| 
         
        
          Applying TQM to the Sales Process 
        It is old news that in 
        the late 70's and throughout the 80's, American manufacturing was taking 
        a beating.  It seemed as though American manufacturers could do no 
        right. 
         
        First, the leaders of the largest and most prestigious firms had seemed 
        to have become arrogant, turning a deaf ear to complaints about shoddy 
        merchandise. Instead of reacting to complaints proactively, many 
        corporations seemed to blame the consumers themselves. The news reported 
        the latest lawsuit or class action (One for all: class actions. Time, 
        Dec. 13, 1971. They no longer say, 'I got a lemon'; nowadays, they say, 
        'I'll sue'. Forbes, April 15, 1972), and price increases (The day that 
        no one could afford a car. ar and Driver, March '75) instead of the 
        latest safety advance or leap forward in product convenience and value. 
         
        Second, the line management and workers responsible for crafting the 
        product themselves seemed to lose their own pride, and the sense of what 
        it meant to work with honor and dignity was severely undermined. Strife 
        and friction between employees and their own companies made the news 
        frequently, as headlines dealing with the automakers, truckers and 
        others testified. (How you pay for boredom on the assembly line. Popular 
        Mechanics, Oct. 1973. "Probing for the depths of trucker discontent. 
        Business Week, Feb. 9, 1974. "Strike, strike, strike." Time, Aug. 12, 
        1974.)  
         
        Third, as a result of its lost ability to satisfy the consumer and 
        management-labor's collective failure to set aside their problems and 
        work with quality, America was losing its share of the global market 
        hand over fist. From 1975 to 1990, the balance of global trade shifted 
        from +$3.7 billion to -$118 billion. In 1987, we became a net debtor 
        nation and have remained so since. 
         
        Those of us living through those times remember the feeling of impending 
        doom. Prognosticators warned that America would have to get used to a 
        lower standard of living, and critics pronounced that it was "about 
        time;" that is, that we were just getting what we deserved. The 
        handwriting was not only on the wall and in the press, but on the 
        balance sheets and paychecks of America. From boardrooms to living 
        rooms, the message got louder: get with it or face the consequences. 
         
        The reason for all of those problems?  Social cause-and-effect analysis 
        aside, consumers simply exercised their options in a free market almost 
        as soon as they had a genuine choice. Once the level of quality of 
        foreign goods, in proportion to the price tag attached to them, exceeded 
        our own, the consumer did what any intelligent organism would do: picked 
        what they liked better. 
         
        Fortunately for all involved, the US has proven again and again that it 
        has what it takes to meet great challenges. It is doing so now. In fact, 
        the most progressive of all companies in the world are listening to the 
        customer and meeting their need for quality items. While the buzzwords 
        change, the principles remain the same: quality is back in 
        manufacturing. In turn, customers are buying from American firms again 
        (see, for example "How H-P Used Tactics of the Japanese to Beat Them at 
        Their Game," WSJ, September 8, 1994). The battle is never-ending, but 
        the tide has turned. 
         
        At this time of resurgence and building confidence, we offer two 
        critical contentions and one powerful prediction. 
         
        First, we contend that a key player in the overall picture has been 
        overlooked in the quest for improved quality, namely, sales--the side of 
        business responsible for selling goods and services in the first place. 
        Broadly speaking, we can include sales, marketing and customer 
        service--that is, any group that is in direct contact with the customer 
        -- in the remarks that follow. 
         
        That the opportunity for improvement in this field is huge needs little 
        formal proof.   Daily, anyone standing on the customer's side of the 
        counter will experience what experts define as a lack of quality: 
        non-conformance to specifications.  A salesperson says he will return my 
        wife's call before 4 pm: he doesn't. A salesperson tells me my new car 
        will be ready for pick-up on Tuesday: it's not.  I get billed for an 
        entirely new subscription for a magazine, when all I sent was a change 
        of address form. Once received, the products were great; it's the 
        sales-to-customer relationship that lacked.  
         
        Look around yourself.  You'll see companies placing foolish barriers in 
        front of the customer, making it harder or annoying to get that great 
        product!  All at tremendous costs to the companies themselves.  It may 
        cost between $35 and $100 at many firms just to place an order the first 
        time, let alone to correct the mistakes made when an order was set up.  
        We contend that the frequency and cost of such quality errors in the 
        sales process impose a tremendous amount of drag on the flow of steps 
        through the process. 
         
