Blog | No Smoke and Mirrors

No Smoke Performance Culture Transition Diagnostic

0 Comments

NO SMOKE & MIRRORS™

Performance Culture

Transition Diagnostic

A 10-Category, 50-Question Sales Culture Assessment for B2B Sales Organizations

PURPOSE

To determine whether an experienced B2B sales organization is prepared to transition from an autonomy-based, experience-driven culture to a performance-based culture.

nosmokeandmirrors.com

BEFORE YOU BEGIN

How to Use This Diagnostic

Who Should Complete It

The CEO or owner, the sales leader, sales managers, and a representative sample of salespeople should complete this diagnostic. Wherever possible, compare leadership’s perception of the organization against the sales team’s perception of the same questions — the gap between those two views is often more revealing than either score alone.

How to Score Each Question

Rate each statement honestly, using the scale below. Resist the instinct to score generously. A diagnostic that reflects aspiration instead of reality won’t identify anything worth fixing.

1	Significant weakness
2	Weak
3	Inconsistent
4	Strong
5	Institutionalized

How the Results Are Used

The diagnostic has 10 categories, each with 5 questions scored 1 to 5, for a maximum of 25 points per category and 250 points overall. Total your score at the end of each section, then carry all ten section scores into the summary scoring guide that follows the diagnostic. The overall score matters. The category-by-category profile matters more — a company can score acceptably overall while carrying a serious, specific weakness that an aggregate number will hide.

SECTION 1 OF 10

Strategic Alignment

Question	1	2	3	4	5
1. Our sales team understands exactly where the company is going over the next 1–3 years.	○	○	○	○	○
2. Revenue goals are supported by a specific sales strategy.	○	○	○	○	○
3. We know where incremental revenue is expected to come from.	○	○	○	○	○
4. Salespeople understand which customers, markets, and opportunities have the greatest strategic value.	○	○	○	○	○
5. Individual territory plans are connected to the company’s strategic plan.	○	○	○	○	○

Section Score: ______ / 25

NO SMOKE QUESTION

If I asked five salespeople where the next $5 million of revenue is supposed to come from, would I get essentially the same answer? If not, you don’t have alignment. You have individual interpretations of the strategy.

SECTION 2 OF 10

Performance Expectations

Question	1	2	3	4	5
1. Everyone understands exactly what constitutes strong sales performance.	○	○	○	○	○
2. Expectations include behaviors as well as revenue results.	○	○	○	○	○
3. Salespeople know the weekly activities required to achieve their goals.	○	○	○	○	○
4. Underperformance is addressed quickly rather than tolerated.	○	○	○	○	○
5. High performers and low performers are managed differently based on objective performance data.	○	○	○	○	○

Section Score: ______ / 25

WARNING SIGN

If the dominant cultural phrase is “I’m doing the best I can,” ask: “How do we objectively know?” Effort is important. Performance is measurable.

SECTION 3 OF 10

Sales Skills

Question	1	2	3	4	5
1. We have objectively assessed our sales team’s skills.	○	○	○	○	○
2. Salespeople are strong at discovery and questioning.	○	○	○	○	○
3. Salespeople can clearly articulate customer value and differentiation.	○	○	○	○	○
4. Salespeople know how to diagnose objections rather than simply overcome them.	○	○	○	○	○
5. Salespeople have the skills necessary to prospect consistently.	○	○	○	○	○

Section Score: ______ / 25

NO SMOKE TEST

Ask each salesperson: “Why should your ideal customer choose your company instead of your three strongest competitors?” If answers vary dramatically — or focus primarily on products and features — you have a capability issue.

SECTION 4 OF 10

Sales Process

Question	1	2	3	4	5
1. We have a defined sales process.	○	○	○	○	○
2. Salespeople consistently follow it.	○	○	○	○	○
3. Sales stages have objective exit criteria.	○	○	○	○	○
4. Pipeline stages reflect buyer behavior rather than salesperson optimism.	○	○	○	○	○
5. Managers use the sales process to coach opportunities.	○	○	○	○	○

Section Score: ______ / 25

THE NO SMOKE TEST

Look at 10 opportunities. Ask: “What specifically has to happen for each opportunity to move to the next stage?” If the answer is different for every salesperson, the company probably doesn’t have a sales process. It has individual selling styles.

SECTION 5 OF 10

Territory & Account Planning

Question	1	2	3	4	5
1. Every salesperson has a documented territory strategy.	○	○	○	○	○
2. Target accounts are prioritized using objective criteria.	○	○	○	○	○
3. Major accounts have growth plans.	○	○	○	○	○
4. Salespeople know which accounts have the greatest unrealized potential.	○	○	○	○	○
5. Territory plans are reviewed and coached by management.	○	○	○	○	○

Section Score: ______ / 25

NO SMOKE QUESTION

If you removed the salesperson tomorrow, could another salesperson understand how the territory generates revenue? If the answer is no, you may have a relationship-dependent business rather than a scalable sales organization.

SECTION 6 OF 10

Sales Management & Coaching

Question	1	2	3	4	5
1. Sales managers regularly coach salespeople.	○	○	○	○	○
2. Coaching focuses on specific behaviors and skills.	○	○	○	○	○
3. Managers spend time observing salespeople in real customer situations.	○	○	○	○	○
4. Pipeline reviews are coaching conversations rather than forecast interrogations.	○	○	○	○	○
5. Managers hold people accountable for agreed-upon actions.	○	○	○	○	○

Section Score: ______ / 25

CRITICAL QUESTION

Ask the sales manager: “Who did you coach last week, what behavior did you coach, and what changed as a result?” If you can’t answer, you don’t have a coaching culture. You have a management culture.

SECTION 7 OF 10

Data & Accountability

Question	1	2	3	4	5
1. We know the key numbers that drive sales performance.	○	○	○	○	○
2. Sales activity is measured where activity is predictive of results.	○	○	○	○	○
3. Pipeline data is accurate.	○	○	○	○	○
4. Sales performance is reviewed consistently.	○	○	○	○	○
5. Decisions are based more on evidence than opinion.	○	○	○	○	○

Section Score: ______ / 25

NO SMOKE PRINCIPLE

You can’t manage what you don’t measure. But don’t measure everything. Measure the numbers that tell you why revenue is happening — or isn’t happening.

SECTION 8 OF 10

Culture & Change Readiness

Question	1	2	3	4	5
1. People understand why the organization needs to change.	○	○	○	○	○
2. Experienced employees feel respected during the transition.	○	○	○	○	○
3. Employees are willing to learn new approaches.	○	○	○	○	○
4. Resistance to change is discussed openly.	○	○	○	○	○
5. People believe accountability applies consistently to everyone.	○	○	○	○	○

Section Score: ______ / 25

RED FLAG

If experienced salespeople say “we’ve always done it this way,” don’t immediately label that resistance. Ask: “What specifically about the new approach do you believe won’t work?” Legitimate market knowledge may be buried in the resistance. Listen. Then test it against the data.

SECTION 9 OF 10

Knowledge Transfer & Retirement Risk

This section becomes particularly important when a significant percentage of the sales team may retire within the next three years.

Question	1	2	3	4	5
1. We know which critical customer relationships are concentrated with individual salespeople.	○	○	○	○	○
2. Key account knowledge is documented.	○	○	○	○	○
3. We have identified potential successors for critical territories.	○	○	○	○	○
4. Experienced salespeople actively mentor developing salespeople.	○	○	○	○	○
5. We have a plan to transfer institutional knowledge before people retire.	○	○	○	○	○

Section Score: ______ / 25

NO SMOKE QUESTION

If three of your most experienced salespeople retired tomorrow, how much customer knowledge would walk out the door with them? That isn’t a retirement problem. It’s a business continuity problem.

SECTION 10 OF 10

Leadership Commitment

Question	1	2	3	4	5
1. Senior leadership is aligned on the need for cultural change.	○	○	○	○	○
2. Leadership consistently reinforces the new expectations.	○	○	○	○	○
3. Leaders are willing to make difficult performance decisions.	○	○	○	○	○
4. Leaders will invest in the capabilities required to achieve the new expectations.	○	○	○	○	○
5. Leadership holds itself accountable for creating the environment required for performance.	○	○	○	○	○

Section Score: ______ / 25

NO SMOKE QUESTION

Would your sales team describe leadership’s commitment to this transition as consistent — or as something that intensifies before the annual meeting and fades by February?

