best advice is to anticipate the unexpected and have a contingency plan!
Forecasting accuracy drives confidence, which helps you secure funding for new campaigns or initiatives. Surprises, even positive ones, are generally disliked because the results differ from expectations, which can fuel other doubts and concerns.
Confidence comes from understanding, good planning, helping everyone meet a quota, and supporting teams to do what is needed, when it is needed, to optimize the process. This also assumes you can determine whether deals are really on track and intervene with guidance before deals slip or are lost.
It may not be easy, but it helps drive companies to the next level through a predictable, sustainable growth trajectory. In the end, that consistency often matters the most to the owners and stakeholders of a business.
IoT and Vendor Lock-in
I was researching an idea last weekend and stumbled across something unexpected. My view on IoT has been that it provides a framework for a rich ecosystem of hardware and software products and their use. That flexibility and extensibility foster innovation, which in turn leads to greater use and adoption of the best products. It was quite a surprise to discover that IoT was being used to do just the opposite.
My initial find was a YouTube video about “Tractor Hacking” that lets farmers make their own repairs. That seemed like an odd video to appear in my search results, but it made sense about halfway through. The video discusses not having access to software, replacement components not working because they aren’t registered to that tractor’s serial number, and the only alternative being costly transportation of the equipment to a Dealership to have a costly component installed.
I initially thought there had to be more to the story, as I found it hard to believe that a major vendor in any industry would intentionally do something like this. That led me to an article from nearly two years earlier that contained the following:
“IoT to completely transform their business model” and
“John Deere was looking for ways to change their business model and extend their products and service offering, allowing for a more constant flow of revenue from a single customer. The IoT allows them to do just that.”
That article closed with the assertion:
“Moreover, only allowing John Deere products access to the ecosystem creates a buyer lock-in for the farmers. Once they own John Deere equipment and make use of their services, it will be very expensive to switch to another supplier, thus strengthening John Deere’s strategic position.”
While any technology – especially platforms – has the potential for vendor lock-in, the majority of vendors offer some form of openness, such as:
- Supporting open standards, APIs, and processes that support some degree of portability and third-party product access.
- Providing simple ways to unload your data in at least one of several commonly used non-proprietary formats.
Some buyers may deliberately implement systems that support non-standard technology and extensions because they believe the long-term benefits of a tightly coupled system outweigh the risks of being locked into a vendor’s proprietary stack. But there are almost always several competitive options available; always consider all viable alternatives.
Less technology-savvy buyers may never even consider asking questions like this when purchasing. Even technologically savvy people may fail to consider IoT as a key component of everyday tools and services – thus failing to recognize the implications of a closed system relative to their purchase.
It will be interesting to see whether deliberate business strategies like these change because of competitive pressure, social pressure, or legislation over the coming years. In the meantime, the principle of caveat emptor may be truer than ever in this age of connected everything and the Internet of Things.
The Value Created by a Strong Team
I participated in an amazing team-building exercise as a Board Member for the Children’s Hospital Foundation of Wisconsin. We were heading down a path that would lead to a decision on whether to invest $150M in a new addition. The CEO at the time, Jon Vice, wisely determined that each committee needed strong teams to thoroughly vet the idea from every possible perspective.
The process started with being given a book to read (“Now, Discover Your Strengths” by Marcus Buckingham & Donald O. Clifton, Ph.D.) and then completing the “StrengthsFinder” assessment using a code provided in the book. The goal was to understand gaps in perception (how you view yourself vs. how others view you) so you could better understand your strengths and weaknesses. Then, teams were created with people having complementary skills to help eliminate weaknesses from the overall team perspective. The results were impressive.
Over my career, I have been involved in many team-building exercises and events – some of which provided useful insights. However, most failed to combine the findings meaningfully, provide useful context, or offer actionable recommendations. Key areas that were consistently omitted were Organizational Culture, Organizational Politics, and Leadership. Those three areas significantly impact value creation vis-à-vis team effectiveness and commitment.
When I ran my consulting company, we had a small core team of business and technology consultants and leveraged subcontractors and an outsourcing company to take on more concurrent projects, as well as larger, more complex ones. This approach worked for three reasons:
- We had developed a High-Performance Culture that was based on:
- Purpose: A common vision of success, understanding why that mattered, and understanding how that was defined and measured.
- Ownership: Taking responsibility for something and being accountable for the outcome. This included responsibility for the extended team of contractors. Standardized procedures helped ensure consistency and make it easier for each person to accept responsibility for “their team.”
- Trust: Everyone understood that to be effective and responsive, they needed to trust and support each other and trust each other’s judgment. If there was a concern, we focused on context and process improvements to understand what happened and implement changes based on lessons learned. We avoided personal attacks for the good of the entire team.