        Second, we contend that many of the principles and practices related to 
        quality improvement that worked so well in the production and assembly 
        of goods will also work to improve quality in the field of sales (again, 
        we include marketing and customer service in this term). For example, 
        the quality technique of counting the type and frequency of errors to 
        help identify opportunities to improve should work directly in the field 
        of sales. Instead of measuring a sample of a batch of pistons to see 
        whether they were machined to a certain tolerance, in sales we'll 
        measure the number of order entry errors. Some measurements will overlap 
        between what is measured now in both modern manufacturing and sales, 
        such as number of shipments that are delivered on schedule. Quality 
        improvement practices should help improve the sales process. 
         
        Third, a prediction. We predict that improvements in the field of sales 
        will have a roughly equivalent impact in terms of customer satisfaction 
        as improvements in the field of manufacturing. In turn, this should lead 
        to increased sales, relative to the competition, in any firm that 
        improves the quality of its sales practices. Already, companies such as 
        Ascom-Timeplex, Nalco Chemical and Mead School and Office Products are 
        finding that when they improve their sales process, the financial 
        rewards can be great. 
         
        If we agree that the opportunity for improvement is great, and that the 
        effort to improve quality in this arena is worth making, the next 
        question becomes, "What are the quality principles that apply in the 
        field of sales, marketing and customer service?" 
         
        What follows is a brief description of principles drawn from what we 
        feel are the four most important figures in the field of modern quality 
        improvement, together with a translation of these principles into the 
        field of sales. In our review of two of the major sales-related 
        publications for the past decade (Sales and Marketing Management 
        magazine and Personal Selling Power) we were unable to find a similar 
        translation to date. Although this may be the first such formal 
        "translation", we also predict that others will follow because interest 
        in the area is building. Both the necessary knowledge and the technical 
        infrastructure is growing -- witness the growth of an organization like 
        the Sales Automation Association (expanding tenfold in four years). Cost 
        and competitive pressures will dictate that all companies, large and 
        small, study this area as if their future depended on it. 
         
        The Big Four of Quality 
         
        Do the quality leaders have something important to say to those in 
        sales? Just remember that "Made in Japan" was a label that meant "cheap" 
        as recently as 20 years ago. Yes, the quality proponents obviously have 
        something to say, since in a very short period of time the phrase "Made 
        in Japan" has come to mean "the highest quality." Three of the four 
        leaders discussed below, Deming, Juran and Shingo, played a big part in 
        Japan's quality turnaround, though for decades they were largely ignored 
        in the US. The fourth, Crosby, helped to popularize the quality movement 
        in the US, and contributed some of the quality movement's most memorable 
        sayings such as, "Do it right the first time, every time." 
         
        W.E. Deming:  
        "In God we trust. All others must use data." 
         
        Deming taught that it isn't good enough to guess what our quality 
        problems might be. He said that you have to know. Deming stressed that 
        using measurement, graphing results, and a technique called statistical 
        process control (SPC) are often necessary to identify and help remove 
        undesirable variations in the process. Deming also taught that the 
        purpose of quality improvement is not simply to find problems, but to 
        prevent them. 
         
        If sales is a process that yields measurable outcomes or whose outcomes 
        can be described using reliable measures of their attributes, the 
        techniques of measurement and SPC should be applicable. 
         
        In sales, this type of data can be found in samples of order entry 
        errors, a comparison between what is proposed and what is delivered, and 
        in terms of whether a particular sales lead meets a certain level of 
        specification prior to delivering it to a rep. In principle, we would 
        expect that each relevant aspect of the sales process can be measured. 
        Just as in manufacturing, an acceptable range of specifications can be 
        established, and, using basic statistical tools, we can determine what 
        is "out of spec" and work to correct it and prevent it from occurring in 
        the future. 
         
        Mead School and Office Products measured their sales process and 
        performed the courageous act of actually surveying their customers to 
        find out what they liked and disliked about doing business with Mead. 
        Mead found that it was granting some $2 million in deductions (dollars 
        given back to appease unhappy customers) per year. The credits were due 
        to approximately 21,000 pricing errors--discrepancies in what customers 
        were told their bill would be versus what it actually was. Their 
        analysis told Mead where to focus their corrective actions, and, thanks 
        to a computerized pricing system, both Mead and customers alike are 
        enjoying the benefits. Incidentally, Mead saved $100,000 in deductions 
        and slashed pricing discrepancies by over 60%--from 21,000 to 8,000--in 
        the first year improvements were instituted. 
         
        J. M. Juran:  
        Process Mapping to Find Bottlenecks 
         
        Juran pointed out that there are at least two important aspects of 
        quality: product performance and freedom from deficiencies.  Product 
        performance refers to how well a product meets the customer's needs. 
        Freedom from deficiencies means absence of defects. Quality must have 
        both aspects. If the product performance is just what the customer 
        ordered, but it has one or more defects, the customer will not buy it. 
        Likewise, if a product is completely defect free, but it isn't what the 
        customer wants, it will also not be purchased. Juran emphasizes mapping 
        the entire process to expose bottlenecks that hinder the process in some 
        way. Once a bottleneck is identified, it can be corrected and the 
        process will improve. Then the next bottleneck can be exposed and 
        eliminated. 
         