INTERPRETING YOUR RESULTS

Scoring the Diagnostic

The diagnostic includes 50 questions across 10 categories, for a maximum score of 250 points. Add your 10 section scores together for the overall total, then find the corresponding range below.

225–250	Performance Culture Ready The organization has most of the infrastructure required for a performance culture. The challenge is execution, consistency, and continuous improvement.
200–224	Transition Ready The foundation exists, but several areas could undermine the transition. Leadership should identify the two or three lowest-scoring categories and address those first.
175–199	Significant Culture Gap The company may have performance expectations, but the systems supporting those expectations are inconsistent. Training alone will not solve the problem.
150–174	Performance Culture at Risk Significant gaps exist in strategy, process, skills, management, or accountability. A structured transformation is warranted.
Below 150	Operating System Reset Required The organization is likely depending heavily on individual experience, relationships, and discretionary effort. Before increasing targets, leadership should establish the infrastructure required to produce and manage performance.

READ THE PROFILE, NOT JUST THE TOTAL

The More Important Score

Don’t stop at the overall score. Look at the ten category scores individually. A company can score 210 overall — comfortably in the “Transition Ready” range — and still be carrying a serious, specific weakness the aggregate number hides completely. Here’s a real profile that illustrates exactly that:

Category	Score / 25
Strategic Alignment	22
Performance Expectations	23
Sales Skills	15
Sales Process	17
Territory Planning	14
Coaching	12
Data & Accountability	21
Culture & Change	19
Knowledge Transfer	16
Leadership Commitment	23

The overall score here — 210 — might look acceptable. But the profile tells a very different story. This company doesn’t have a motivation problem. It has a capability, process, territory planning, and coaching problem, highlighted above. That’s precisely where the No Smoke approach becomes valuable: it points leadership at the specific gap, not a vague sense that something needs to improve.

FROM DIAGNOSTIC TO TRANSFORMATION

The No Smoke & Mirrors Performance Culture Model

The diagnostic identifies the gap. This six-step model closes it.

1	ALIGN	Where are we going? Define the growth objective.
2	DIAGNOSE	What’s really preventing us from getting there? Assess people, process, skills, behaviors, beliefs, customer relationships, and data.
3	DESIGN	What must change? Build the sales process, KPIs, territory strategy, and performance expectations.
4	DEVELOP	Can our people do what we’re asking them to do? Train the skills and capabilities required.
5	COACH	Are people actually applying what they learned? Make managers responsible for reinforcing the behaviors.
6	ACCOUNT	Are we doing what we said we would do? Measure performance and address gaps.

Goals → Plans → Behaviors → Coaching → Accountability → Results

THE EXECUTIVE DISCUSSION GUIDE

The CEO’s Final 10 Questions

Use these as the discussion guide once the diagnostic is scored. They belong in the room with senior leadership, not just in the results binder.

1	Do we have a growth goal — or a growth strategy?
2	Does every salesperson know what they must do differently to achieve the company’s growth objectives?
3	Are we measuring sales behaviors or just sales results?
4	Do we know the actual skill gaps on our sales team?
5	Do we have a sales process — or 20 different ways of selling?
6	Are our sales managers actually coaching?
7	Are our territories strategically planned or simply inherited?
8	How much institutional knowledge could walk out the door through retirement?
9	Are we tolerating performance because someone is experienced, well-liked, or has long-standing customer relationships?
10	*If nothing about our sales organization’s behavior changed over the next 12 months, would we still achieve our growth objective?*

That last question is the No Smoke question.

If the honest answer is no, the organization doesn’t need another motivational sales meeting. It needs a performance transformation.

Now that you have diagnosed your sales culture, let’s schedule a call and discuss writing a plan to get you where you need to be.

What If Rejection Is Really Redirection?

0 Comments

Every salesperson knows the sting. You research the account, make the call, run the meeting, and send the proposal. Then you hear it: no. Most of us treat that word as a verdict on the deal, the pitch, or ourselves. But what if it isn’t a verdict at all? What if rejection is really redirection? I don’t mean that as a poster on a break-room wall. I mean it literally.

A “no” carries information about what the buyer values, what they fear, what they are already committed to, and what is going on inside their business. Salespeople who treat it as a dead end walk away with nothing. Salespeople who treat it as a signal walk away knowing where to go next.

Where this idea came from

This idea comes from my friend and editor, Matthew Harms. He coached and edited my three books. ( If you want to write your book, Matt and his team make it very easy) He gave me the thought that rejection might be a form of redirection, and I wanted to unpack it for people who sell for a living. I have written about rejection before, but this thought about redirection can help many salespeople become rejection-proof.

Here is the short, no-smoke-and-mirrors version.

The “no” you receive is rarely the real problem. What you do in the next thirty seconds decides whether the conversation ends or turns toward something that matters more to the buyer.

**What “Rejection Proof” teaches**

The best book I know on this subject is Rejection Proof: How I Beat Fear and Became Invincible Through 100 Days of Rejection by Jia Jiang. Jiang let the fear of rejection run his life, so he quit his job and spent 100 days deliberately seeking out situations where he would be told no. One request was for donuts shaped and iced like the Olympic rings. Another was to pilot a light aircraft.

What he found surprised him. He learned to handle rejection, and he discovered that even outrageous requests are sometimes granted when you ask the right way. Here are the key takeaways I would hand to every salesperson, drawn from a summary of the book’s lessons:

Rejection is an opinion, not a fact. It reflects the person saying no, along with their context and circumstances. It is not a ruling on your worth or your offer.
Ask why before you say goodbye. Staying in the conversation and asking “why” often reveals the real reason behind the no and gives you a chance to address it.
Collaborate, don’t contend. Arguing with the person rejecting you ends the conversation. Working with them to find a version of the request they can accept keeps it alive.
Use rejection to improve. Every no is feedback on your idea, your timing, or your approach.
Focus on what you control. You control your effort and your actions. You don’t control the outcome, so detach.

Notice what these five have in common. None of them tells you to push harder. They tell you to get curious.

Three ways a “no” reveals a more important need

Here is where redirection becomes practical. A rejection tells you what the buyer values more than your offer. These three illustrative scenarios show how.

The “no” that exposes the real priority. Say you pitch a way to cut costs and hear, “That’s not a priority right now.” Ask what a priority is, and the buyer tells you their biggest worry is losing customers. Your product may still fit, but now you are talking about retention, which is the need that gets budget. Without the “no,” you would have kept selling savings to someone who cared about something else.
The “no” that exposes what the buyer is protecting. Say the answer is, “We’re happy with what we have.” Ask what they like most about it, and you learn the real need is avoiding disruption. They aren’t defending a product. They are defending a process that works. That points you toward a small, low-risk first step instead of a full replacement.
The “no” that exposes missing proof. Say you hear, “It costs too much.” Ask what the problem is costing them today, and you often find nobody has put a number on it. The need underneath the price objection is confidence in the return. Your redirect is to help them measure the problem before you defend the price.

In all three, the rejection didn’t close the door. It pointed to a different one.

What Are The Five common business rejections, and how do you respond?

These are the five I hear most often in sales conversations. For each one, the response follows the same pattern: acknowledge it, ask a curious question, and set a next step.

“We’re not interested.”

What it often means: You haven’t connected to a problem they care about, or you caught them at a bad moment.

How to respond: Don’t defend. Acknowledge it and ask permission for one question: “Fair enough. Before I go, how are you handling [specific challenge] today?” If the answer is still no, leave with a specific reason to return, not a vague “keep in touch.”

“Your price is too high.”

What it often means: They don’t yet see enough value, they’re comparing you to something that isn’t equivalent, or the budget is genuinely tight.

How to respond: Resist the urge to discount first. Ask, “Compared to what?” Then ask what the problem is costing them today. Put a number on it together, then show the return against your price.

“We already have a vendor.”

What it often means: Switching feels risky, and the current supplier meets at least some of their needs.

How to respond: Never attack the incumbent. Ask what they value most about the relationship and what they would change if they could. Then offer a low-risk way in, such as a trial order, a second-source role, or a single project.

“Now isn’t a good time.”

What it often means: Another priority has their attention or budget, or the problem isn’t urgent yet.