- Empowerment: Everyone understood that decision-making involves risk, while also recognizing that delaying an important decision could be costly and create more risk. Therefore, each member was responsible for making good decisions as needed and communicating changes to the rest of the team.
- Clear and Open Communication: The team was very transparent and honest. When an issue came up, they tried to resolve it with that person first, then escalated if they couldn’t reach an agreement and decided to seek the team’s consensus. Everything was out in the open and done in a constructive, collaborative spirit.
People who were not a good fit would quickly wash out, so our core team consisted of trusted experts. A friendly competition helped raise the bar for the entire team, but when needed, the other team members became a safety net for each other.
We were all focused on the same goal, and everyone realized the only way to succeed was to work together. Win or lose, we did it together. The strength of our team created tremendous value – internally and for our customers that we sustained for several years. That value included innovation, higher levels of productivity and profitability, and an extremely high success rate.
This approach can work at any level but is most effective when it starts at the top. When employees see their company leaders behaving this way, it provides a model and sets expectations for everyone under them. If there is dysfunction within an organization, it often starts at the top – by promoting or accepting behaviors that do not benefit the whole of the organization. With a strong and positive organizational culture, the value of strong teams is multiplied and becomes an incredible competitive advantage.
Commentary on an HBR article about Start-ups & Entrepreneurship
A friend posted this article on LinkedIn.com. Because of character limits for comments, I decided to post my response here. Below is a link to the article referenced: https://hbr.org/2019/07/building-a-startup-that-will-last
The article is interesting, but emphasizing “second and third acts” assumes that the start-up will successfully navigate the first act. Even with addressing what the author views as key points, this is still a very big assumption. The reasons for Longevity and Success are far more complex and multi-dimensional, but it highlights some of the more important areas of focus.
Long-term success requires several things: The right combination of having a unique goal that has the potential to make a big impact (think “No software” from Salesforce.com); Innovative ideas to achieve that goal; A diverse team to build the product (a mix of visionaries, insightful “translators,” technical experts, designers, planners, adept doers, etc.); Very good sales/business development/marketing to describe a better way of doing things and converting that to new business; and ultimately a management team focused on sustainable and scalable growth.
The point about the need to “Articulate a value framework oriented toward societal impact, not just financial achievement” seems superficial and too tactical.
First, most new technologies have unintended consequences. Social Media is a recent example, but Genetic Editing and AI are two areas that are likely to provide more examples over the next decade. Not every societal impact will be positive, and having a negative impact could very well lead to the untimely demise of that company.
Second, the two ideas (societal impact and financial achievement) are not mutually exclusive. When I owned my consulting company, we aimed to fund $1M of medical research to find a cure for Arthritis. We allocated half of our net profits to this goal. Every employee was on board with this because there was a tangible example of why it mattered (my daughter). We invested $500K and helped launch a few careers for some brilliant MD/Ph. Ds, and at least one national protocol came out of their research.
Mission and Vision are important to a company, yet many fail to view this as anything more than a marketing effort. Those companies fail to realize that this is as much about motivating and inspiring employees as it is about grabbing a prospective customer’s attention. These should be inspirational and aspirational, such as the “BHAG” (Big Hairy Audacious Goals) Collins and Porras wrote about 25 years ago.
Regarding Endurance and the assertion that “…the best businesses are intrinsically aligned with the long-term interests of society,” my take is slightly different. The best businesses look for trends and opportunities in an ever-changing global competitive landscape instead of looking to their competitors and trying to ride on their coattails. Companies with a culture of fostering innovation as a way to learn and grow (Amazon and Google are two great examples) can find that intersection of “good business” and “positive societal impact.” It is much more complex than a simple one-dimensional outlook.
But it was a good article to help reframe ideas and assumptions around growth.
Creating Customers for Life
The goal for any business, regardless of the products you sell or the services you provide, should be maintaining a satisfied customer base that is loyal to your business. The idea is to create a mutually beneficial relationship that motivates people to keep working with you, even when competitive products or incentives are available (e.g., those pushing for a “Corporate Standard” involving another product).
The best part is that this concept applies to all companies and all Product Life Cycle stages. Whether your company is on a rapid growth trajectory towards ‘Unicorn status,’ or your offerings are mature and viewed as ‘less exciting.’ The approach will also help if your products decline and you seek the ‘longest tail’ possible. At each phase, credible threats from competitors seek to grow by eroding your business.
Several years ago, I was responsible for two product lines in two major geographic regions (Americas and APAC/Japan). Our attrition rate (“churn”) was traditionally slightly below the industry average, and our net revenue rate (NRR), which reflects overall growth by factoring in churn, was around 100, indicating the business was flat. We began seeing an increase in churn and a corresponding decrease in organic growth. Both were indicators that something needed to change.
