Recently, I have been spending a lot of time talking with managers about their underperforming salespeople.
I want to help leaders win, and having AEs who are not performing is a huge problem for most. This made me reflect on how leaders hire and where they spend their time. Unfortunately, many leaders spend a lot of their time with AEs who have a “talent” deficit.
You can’t go back to the same dry well looking for water. No matter how much time and energy you put into the well, water will not suddenly appear.
Still, many leaders think they can change the person, and they keep putting time and training into them, hoping they will suddenly “get it”.
A better approach is to know what you are looking for in an AE and then hire based on how the candidate’s “talent” fits the description of what you need. Training to a person’s strengths almost always inspires success.
A common belief is that as we age and gain more experience, our talents evolve, too. However, our natural behavior patterns are set at a young age and remain consistent throughout life. What changes is not our talents themselves but how we use them.
As we grow and mature, we learn to navigate the world more effectively, often finding ways to leverage our strengths and work around our weaknesses.
For example, a competitive individual doesn’t become less competitive over time; they learn to express it more constructively. Managing emotions, like tempering frustration in socially acceptable ways, reflects maturity, not a shift in core talents.
The idea that anyone can master a skill through practice alone is overstated. While deliberate practice certainly leads to improvement, research shows it can only take you so far, especially in unpredictable fields like sales.
Practice can lead to a 26% improvement in stable environments like games. However, the improvement might be just 1% in fields like sales. Talent provides the foundation for excellence, and while practice helps, it cannot replace natural talent.
It’s tempting to believe that working hard enough can turn any weakness into a strength. While you can certainly improve in weak areas with enough effort, the gains are usually modest—around 10%.
On the other hand, if you focus on developing your strengths, you can improve dramatically, sometimes by as much as 10x! The most successful people focus on amplifying their strengths rather than eliminating weaknesses, making the latter largely irrelevant.
The assumption that talented individuals need less coaching is false. Even the most talented people, like athletes, continue to seek guidance and improvement throughout their careers.
Talented individuals may require a different type of coaching—one that challenges and pushes their boundaries—but they still need consistent support. Coaching them is an investment that can yield significant returns, as it helps them refine their skills and reach their full potential.
It’s easy to think that a manager’s talent can compensate for a salesperson’s weaknesses. While a manager can provide some support, relying too heavily on this dynamic is unsustainable.
If a salesperson consistently struggles because they lack the core talents required for the job, it places undue strain on the manager and the employee.
The best approach is to align people’s roles with their natural strengths. When people are in roles that fit them well, they thrive—and so does the team.
By focusing on talent and strengths, both individuals and teams can thrive in roles that play to their natural abilities.
*Editor's Note: This blog has been updated since its original publish date.