How to respond: Ask what is taking priority and what would need to change for this to move up. Then agree on a dated follow-up tied to a real event, such as a budget cycle, an expansion, or an equipment replacement, and keep adding value until then.

“Send me some information.” or “I need to think about it.”

What it often means: Either a polite brush-off or a concern they haven’t said out loud.

How to respond: Say yes, then ask one question first: “What specifically do you want to see to make a decision?” Set a date for the follow-up before you hang up. If you sense hesitation, ask directly, “What would make this an easy yes or an easy no?”

A real “no” deserves respect. Thank them, leave the door open, and move on to someone who needs what you do. The goal is never to pressure a buyer. It is to find out whether there is a need worth solving.

The No Smoke & Mirrors Takeaway on Rejection

Treat every “no” as data. Ask one curious question, then sort what you hear: wrong timing, wrong person, wrong problem, or missing value. Log it. A pattern of “no” answers across a team is some of the most useful intelligence a sales organization has, because it shows where your message misses and what buyers care about instead.

That is the heart of redirection. The word “no” isn’t the end of the map. It is the buyer telling you which road they would rather take.

So the next time you hear it, resist the urge to push, retreat, or move on. Get curious. Ask why. You may find that the rejection was pointing you toward the sale that matters.

No smoke. No mirrors. Just better questions.

Let’s schedule a call if you want your sales team to be rejection-proof. It is one of my most popular sales training courses.

Sources

Why Q4 Is the Best Time to Fix a Sales Performance Problem, Not the Time to Postpone It

0 Comments

It’s the fourth quarter of the year. A few teams in each industry are driving explosive growth; most are not. I recently spoke with a B2B company president who initially wanted help getting to the root cause(s) of why her team isn’t hitting its sales growth plan (again). Interestingly, the VP of sales said No, this is not a good time to assess salespeople and deal with sales performance issues…we need everyone selling.

I heard… “Let’s give them some time. Maybe they’ll turn it around.”

(But didn’t the president share that they contacted me because this is the third year in a row your team will likely miss your sales goals?)

I’ve heard some version of that sentence hundreds of times from managers, sales leaders, and CEOs each month, and even more so in the fourth quarter. I understand exactly why they say it. Everyone’s busy; there’s a budget to hit and a year to close out. Waiting simply feels easier than having the data and possibly tough conversations. It’s always someone leading sales…a sales manager, sales VP, or CRO who fights the no-smoke-and-mirrors process of assessing the sales team’s effectiveness and conducting voice-of-customer interviews.

Some sales leaders personalize their reason to identify and fix root causes of poor performance even further… “I have a lot riding on hitting our goal or coming close in my year-end bonus; I can’t afford the team to be distracted.”

My favorite reason not to fix sales problems over the past 40 years was…” I am not going to assess my sales team; it will give the president a stick he will beat me with.”

Here’s the problem: sales performance issues almost never solve themselves. They get more expensive, more visible, and harder to fix the longer they sit. I saw this early in my career as VP of sales for a B2B manufacturing company in Ohio.

That’s exactly why Q4 is one of the best times of year to address sales performance problems.

Not because year-end is a convenient moment for hard conversations. Because by Q4 you have something every leader needs to make a good decision: evidence. Nearly a full year of results, behaviors, missed commitments, and customer feedback. You don’t have to guess anymore. You can see the pattern.

Nobody Fails Overnight

A salesperson doesn’t suddenly become ineffective in November. A manager doesn’t suddenly stop coaching in October. Usually there were signals all year — a missed goal, a customer complaint, a declining pipeline, repeated excuses — and the real problem was never that leadership missed the signs. It’s that leadership explained them away. They’re having a tough quarter. The market’s difficult. They’ve been here a long time. We don’t want to lose them. Another month passes, and then another. Often the root causes are diluted by the time they reach the senior leadership team.

The Debt Compounds Like Any Other Debt

When a performance issue continues, the cost doesn’t stay contained to one person. Other employees notice. High performers quietly pick up the slack. Standards become negotiable, and the person with the problem learns that consequences aren’t actually coming. I call the accumulated result performance debt, the cost of letting unacceptable performance continue because addressing it was uncomfortable or simply wasn’t the priority that week. Like financial debt, it compounds. The longer it sits, the more expensive the correction gets. I just delivered a keynote for a trade association, and I discussed how veering off course by just 1% over time can land you in the wrong place.

**“Let’s Give Them Time” Isn’t Always Kind**

There’s a real difference between giving someone a fair chance to improve and simply avoiding the conversation. If an employee doesn’t know there’s a problem, they haven’t had a real opportunity to fix it.

As I shared in a recent post, I find many B2B experienced sales teams believe doing their best is good enough. If you haven’t provided coaching or resources, you may be mistaking a development gap for an attitude problem.

No Smoke and Mirrors Truth: If expectations were clear, support was provided, and nothing changed anyway, waiting longer doesn’t make it fairer. It just delays the decision that was always coming.

This tracks with Gallup’s research on feedback frequency: employees who strongly agree they received meaningful feedback in the past week are roughly 80% likely to be fully engaged, compared to about one in four when they didn’t. Gallup has also found that employees are 3.6 times more likely to be motivated to do outstanding work with daily feedback than with annual-only reviews. The lesson isn’t that every employee needs a formal sit-down weekly. It’s that performance management has to happen while the work is happening, not exclusively at year-end — and Q4 is where that habit either gets built or gets postponed one more year.

Part of why sales performance gets postponed so often is that the conversation itself feels genuinely hard. A Harris Poll survey of managers, cited by Harvard Business Review, found 69% admitted they’re regularly uncomfortable communicating with employees at all, and 37% specifically said they avoid giving direct negative feedback for fear of how it’ll land. That discomfort is real. It’s also not a reason to let a full year pass without addressing what everyone already privately knows.

When It Comes to Sales Performance Issues: Don’t Confuse a Skill Problem with a Will Problem

I remember having a sales mentor ask: “Mark, is this a can-do or will-do problem?” and I never forgot it. This distinction matters most for sales leaders specifically. A rep who isn’t prospecting because they don’t know how to prospect has a skill problem, and that calls for coaching. A rep who knows exactly what to do and simply isn’t doing it has a different problem, and that calls for accountability. If their prospecting drops each month, you’ll land in a 4^th quarter well below where you planned to end up.

The same split applies to managers who aren’t coaching — if they were never taught how, train them; if they know it’s the job and keep deprioritizing it anyway, that’s a leadership-accountability issue, not a training gap. Don’t train a motivation problem. Don’t punish a skill problem. Diagnose before you prescribe.

More Sales Tools Do Not Fix Sales Performance Issues

Unfortunately, many sales leaders try to handle performance issues with more tools. If I can’t get my salespeople to prospect, I’ll get AI to do it. If my salespeople are not following up, I will get AI to do it, and the list goes on and on. In my experience, new tools require even more training and more effort to ensure salespeople use the tools you invested in.

Fixing Sales Performance Issues in Q4 Isn’t About Firing People

Addressing a performance problem early doesn’t mean ending it with a termination. If you have read my content or heard me speak, I believe everyone is destined for greatness. Often, they haven’t been trained, or they are in the wrong role. It usually means you have more real options: coach, retrain, clarify expectations, change the responsibilities, set measurable milestones, build a real 30-, 60-, or 90-day improvement plan. Sometimes, after doing all of that, you learn the person genuinely isn’t right for the role. We often move employees with strong desire and loyalty into roles where they can deliver the most value elsewhere in the organization.

At least that decision gets made on evidence instead of accumulated frustration.

How do you have Sales Performance Issues Conversations?

Frustration is exactly what you want to avoid bringing into the conversation. Start with facts: your target was $2 million, you’re at $1.4 million, pipeline coverage is below standard, prospecting activity has been below the agreed level, your prospecting calls are well below our behavior targets. Let’s understand what’s happening and what needs to change. That’s accountability. “You’re just not getting it done” is judgment, and it rarely produces anything except defensiveness.

Five Questions Worth Building the Sales Performance Conversation Around

What was expected, specifically — goals, behaviors, standards?

What happened, based on evidence, not assumptions?

Why the gap exists — skill, resources, priorities, process, or genuine commitment?

What specifically needs to change, in numbers a person can act on, not “improve your performance”

What happens next — a timeline, who owns what, when progress gets reviewed, and what happens in both directions depending on whether it improves.