        How can Juran's precepts be applied to sales?  Juran's concept of 
        product performance and freedom from deficiencies certainly apply. Those 
        who have studied the subject know that sales is a process with many 
        steps, each delivering a "product" to subsequent steps for use by the 
        next customer (who may be internal to the organization) within the 
        process. Some of the sales products delivered (in the sense that leads 
        are a "product" delivered to reps, and quotes are "products" delivered 
        to customers) either meet the reps' or the end customers' needs (product 
        performance) or they do not. Some of the products in the sales process 
        contain outright defects, such as mistakes (a lead classified as hot 
        when it was cold or a proposal containing math or pricing errors). 
        Juran's recommendation to map a process to help point out bottlenecks 
        applies, too. If we mapped out the cycle times, costs, quality levels of 
        the outputs at each step of the sales process (such as lead generation - 
        contract - presentation - estimation- proposal development - closing - 
        order entry - servicing, etc.), glaring bottlenecks would be revealed. 
         
        When Ascom Timeplex applied this technique to their sales process, they 
        found that it took ten days to simply enter the order, more than six 
        weeks for the total order cycle from entry to delivery to be completed, 
        and as many as four days just to give customers a quote or proposal. 
        Mapping the process highlighted these problems. They were able to 
        identify the bottlenecks and fix them. In this fashion, they were able 
        to reduce order entry to four days, reduce the total order cycle to four 
        and a half weeks, and proposal generation to a matter of hours. Once the 
        bottlenecks were solved, the quality of the entire sales process was 
        greatly improved. 
         
        Shingo: 
        100% Inspection or Foolproofing 
         
        Shigeo Shingo is the father of hundreds, and possibly thousands, of 
        fool-proofing (poka-yoke) techniques now used throughout modern 
        manufacturing and assembly. Shingo emphasized devising mechanical means 
        so that mistakes would be prevented through their physical 
        impossibility. Modern wiring harnesses, for example, combine both a 
        unique shape and a physical locking device to simultaneously prevent 
        connecting two lines "backwards," and lock them together so that normal 
        day-to-day vibration cannot work the connection loose. To Shingo, 
        waiting to sample a batch of goods or parts after they were created or 
        assembled was too late. Thus, the very act of fool-proofed assembly 
        produced 100% inspection at the source of each operation. 
         
        In the sales process, to apply foolproofing, we have to creatively find 
        ways to prevent mistakes so that errors physically cannot happen. The 
        specific solutions to individual problems will vary.  To test whether 
        the principle makes sense without saying what the specific solution is, 
        just ask yourself a few simple questions.  Do you like seeing hundreds 
        of dollars wasted through non-deliverable mail in each mail campaign you 
        oversee? Wouldn't it be desirable to develop a procedure where names 
        that should have been purged from a cold call or mailing list, are, in 
        fact, removed prior to their use?   Is it good for salespeople to 
        mismatch product components in their quotes? Wouldn't it be better to 
        physically prevent such mismatching? Is it smart to allow salespeople to 
        quote discounts that means products are unintentionally sold below 
        costs? Wouldn't it be better to automatically head off such a 
        possibility? Incidentally, solutions to each of these problems now 
        exist. If you think about it, you'll probably come up with dozens of 
        areas where, conceivably, you could prevent mistakes through mechanical 
        or computerized devices. 
         
        Modern computer firms such as Dell and Gateway use an automated product 
        configurator to allow order entry telephone personnel to electronically 
        call up all the allowable add-on components that may be combined with, 
        say, a 486-based PC being ordered. The non-compatible options do not 
        even appear in the list from which options may be selected. In this way, 
        errors cannot even occur because orders can only be placed with 
        compatible configurations. 
         
        Crosby: 
        COQ--The Cost of Quality 
         
        "Quality is free," says Philip Crosby. "What costs money is not doing 
        things right the first time." Aside from the contribution he made by 
        popularizing quality in the US, Crosby helped work out the cost/benefit 
        economics related to quality. Crosby's cost of quality (COQ) formula 
        takes into account all the costs accrued when things aren't done right, 
        including more than 30 factors in three key areas: failure-related 
        costs, inspection-related costs, and costs associated with prevention. 
        Taking economics into account, Crosby was able to demonstrate two 
        critical points: first, that quality is "free," and secondly, that 
        improving quality is a profit-maker. Crosby calculated that, on the 
        average, each dollar not spent doing things wrong or having to fix 
        things not done right the first time yields an additional fifty cents to 
        the bottom line. In this way, he pointed out that improving the quality 
        of what you were doing right now might be even more of a priority than, 
        say, simply trying to increase sales. 
         