After discussing tactical approaches, our small leadership team agreed this was a strategic issue we needed to address. The result was an understanding that we needed to create ‘Customers for Life.’
Everyone agreed with the concept, but due to various differences (culture, who our customer was – end customer vs. channel partner, buying patterns, etc.), we agreed to try what was best for each of our regional businesses and share the results and lessons learned.
My approach focused on developing strong relationships that fostered collaboration and ultimately led to growth and success for both parties. The basic premise was simple:
- People tend to buy from people they like, respect, and trust. Become one of those people for your customers.
- Helping companies achieve better business outcomes leads to greater success for our customers and us.
How did we do it? It was a systematic process that my team used that included the following:
- Develop simple profiles for each customer (e.g., products used, date of first purchase, footprint size, usage and payment trends, industry).
- Estimate their overall impact based on product footprint size, annual spend with us, company size, engagement and interactions, and growth potential. Companies and organizations with the most at stake or the most to gain became our Tier 1 priority. These are the customers that we invested even more time and effort with.
- Make contact multiple times yearly, not just when you want money.
- These “out of cycle” contacts became very important for maintaining and growing the relationship.
- When issues or concerns came up, we often learned about them earlier and addressed them before renewal, which helped expedite the process.
- Ask questions about key initiatives, milestones, and concerns.
- We documented the responses, which helped seed following conversations and demonstrate a genuine interest in what they were doing.
- If we noticed changes in their industry or region, we asked about them and probed whether we could help.
- Follow-up!
- Lack of follow-through is the fastest way to lose your customer’s trust and respect. Being reliable and helpful increases your value.
- Request meetings to understand how they use our products and get a brief update on what our company has been doing.
- Face-to-face meetings are always preferred, as you tend to learn much more than in remote meetings.
- Learning more about their business, systems, goals, and challenges creates opportunities to add value and become more of a partner in that customer’s success.
- Ask “What would it look and feel like when you successfully overcame those challenges and achieved your goals?” and “What is a realistic timeframe for making that happen?” to get the customer emotionally focused on that better future state, and then look for ways to “Weave your value proposition into the fabric of their dreams and goals.“
- We looked at how they used our products and offered suggestions to do more, do something better or more efficiently, call out potential problems, and discuss best practices. Often, we had a technical expert follow up and provide an hour or two of free assistance to explore those suggestions. We invested in their ongoing success.
- Look for opportunities to congratulate them.
- It demonstrates that they are important enough that you are paying attention. Google Alerts made this easy.
- Regularly ask our customers if there is anything that we could do to help them.
- They would often reciprocate, leading to increased references and referrals.
- Helping our install base customers, even if it wasn’t directly related to our products, was good business.
- Continuous Improvement – Analyze the results and refine the process as needed.
Before the meeting, we would spend an hour or two researching the company, its history, and significant events for it and within its industry, and identify its top 2-3 competitors. My consulting background came in handy as I “looked between the lines” to better understand the situation as we planned the meeting, focusing on what we wanted to walk away with and what we wanted the customer to walk away with. Preparation matters.
As we met with our Customers and Channel Partners, we would explain what ‘Customer for Life’ meant to us and the potential benefits to them. Before the meeting, we would check whether we had (or they wanted) an NDA so they could speak freely and with confidence. Trust was important. The information disclosed helped us understand their situation, and we mapped it against other customers to identify actionable trends. Showing interest and understanding created credibility. Asking relevant questions helped conversations move to substantive issues faster. From there, we focused on specific points that would positively impact that customer.
Over the course of two years, my team and I helped our customers innovate by providing different perspectives and ideas, modernizing (e.g., moving to spatial analytics to get a more granular understanding of their own business, cloud-enabling their systems to increase responsiveness to their business and control costs), improving their systems and growing their businesses, and more. We became their trusted advisors and advocates within our company.
We also received feedback that helped us improve our products and a variety of processes – something that benefited all customers. Occasionally, we learned about problems they were having. We took ownership of the issue, brought in the right people, and helped the customer find a resolution. Collaboration and success created stronger relationships – especially with the largest customers and companies.
The results: Customer churn decreased by 50%, organic growth increased by slightly more than 20%, and NRR increased by over 5%. This program made a several-million-dollar positive impact with relatively little effort. We had achieved our objectives, improved our bottom line, and shared our lessons learned with the other two teams.
The concepts behind Strategic Account Management, Voice of the Customer, Customer Experience, Customer Loyalty, and Customer Success blended into a manageable, practical approach and delivered strong ROI. My biggest lesson learned was that adopting this mindset and creating a repeatable process should be started sooner rather than later – before problems arise.
Every day you are not creating your own ‘Customers for Life,’ there is a good chance that your competition is. Don’t let that happen to your business.