Use Q4 as the Sales Performance Reset, Not Just the Budget Meeting

Look at every critical role and ask plainly: do we have the right person, in the right role, with clear expectations, being properly coached, and being held accountable for the results the business needs?

Those questions aren’t there to create fear. They’re there to create clarity, and clarity is one of the most valuable things a leader can hand someone.

“We’ll deal with it next year” is one of the most expensive sentences in business, because next year arrives and the same person is still struggling, the same manager is still avoiding it, and leadership now has another full year of evidence that it was never going to fix itself.

Q4 is the chance to stop that cycle — not with knee-jerk decisions or a sudden hard-boss persona, but by doing what leadership is actually for: define the standard, diagnose the gap, coach the person, build accountability, and make the call. That’s how Q4 stops being the end of a disappointing year and starts being the beginning of a better one.

Do you want to get to the root causes of why sales will likely miss plan again this year before your meeting with the board and investors?

Do you want to ensure your salespeople have the right skills, beliefs, systems, and tools to have a much stronger year next year?

Do you want to get to the root cause of why sales performance is not a plan, but someone in sales is giving you (sometimes emotional) pushback?

Have your PE Investors asked for your turnaround plan to meet the value growth model they shared?

Could it be that your sales skills and systems cannot execute your strategic growth plan?

Could it be that your sales team isn’t motivated and feels doing their best is good enough?

Could the grey tsunami be impacting your sales performance as some once top performers have let off the gas as they prepare to retire?

Keep in mind that correcting sales skills and systems issues is not an overnight or even a one-month event. Some teams have taken six to twelve months or more. So, can you really wait as your salespeople drift off course more each month?

Let’s schedule a call to discuss our no-smoke-and-mirrors process. Let’s not put off understanding root causes because some members of the team do not want to have difficult conversations; they likely should have had a year ago.

Research referenced: Gallup, “Fast Feedback Fuels Performance”, on feedback frequency and engagement; Interact/Harris Poll survey of U.S. managers, cited via Harvard Business Review, on discomfort with direct feedback conversations.

“Do Your Best” Isn’t a Sales Performance Strategy. Here’s What Actually Replaces It.

0 Comments

For years, plenty of B2B companies have run on goals without a real plan to hit them.

All the teams I have served had goals. Some turned those goals into Excel spreadsheets with quarterly projections. Less than 20% wrote a strategic growth plan. The annual sales kickoff meeting happens, a number gets set, everyone nods, and the team goes back to doing exactly what it’s always done, believing that if they do their best, it is still good enough. (In some cases, returning to how they sold for ten years or more) Some hit the number.( about 11%-13%) Some come close.(About 20%- 30%.)) Many ( most) miss their goals and explain it away — the market, tariffs, competition, the war, the economy.

Management is not happy with the performance-to-plan variance, and usually accepts the explanation, and the unwritten rule quietly becomes: if you’re working hard and doing your best, that’s good enough.

That model survives for years. Until ownership changes. A new CEO, a new President, a new sales leader, private equity money invested, the next generation taking over the family business, and rising growth expectations; margins start mattering more, and “do your best” stops being a strategy. That’s where the collision starts. If you don’t manage it correctly, your business will suffer, and you may lose some of your top-performing salespeople.

The Sales Problem Was Never Effort

This distinction matters more than most leadership teams realize. Many experienced salespeople are hardworking, loyal, and deeply connected to customers they’ve spent decades building trust with. They have made sacrifices for the company, including time away from their families and often health concerns from stress. The issue isn’t work ethic.

Experience and performance aren’t the same thing.

Someone can have twenty-five years of experience and still be running a twenty-five-year-old approach to prospecting and opportunity management.

Experience tells you what worked.

Performance management asks whether what worked yesterday still produces tomorrow’s number — and that’s an uncomfortable question for people who were genuinely successful under the old system.

Shift From Sales Autonomy to Sales Accountability

Most traditional B2B sales organizations run on enormous individual autonomy: the rep owns the territory, decides who to call, who to visit, decides how often, and management checks the revenue number at year-end. Management may run CRM reports to determine the sales activity by territory. That’s not a performance culture. It’s an outcome culture, and the difference is real.

No Smoke And Mirrors Insight: A performance culture manages the behaviors that produce results, not just the results themselves.

Instead of “did you hit your number,” the real question becomes what behaviors and capabilities are actually producing that number, and what needs to change if they aren’t.

That single shift changes everything downstream.

Underperforming salespeople on your team will push back.

Top performers who typically carry up to 70% of revenue will love it.

The research backs the shift hard. Vantage Point Performance and the Sales Management Association, in research cited by Harvard Business Review, found companies with a formal, defined sales process grew revenue 18% faster than companies without one — and the same research found managers who spent at least three hours a month actively managing each rep’s pipeline saw 11% greater revenue growth than managers who didn’t. The lift isn’t from the process existing on paper. It’s from someone actually managing it.

What should you do if you are asked to have a more performance-based sales team?

Let me share the process I have seen to create the greatest success in the shortest amount of time.

Diagnose Before You Prescribe

Most transformation efforts get this backward — buying training before anyone knows what needs training, installing a CRM before understanding how the team actually sells, setting KPIs before knowing which activities drive revenue in this specific business. Investing in sales tech stack tools and AI without a clear understanding of what these investments will solve.

Diagnose first.

That means looking honestly at five things: the actual results broken out by rep and segment, not just the total; the real behaviors happening in the field, not the activity everyone assumes is happening; the actual skill level underneath the tenure, because knowing an industry deeply doesn’t automatically mean being skilled at selling in it; whether there’s one real sales process or twenty individual styles wearing the same job title; and, most overlooked of all, what the team actually believes about what selling requires — how many touches before giving up on a prospect, what they think makes a customer choose you.

No Smoke and Mirrors Truth: Beliefs drive behavior more than any KPI on a dashboard, and a team can be missing shared beliefs long before anyone notices they’re missing skills.

Don’t Mistake Resistance for Incompetence

As a Strategic Planning and Sales growth coach, I need a thick skin.

Some teams, particularly seasoned B2B sales teams, push back and don’t want to follow the no-smoke-and-mirrors process. If left unchecked, I have seen salespeople threaten to quit, complain to HR, and, in one case, take their frustration about being asked to take a sales effectiveness assessment to the CRO of a $4 billion organization.

Someone pushing back on a skills assessment after twenty years of success isn’t necessarily a weak performer. It’s a legitimate reaction: I’ve done this successfully ( or so I think) for two decades; why does someone need to evaluate me now? This is insulting. I refuse. What are you going to do, fire me?

The answer leadership has to hold firm on is simple — experience earns respect. It doesn’t earn an exemption from accountability, and that standard has to apply to leadership too, not just the sales floor.

One of the fastest ways to defuse that resistance is bringing the customer’s voice directly into the room. Ask them why they chose you, what your reps do well, where the experience falls short, and what would make them buy more. Gartner’s research on formal win-loss programs found that companies running them saw revenue increases of 15% to 30% and win-rate improvements as great as 50%. That’s not management telling the team to change. That’s the market saying what it needs, and it’s far harder to argue with.

Think about how much sales have changed since COVID. Think about how new generations of decision makers are behaving compared to the buyers of 20 years ago. Markets and how decision makers make buying decisions have changed. Have your senior sales associates adapted, or are they selling like it’s 1999? They are working hard, but they need a new sales process and are likely to need to refresh some of their sales skills.

What impact would it make on your bottom line if 40%-60% of your sales team hit their growth goals instead of 12%?

How much would your net income improve if your salespeople sold at 4%- 6% higher gross margin?

What impact would it have to see your customer satisfaction scores increase from 65% to 83%?

The above are some of the”whys” we want to help B2B sales teams improve sales effectiveness.

Three Performance-Based Sales Foundations, One Culture Carrier

A real performance culture rests on three things: clear, specific expectations instead of “sell more”; genuine capability-building, because raising expectations without developing the skill behind them just creates frustration dressed up as accountability; and consistent coaching, because training creates awareness and coaching creates application. Skip any one of the three and the system collapses back into hope.

The sales manager is where a performance-based sales culture either becomes real or quietly dies.