        Crosby's inspiration to examine costs associated with defective 
        processes offers great potential to inspire top management to support 
        sales process improvement efforts.  If we counted the costs associated 
        with management inspection of sales decisions made in the field, the 
        costs associated with correcting poor impressions made on potential 
        customers viewing a flawed sales presentation, or the costs associated 
        with winning back a now-unhappy customer, most organizations would 
        immediately take action to prevent another single dollar from being lost 
        in this fashion. In manufacturing, Crosby estimated that up to 20% of 
        all income received was spent on the cost of (poor) quality. What do you 
        imagine the percentage of all income wasted on poor quality is, thanks 
        to faulty sales processes? 
         
        When the U.S. Postal Service sought to improve its sales effort, it 
        examined problems associated with its sales presentations.  After the 
        quality of the presentation was improved, $5 million in incremental 
        revenue came from the region using the new presentation. Yes, quality is 
        not only free, it pays. 
         
        By the way, all four major quality figures recommend that companies act 
        in a way that gives the customer what will help the customer. Many 
        process improvement efforts focus on helping internal customers 
        (employees) within a process, especially salespeople and their managers. 
        Nalco Chemical Company, a billion dollar-plus specialty chemicals firm, 
        chose to focus on the needs of its external customers in its improvement 
        efforts. Nalco installed monitors on its customers' equipment, which 
        automatically call Nalco's chemical engineers the minute it looks like 
        the specifications set up for that process are about to go out of spec. 
        In some cases, Nalco is able to inform its customers own personnel, even 
        before the customer has spotted the problem itself. Customer-oriented 
        systems such as this and others have earned Nalco more than $14 million 
        in saved jeopardy accounts. That's customer orientation that pays off. 
         
        The four quality leaders we have reviewed have much more to say, of 
        course. In this article, we could only touch on some of the more notable 
        aspects of these four   distinguished quality figures. We obviously feel 
        that quality principles aimed at improving manufacturing and 
        design-related processes also apply to the sales process. Unfortunately, 
        as the reader who explores this topic further will find, these great men 
        were not familiar enough with the field of sales to directly comment at 
        length on how the principles of quality, so successful in manufacturing, 
        apply to sales. In this article, we have briefly shown that, not only is 
        such a translation possible, it is well worth performing. Both common 
        sense and the financial success of companies already engaged in sales 
        process improvement argue for a strong push to translate and apply the 
        techniques of quality improvement to the sales process. 
         
        A word of caution. It is possible to move too fast and with too little 
        thought in the name of sales process improvement.  Today, we have 
        observed that companies often place people in charge of sales automation 
        and re-engineering efforts who have little background in either field. 
        This can easily result in the misapplication of technology and/or 
        principles. 
         
        What usually happens is that an inexperienced project leader, someone 
        who has neither read the most basic primers in the field, nor even 
        attended the most fundamental of workshops or other professional 
        development activities, puts notebook computers, E-Mail, a spreadsheet 
        package, and a word processing program into the hands of the sales reps 
        and then wonders why sales don't magically improve. That this is allowed 
        to happen borders on professional negligence, but is probably more a 
        case of well-intentioned enthusiasm coupled with old-fashioned 
        ignorance. From a practical point of view, slap-dash approaches don't 
        work in industries where an extensive body of knowledge is available, 
        let alone in a fledgling field such as sales process and quality 
        improvement. 
         
        A recent statistic from Operations & Fulfillment magazine 
        (October, 1993) makes this point. The results of their analysis show 
        that equipment alone does not improve productivity. Companies who use an 
        engineering study approach claimed 31% productivity increases when 
        installing new equipment, while those simply investing in new equipment 
        without the use of such advance planning actually experienced a decrease 
        in productivity of 1%. 
         
        By recognizing sales as a process, the principles of TQM can be used to 
        bring about dramatic increases in sales productivity and profitability. 
        Even as we learn more about the specific techniques for doing so, let's 
        keep in mind one of the most fundamental of guiding questions that all 
        of the quality experts repeatedly stress. It may be the simplest of all: 
        what best serves the customer? Those of us who believe in the Golden 
        Rule recognize that particular quality rule with no surprise. 
         
        © 1994 Paul H. Selden All Rights Reserved. Please call for permission 
        to reprint or republish. 
         
        Originally published in the Sales Automation Association's quarterly 
        journal, "Sales Process Engineering & Automation Review," December 1994. 
        
         
         
        Return to Articles Table of Contents.
  |