Train the reps and leave the manager running exactly as before, and the old behaviors return within a quarter. The shift must happen in the manager’s own questions — from “what’s your forecast” to “show me what you’re doing to move this specific opportunity forward.” Research on coaching cadence backs this precisely: reps coached weekly hit roughly 76% quota attainment versus 47% for reps coached quarterly or less. The coaching is the mechanism. Everything else is just infrastructure around it.

How do we help experienced B2B sales teams transition to a performance-based sales culture?

Change Three Things, Not Twenty-Five

If a team has sold the same way for fifteen years, don’t introduce twenty-five new expectations on a Monday. Pick three or four: a defined prospecting commitment per rep, documented next steps on every active opportunity, real account-development plans on the top accounts, and regular field coaching from every manager. Measure those, coach them, reinforce them until they’re a habit, then add the next layer. Culture changes through repeated behavior, not a slide deck or demands.

Some teams ask us to create a sales behavior performance scorecard.

Below is an example for one of my clients.

Prospecting calls per week.- 40

Meetings with ideal customers per week – 6

Quote follow-up – 100%

Review current key account growth – two per month

Sales Manager – one coaching call with each rep each week

Each team we work with has a different scorecard based on their strategic growth plans, but the above gives you some idea of what a scorecard can look like.

What Is the Conversation Leadership Eventually Has to Have Regarding Performance-Based Sales?

At some point it has to be said plainly…

“We value your experience and your relationships, and the market has changed enough that experience alone isn’t the whole answer anymore. We’re not asking you to abandon what made you successful. We’re asking you to add what the next chapter requires, and we’ll provide the training, systems, and coaching to get you there — in exchange for real accountability.”

That’s not unreasonable. That’s leadership.

You don’t transform an experienced sales team by telling them their past was wrong. You transform it by proving their experience is genuinely valuable, and then showing them the future requires building on it, not just repeating it.

If someone keeps pushing back or threatens to leave instead of adapting to what the team needs…let them go!

No Smoke and Mirrors Truth: If you allow even one experienced salesperson to constantly undermine your efforts to become a performance -based sales organization, you will not experience the growth you could have.

Often we are asked to facilitate a top-grading conversation. Here we look at performance and whether their behaviors match your culture. We work with leaders and place everyone on their team into four quadrants.

Number one – Strong Culture, Strong Performance

Number two- Strong Culture but low performance

Number three- Strong Performance but Low Culture

Number four – Low Culture and low performance

Each quadrant above has specific recommendations sales leaders must act on quickly.

Do you have a seasoned B2B sales team that has not met its growth goals for years?

Are you receiving more pressure than before to “hold salespeople accountable to their goals?”

Have some of your most experienced salespeople refused to participate in the shift to a performance- based culture?

Have some of your salespeople threatened to quit ( update their resumes) before taking a sales effectiveness assessment or sales training?

I have experienced the above, and unfortunately much more, and new owners, new investors, and new leaders need greater growth than what the sales team has grown comfortable delivering for years.

Let’s schedule a call if you need your experienced sales team to shift to a more performance-based model.

Research referenced: Jordan & Kelly (Vantage Point Performance / Sales Management Association), cited in Harvard Business Review, on formal sales process and manager pipeline engagement; Gartner research on formal win-loss programs; MySalesCoach, State of Sales Coaching, on weekly vs. quarterly coaching and quota attainment.

Think about how much sales has changed since COVID. Think about how new generations of decision makers are behaving compared to the buyers of 20 years ago. Markets and how decision makers make buying decisions has changed. Have your senior sales associates adapted or are they selling like its 1999?

Three Foundations, One Culture Carrier

The sales manager is where this either becomes real or quietly dies. Train the reps and leave the manager running exactly as before, and the old behaviors return within a quarter. The shift must happen in the manager’s own questions — from “what’s your forecast” to “show me what you’re doing to move this specific opportunity forward.” Research on coaching cadence backs this precisely: reps coached weekly hit roughly 76% quota attainment versus 47% for reps coached quarterly or less. The coaching is the mechanism. Everything else is just infrastructure around it.

So how do we help B2B sales teams transition to a performance-based sales culture?

Change Three Things, Not Twenty-Five

If a team has sold the same way for fifteen years, don’t introduce twenty-five new expectations on a Monday. Pick three or four: a defined prospecting commitment per rep, documented next steps on every active opportunity, real account-development plans on the top accounts, and regular field coaching from every manager. Measure those, coach them, reinforce them until they’re habit, then add the next layer. Culture changes through repeated behavior, not a slide deck or demands.

The Conversation Leadership Eventually Has to Have

At some point it has to be said plainly: we value your experience and your relationships, and the market has changed enough that experience alone isn’t the whole answer anymore. We’re not asking you to abandon what made you successful. We’re asking you to add what the next chapter requires, and we’ll provide the training and coaching to get you there — in exchange for real accountability.

That’s not unreasonable. That’s leadership. You don’t transform an experienced sales team by telling them their past was wrong. You transform it by proving their experience is genuinely valuable, and then showing them the future requires building on it, not just repeating it.

Do you have a seasoned B2B sales team that has not met its growth goals for years?

Are you receiving more pressure than before to “hold salespeople accountable to their goals?”

Has some of your most experienced salespeople refused to participate in the shift to a performance- based culture?

Have some of your salespeople threatened to quit before taking a sales assessment or sales training?

I have experienced the above and unfortunately much more and new owners, new investors, new leaders need greater growth than what the sales team has grown comfortable delivering for years.

Let’s schedule a call if you need your experienced sales team to shift to a more performance -based team.

The 10 Mental Biases Quietly Hurting Your Strategic Planning

0 Comments

As we enter strategic planning season, I often experience common threats and biases that stall business growth. The biggest threat to your growth strategy probably isn’t what you and your leadership team think…the market, your competitors, tariffs, inflation, or your sales team’s accountability. It’s how you think about all of them.

CEOs make high-stakes calls constantly with incomplete information: hire or hold, raise prices or hold the line, keep this account executive or move on. They make decisions based on years of experience, gut, and intuition. Experience helps. Experience also builds blind spots, because the brain runs on shortcuts to decide faster, and those shortcuts distort how leaders read information, weigh risk, and choose.

Here are ten common leadership biases hurting strategic planning, and how to handle them quickly.

Confirmation bias

“I already know I’m right.” A CEO decides sales are down because the market is bad, and the team dutifully goes collecting evidence about tariffs and interest rates while nobody checks whether reps are prospecting or following up on quotes. Nickerson’s landmark review of the research found this bias shows up even among judges and scientists actively trained to be objective.

How do we handle this strategic planning bias?

The fix is one question: what evidence would prove our current explanation wrong?

The Dunning-Kruger effect

I just wrote about this in a recent post. “We know more than we actually know.” Kruger and Dunning’s original 1999 study found that the people least skilled at a task are often the most confident in their own competence. You may know your industry better than anyone in the room. That doesn’t mean you understand modern sales methodology, AI implementation, or pricing strategy just because you’re used to having the answer. The CEO doesn’t need to know everything.

How do we handle this strategic planning bias?

The CEO and leadership team need to know exactly what they don’t.

Sunk cost fallacy

Like the gambler at a blackjack table who has lost a significant amount of money, they believe they are likely to win soon and keep investing. “We’ve already invested too much to quit.” Arkes and Blumer’s classic study found people were far more likely to keep funding a failing project once money was already sunk into it, even when the outcome was identical either way. The past investment is gone regardless of what you decide next.

How to handle this strategic planning bias?

The only real question is: would we make this investment today, starting from zero? (From my experience helping teams write their strategic growth plans for over 30 years, the answer is often “No”.

Negativity bias

We often see this when preparing for a strategic planning offsite and sharing insights from our Voice of Customer research. “One problem erases ten wins.” One bad review, one lost account, and a CEO can rewrite their entire view of the business around it. Ninety-seven happy customers and three unhappy ones are real data. It isn’t three data points overriding ninety-seven.

How to handle this strategic planning bias?

We coach our clients not to react on a knee-jerk basis, but to track the pattern, not just the exception.

Anchoring bias

“The first number becomes gospel.” Tversky and Kahneman’s foundational research on judgment under uncertainty showed that an early number — a valuation, a competitor’s quote, a founder’s gut-feel target — quietly recalibrates every number that follows it, whether the original had any real basis. You may also see senior leaders sharing their most recent customer call as if it were true with all customers.

How to handle this strategic planning bias?

We suggest asking where the number came from, and whether you’d land on the same one starting clean.

Halo effect

“Great at one thing, so great at everything.” Thorndike’s original research a century ago found that a single strong trait — charisma, tenure, one big win — bleeds into how we rate someone’s competence everywhere else. We see this with companies that scaled quickly but have now stalled or are seeing revenues decline. Maybe you just landed a huge account, and your revenues and profits went through the roof. When your team starts thinking this means you are doing everything right, your company is at risk.

How to handle this strategic planning bias?

An example we see far too often: your best salesperson may be a poor sales manager. Judge the specific role, not the glow around the person.

Authority bias

“The expert said it, so it’s true.” Milgram’s research on obedience to authority remains one of the most cited findings in psychology for a reason: confidence and correctness are not the same trait, whether in a consultant, a board member, or an AI system. Sometimes it’s the HIPPO. The highest-paid person must be the authority since they are paid the most, right? Wrong!

How to handle this strategic planning bias?

Ask what evidence supports the recommendation, not just how convincingly it was delivered.

Availability heuristic

“What I remember easily must be common.” Tversky and Kahneman’s research on availability found people judge frequency by how easily an example comes to mind, not by the actual base rate. “Nobody can find good salespeople” and “customers aren’t buying” feel true after one dramatic story.

How to handle this strategic planning bias?

Check what your own data says before you let a headline write your strategy.

Groupthink

“Everyone agrees, so we must be right.” Everyone on your leadership team knows the politically correct answers. Janis’s research on groupthink, built from studying real policy disasters, found that fast, unanimous-feeling agreement is often a symptom of unsafe dissent, not sound thinking.

How to handle this strategic planning bias?

If the CFO, sales leader, and ops leader all nod within two minutes, ask who sees it differently before the decision locks in.

This is where a third-party outside facilitator adds the most value to your strategic planning.

Survivorship bias

“Let’s study the winners.” Every business book studies the company that scaled from $10 million to $100 million. Almost none study the dozen companies that tried the identical playbook and failed quietly. The lesson popularized by Abraham Wald’s WWII aircraft-armor analysis still holds: the data you can’t see is often more informative than the data you can.

How to handle this strategic planning bias?

Ask who else tried this and failed, and why.

One More Comment About “Follow the Hippo”

Strategic planning offsite meetings that just follow the Highest Paid Person in the Office rarely create plans that drive explosive growth. A dominant highest-paid person in the room leads every conversation and answers every question as if their compensation makes them a strategic planning expert.

How to handle this strategic planning bias?

When I facilitate strategic planning meetings, the first thing we establish is the session’s ground rules. One key ground rule is that none of us is as smart as all of us. As the facilitator, I lead the meeting with different exercises so the highest-paid person in the room doesn’t dominate.

What is The CEO’s Real Job?

The goal was never to eliminate bias. That’s not how human cognition works, and pretending otherwise is its own blind spot. The real job is building a leadership team and system that catches distorted thinking before it becomes an expensive decision, and a culture where someone regularly asks what assumptions a plan is built on, what evidence actually supports them, and what the data says when nobody’s feelings are attached to the answer. We take a data-driven approach to strategic planning that starts with an MRI of your business to capture the true current state with no bias.

That matters most at exactly the moment most companies skip it: before the strategic plan gets written. Talk to customers directly. Study the transaction data. Assess sales effectiveness honestly. (You can download a copy of our pre-strategic planning checklist here) Then test the assumptions against it all, instead of building the plan around whichever story already felt true.

No Smoke and Mirrors Truth: The most dangerous blind spot in any company is a CEO’s ( and senior leadership teams’) certainty that they don’t have a blind spot.

The best leaders aren’t the ones who always have the answer. They’re the ones still asking what they’re missing—and that’s usually where better decisions and better growth start.

Is your team planning to update your strategic plan soon?

Will this be the year to turn your goals into a strategic plan?

Do you plan to scale revenue from the strong operations foundation you built by implementing EOS?

Let’s schedule a call and discuss how we help teams take a data-driven approach to writing strategic growth plans that drive explosive growth.

Research referenced: Nickerson (1998), Review of General Psychology, on confirmation bias; Kruger & Dunning (1999), Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, on the Dunning-Kruger effect; Arkes & Blumer (1985), Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, on the sunk cost effect; Tversky & Kahneman (1974), Science, on judgment under uncertainty (anchoring and availability); Thorndike (1920) on the halo effect; Milgram (1963), Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, on obedience to authority; Janis (1972) on groupthink; Wald’s WWII survivorship analysis, popularized in modern form by Mangel & Samaniego (1984).

Your Strategic Plan Is Finished. Strategic Planning Series Part 3:Now Comes the Hard Part…Execution

0 Comments

We shared a post about strategic planning and how you may have a smart strategic plan that fails to deliver because your sales team lacks the skills to execute it. As we enter strategic planning season, we started a series of posts, with Part 1 focused on Assess before you write Strategy. In Part 2, we shared: Strategy Should Follow the Data, Not the Other Way Around. In Part 3 of this series, we will discuss why most plans fail: Execution.

You’ve run an MRI on your business and assessed where your business really is. You’ve listened to customers, reviewed the numbers, evaluated your sales team’s capabilities, studied the market, identified the operational constraints, and challenged a few long-held assumptions. Then you used those facts to build your strategy. Great job!

Congratulations — now comes the hard part: execution.

I’ve sat in a lot of strategic planning sessions. The energy in the room is usually high, people are engaged, the whiteboards are covered, and tough decisions get made. Everyone leaves believing this year will be different.

Then Monday happens. A key customer has a problem. Someone quits. A large order needs attention. The ERP system won’t cooperate. Sales misses forecast. A supplier is late. Someone needs a decision only the CEO thinks they can make. And slowly, almost invisibly, the strategic plan gets pushed aside by whatever is urgent.

No Smoke and Mirrors Insight: That’s how good strategies die — not because the strategy was bad, but because the organization never built a system to execute it.

What Does the Data Say About Why Often Brilliant Strategic Plans Fail?

McKinsey, Bain, and Harvard Business Review converge on a sobering truth: roughly 70–90% of strategies fail to achieve their intended outcomes. Not because the ideas are wrong, but because execution breaks down.

As Harvard Business Review notes, a strategy is often structurally flawed long before execution begins because leaders build plans around surface-level symptoms rather than root-cause diagnoses.

A study highlighted by Entrepreneur argues that while strategy failures are labeled as “execution problems,” they are actually problems of institutional authority.

The Harvard Business School Online Blog outlines that 90% of organizations fail to execute strategies due to structural issues like ineffective resource allocation, vague goals, and a lack of clear organizational support

According to Harvard Business Review, 67% of well-formulated strategies fail because of poor execution.

A strategic plan is not an execution plan.

This distinction matters more than most leadership teams treat it.

Your strategic plan tells you where you’re going and the choices you’ve made to get there.

Your execution plan determines what happens Monday morning.

If your three-year strategy says you’ll grow from $30 million to $50 million, that’s direction. If it says growth comes from expanding existing strategic accounts, entering two new vertical markets, and improving gross margin, those are strategic choices. But who owns each initiative? What specifically happens in the next 90 days? What resources does it require, what capabilities are missing, what gets measured weekly, and what happens when something falls behind? Answer those, and you have an executable strategy. Skip them, and you have a document.

Break the strategy into 90-day priorities.

Three-year goals don’t create urgency. What has to happen in the next 90 days does.

Take every major strategic initiative and ask: what must be true 90 days from now for us to know we’re actually making progress?

Say your strategy calls for entering the healthcare market. Your 90-day priorities might be identifying the ideal customer profile, interviewing 15 healthcare customers or prospects, building a target-account list, validating the value proposition, and getting sales into conversations with 50 qualified accounts. That’s executable. “Grow healthcare sales” is not.

The same test applies everywhere. If improving gross margin is strategic, what are we doing in the next 90 days? If reducing customer concentration is strategic, what are we doing? If developing the next generation of leaders is strategic, what are we doing? Every strategic priority needs a 90-day bridge between intention and action, or it just sits there looking like a good idea.

What are the Key Steps To Improve Execution?

Every priority needs exactly one owner.

This is where execution gets fuzzy fast. “We’re going to…” “We need to…” “The sales team should…” “Operations is working on…” Who’s actually accountable? When everybody owns something, nobody really owns it.

Every strategic initiative needs one person accountable for moving it forward. That doesn’t mean they do all the work themselves—it means one name is attached to the outcome. Not a department. Not a committee. A person.

Measure leading indicators, not just results.

This matters especially in sales. Revenue, margin, and EBITDA all matter, but they’re lagging indicators — by the time revenue misses plan, the behaviors that caused the miss happened months earlier.

If your strategy depends on new-customer growth, don’t wait on monthly revenue to tell you how it’s going. Measure qualified new opportunities created, target accounts engaged, decision-makers reached, first meetings held, opportunities advancing. If your strategy depends on margin improvement, don’t just check gross margin at month’s end — track discounting, pricing exceptions, product and customer mix, quotes coming in below target margin. The real question is: what behaviors today predict whether we get the result tomorrow?

Your weekly meetings should connect to the strategy.

Here’s a simple test. Look at the agenda for your weekly leadership meeting — how much time actually goes to your strategic priorities? Now check the sales meeting, the operations meeting, the marketing meeting, the one-on-ones. If your strategy says one thing but your meetings spend all their time on something else, guess which one wins. What gets discussed repeatedly gets attention. Your strategy shouldn’t live in a binder, a slide deck, or a framed one-pager on the wall — it should show up in the conversations you’re already having every week.

Someone has to ask: are we doing what we said we’d do?

Accountability has a bad reputation because people confuse it with punishment. It isn’t that. Accountability is simply closing the gap between what we said we’d do and what we’re actually doing. We agreed to do this by September 30 — is it done? Great. If not, what’s preventing it, what needs to happen next, who owns that, and by when? No drama, no smoke and mirrors — just commitments and follow-through.

Don’t let the CEO become the execution system.

In many growing businesses, the CEO quietly becomes the unofficial project manager for the entire strategy — checking on everyone, following up, solving problems, removing roadblocks, reminding people about deadlines. Eventually they get frustrated: “Nobody takes ownership around here.” Maybe. But sometimes the organization has simply been trained to wait for the CEO to push.

If every initiative requires the CEO to move it forward, that’s not an execution system—it’s just another job on the CEO’s plate. The goal is an organization that can execute strategy without the CEO personally pushing it downhill.

Your people have to be able to execute the strategy.

This is probably the most uncomfortable part of strategic planning: you can build a brilliant strategy your current team simply isn’t equipped to run. It shows up constantly in sales. The strategy calls for moving into larger accounts — but can your salespeople sell to a buying committee? The plan requires selling value instead of price — but can your team actually quantify business impact? You want aggressive new-account acquisition — but are your reps effective prospectors? You want higher margins — but can they negotiate without reaching for a discount first?

That’s why assessment has to come before strategy. Strategy creates requirements for people, and once you know where you’re going, you have to find out whether your people have the skills, experience, systems, and leadership to get there. If they don’t, you have options: train them, coach them, give them better tools and process, change roles, recruit the capability you’re missing, or adjust the strategy. You can’t ignore the gap and hope the team figures it out on its own.

Review the strategy quarterly, not annually.

Your annual planning session shouldn’t be the next time anyone seriously discusses the plan. Pull it back out every quarter and ask: what did we say would happen? What actually happened? What did we learn? What changed with customers, or in the market? Where are we ahead, where are we behind, and which of our assumptions turned out to be wrong? What are the next 90-day priorities?

This isn’t about constantly rewriting strategy — it’s about learning while you execute. Markets change, customers change, competitors change, people change. Strategy needs discipline, but it also needs feedback, or it goes stale the moment the ink dries.

The execution test.

Here’s the test I’d give any leadership team 30 days after strategic planning. Ask any member of the team: what are our three to five most important strategic priorities? What are we doing in the next 90 days to advance them? Who owns each one? How are we measuring progress? What are you personally responsible for?

Then walk into sales, operations, marketing, and finance and ask the exact same questions. If the answers get less clear the farther you move from the conference room where the strategy was written, you have an execution problem…full stop.

Strategy isn’t what you put on the wall.

It’s what your organization does differently because you chose it.

That’s the whole point of this series. Part one: assess before you strategize and know where you really are. Part two: let the data drive the strategy and make choices based on evidence, not opinion. Part three: build an execution system and translate strategy into 90-day priorities, single owners, leading indicators, weekly conversations, and real accountability.

The value of strategic planning was never the plan itself. The value is what changes after the planning meeting ends.

No smoke and mirrors.

Do you want to improve your strategy and execution?

Let’s schedule a call.

Too Busy to Write a Strategic Plan? That’s Exactly Why You Need One !

0 Comments

Everyone who owns a business, invests in businesses, or serves on a senior leadership team knows they need a strategic plan. The sad reality is that less than 20% of B2B businesses have a strategic growth plan. They all have a leader, an owner, or an investor with a future revenue and enterprise value objective, and they turn their goals for the next 3-5 years into an Excel spreadsheet. They share the Excel spreadsheet with their leaders and say… “Make it happen, figure it out; that’s what I pay you to do.”Some have a strategic planning off-site and spend 1-2 days discussing where they want the business to go and how they plan to get there. However, when we meet with an owner and often their teams, we hear common reasons not to have a strategic plan this year. Some people share: “We have too much going on right now to sit down and write a strategic plan. Maybe next year.“ ( after once again having a flat or declining year in revenue and margins are dropping) I hear this most often, especially in struggling teams. They share common reasons for putting off strategic planning one more year, like: The company is growing in people in hopes of getting more done; they hired three people; they are short some people and need to wait; they are implementing new software or systems; new processes; a new machine arrives in three weeks; customers are demanding attention; the receptionist is not dressed appropriately again; the sales team needs coaching; I need to fill an open sales position; operations has quality and on-time delivery problems to solve; and cash flow needs watching, and all while owners, investors, and the leadership team are already putting in 65-hour weeks. They work nights and weekends, dreaming that it will one day get better and they can have a life. So, the strategic plan slides to the bottom of the list. (another year)

What does research say about teams with strategic plans compared to those without?

Decades of McKinsey & Company research demonstrate that strategic planning directly drives enterprise value, provided it moves past rigid budgeting and focuses on long-term capital allocation.

McKinsey also shared that only one in five companies believes it has a high-quality strategy. What do such Strategy Champions have in common? They excel at designing bold strategies—and are even better at mobilizing their execution.

Research by Paul Leinwand, Cesare Mainardi, and Art Kleiner published in HBR tracked how executive teams manage strategic execution. They found that teams that successfully achieve their strategic goals behave vastly differently than low-performing teams.

Harvard Business School shares: Taking part in the strategic planning process forces you to examine and explain why you’re making each decision and back it up with data, projections, or case studies, thus combating your cognitive biases.

We could go on, and likely on and on, sharing what every experienced business leader knows: Strategic planning drives growth.

Yet often, far too often, I suggest a company needs to write a strategic plan to reach its future vision, and I hear excuses why they can’t do strategic planning now.

Here’s my no smoke and mirrors challenge: if it feels like there aren’t enough hours in the day, you need a strategic plan more than ever.

Being busy isn’t the same as making progress.

What is “The Busy Trap” for B2B CEOs and Senior Leaders?

Here’s what happens inside a company without clear strategic direction. One problem gets solved, then another appears. A salesperson needs help. A customer complains. The new software isn’t working the way everyone expected. An installer and someone in shipping call off. The new hire needs training. The machine installation hits an electrical snag. A competitor takes a large customer. A vendor didn’t deliver on time, so you can’t fulfill your largest customer’s order, and health insurance went up 32%. Someone says, “We should probably start doing this,” so you do — and then another priority shows up behind it. The problems you solved last week reappear again, and each week feels like the movie Groundhog Day.

Before long, leadership is spending most of its time reacting to today instead of deliberately building tomorrow. That’s the busy trap. You’re not necessarily failing — you might be growing.

No Smoke and Mirrors Truth: Growth without direction creates chaos, not momentum.

Your problems are the argument for strategy, not against it

Take the examples I hear most often about why companies can’t write their strategic plans now.

“We just hired several people” is good, but why? What capabilities are you trying to build? What should the organization look like 12 months from now? What roles are still missing, and what should each new hire accomplish in their first 90 days? How will you know if that investment in people is paying off? Hire without a strategic plan, and you can end up with more people doing more things — not a stronger organization. Worst case, you hire more people, and your EBITDA per employee drops significantly. Did you just improve throughput and efficiency, or just add overhead? Would you have needed to add new people if your current team were trained and had the right systems and processes?

“We’re implementing new software” is fine, but what business problem is it supposed to solve? What process improves, and what measurable outcome should change as a result? Who owns the rollout, and what should stop happening because the new technology replaces it? Most importantly: how does this support the company’s strategic objectives? Technology isn’t strategy. It’s a tool.

“We’re getting new equipment” that could be a real investment, but what’s the strategic reason behind it? More capacity, lower labor cost, higher quality, a new product, a new market, faster delivery, better margins? Redundancy? The machine shouldn’t just be another piece of equipment on the floor. It should be in service of a business objective, or it’s just capital spend with no direction attached, just to reduce today’s noise.

“We just acquired another company” is another comment I hear in several markets that are consolidating now. I would argue that, based on my experience with acquisitions and mergers, you need a strategic plan even sooner!

I have heard several reasons why business owners who know they need a strategic plan still put it off…for now.

From my own experience, a strategic plan aligns you and your team around what matters and helps reduce all the noise during company growth.

Strategy creates fewer priorities, not more

One of the biggest misconceptions about strategic planning is that the plan needs to contain everything the company could possibly do. I believe the opposite. A good strategic plan tells leadership what not to do. If everything is a priority, nothing is. As I work with leadership teams, we often ask everyone to write on Post-it notes the three to five things the company should do this year. I then group them by category, and we discuss them. One team had over thirty strategic rocks they felt they needed to accomplish to achieve their growth goal. Everyone in leadership was silently executing what they believed was the right plan, and many were working on the same things without knowing it.

I want leadership teams to land on three or four major strategic thrusts ( EOS calls them Rocks), not 27, not a 42-item action list. Three or four things that matter most to the company’s future: grow the right customers, improve sales effectiveness, increase operational capacity and productivity, develop the leadership team. Once those are set, decisions get easier. When another initiative lands on the CEO’s desk, the question becomes simple: does this help accomplish one of our strategic priorities? If not, it probably doesn’t belong on the list. That’s how strategy creates time instead of consuming it.

Your calendar is telling you something

Here’s a question worth sitting with: look at your calendar for the last 30 days. How much time did you spend working on the business versus in it? How much was reacting? How much was spent solving problems that should have been prevented, or discussing initiatives that never got finished? How much did your leadership team spend on the future? How many of the problem

The answers can be uncomfortable, but they’re useful. If the CEO is constantly pulled into operational fires, customer escalations, employee issues, and random initiatives, the problem probably isn’t that the CEO needs to work harder. The business needs a clearer direction.

A strategic plan should answer six questions

You don’t need a 75-page document. You need clarity, and at minimum, your leadership team should be able to answer six questions.

Where are we going?

What should this company look like in three years — not just revenue, but customers, markets, people, capabilities, profitability, and competitive position?

Where are we today?

What does the data say about customers, revenue, margins, sales effectiveness, operations, people, cash flow, and market conditions? Build this on reality, not opinion.

What must change?

Where are the gaps between where you are and where you want to be? This is where the uncomfortable conversations start — maybe you don’t have enough salespeople, maybe they don’t prospect, maybe managers aren’t coaching, maybe you’re carrying too many low-margin customers, maybe operations can’t support the volume you’re chasing.

What are the three or four things that matter most?

This is where you set your strategic thrusts — what has to happen for the company to reach its objectives.

What behaviors must change?

This is the part most strategic plans miss entirely. A strategy sitting in a binder doesn’t change a company — daily behavior does. If the plan calls for 20% growth, what does that mean Monday morning? How many new opportunities need to get created? What accounts need development? What conversations need to happen, what quotes need follow-up, what production improvements need to occur, what metrics get reviewed? Strategy has to show up on someone’s calendar, or it isn’t a strategy—it’s a document.

Who do we want in our sandbox?

Who are your ideal customers today and in the future? What markets do we serve, and do we plan to enter any new ones? What is our team structure today, what should it be for the future, and who owns what? What is the culture we want?

Don’t confuse activity with progress

This might be the most important point in your strategic growth puzzle: a company can be incredibly busy and still moving in the wrong direction.

You can have more employees, more technology, more equipment, more meetings, more customers, more sales, more new products, more problems, and are still not be building a better business.

So instead of asking “what are we busy doing,” ask “what are we doing that actually moves us toward the business we said we wanted to build?” Those are very different questions, and most leadership teams have answered only the first.

The strategic planning paradox

Here’s the paradox: when business is slow, leaders say they don’t have enough money to invest in strategy. When business is busy, they say they don’t have enough time. So, when, exactly, are they going to plan? The answer shouldn’t be “next year”. Next year brings its own set of problems, and if you wait for plenty of time to show up, or excess money to invest it never will.

No Smoke and Mirrors Truth: The companies that scale intentionally understand something the rest miss: strategy isn’t something you do when you have time. Strategy is how you decide what deserves your time in the first place.

Businesses hit predictable revenue plateaus when they don’t have a plan, and you can read more about them here and here. Without a plan, your team will hit a growth ceiling, and net income will begin to decline. A strategic plan helps predict upcoming plateaus and enables your team to sail past them. (You can read about the predictable business plateaus where companies get stuck here)

My Advice on strategic planning?

If a traditional strategic planning process sounds like a three-day retreat and a 100-page document nobody will read, don’t start there. Start with one leadership conversation or workshop.

What are questions we discuss in pre-strategic planning workshops?

Where do we want to be 12 months from now?

What’s preventing us from getting there?

What three things must we accomplish to close those gaps?

What has to happen every single week to make those three things real?

That’s the beginning of a strategic plan and, more importantly, the beginning of strategic execution.

When I help teams write their strategic growth plan, it typically is two pages, and it is a living document. Not something that is saved on a drive to be opened again this time next year.

Some clients prefer a software-led strategic plan today. We have 4 meeting sprints for 2 ½ hours each, and you will have your strategic plan. Some clients do this over two days in a row, and some do one sprint per week for a month. The software builds the information needed for a strong strategic plan, and the tool makes suggestions that can save a ½-day discussion. It is a living plan, and your team has access to the plan and their big rocks 24/7.

We can use the Scaling Up Strategic Planning Framework, which focuses on four pillars: People, Strategy, Execution, and Cash.

The goal is to start planning. To take the vision and how we plan to achieve it and put it on paper.

Planning should follow a framework, not just an open dialog or someone advising you what to do without first running an MRI on your business.

If you are starting to plan your next strategic planning meeting, I prepared a list of what to prepare to make the best use of your team’s time at the strategic planning offsite, and you can download a copy of our pre-strategic planning checklist here.

The No Smoke & Mirrors bottom line on writing a strategic business plan

If your answer when we discuss scaling your business is, “we’re too busy to create a strategic plan.“

You aren’t too busy for strategy.

**You may be too busy because you don’t have strategy.**

A strategic plan isn’t another project added to the pile; when done right, it’s what decides which projects belong on the pile in the first place. It reduces the piles and the time you currently spend solving the same problem over and over again. Your plan creates team alignment and accountability focused on leading and lagging indicators. Part of your plan is a meeting cadence focused on the key drivers to ensure execution.

What should you expect after writing your strategic plan?

We focus on execution.

Some teams want to take the plan and run with it on their own.

Most teams want a coach who has scaled several companies to come alongside and help keep everyone executing what we decided matters most.

Some teams want monthly coaching to stay on track with their plans.

Each quarter we review progress, and each department reports on their big rock completion.

We tackle any constraints we discover as a team quarterly.

We work as a cross-functional team to drive the outcomes we agreed to in strategic planning.

We align the team, create and share our KPIs, and measure what matters.

We improve communication with daily huddles and team focus.

Closing the discussion about Strategic Business Plans

The goal was never a beautiful document. The goal is clarity, focus, and execution.

No Smoke and Mirrors Truth: When everyone on the team knows where the company is going, what matters most, what doesn’t, what we will measure, and what has to happen next, leadership gets something valuable back: time.

In a growing company, time may be your most strategic asset.

No plan means more reacting.

More reacting means more firefighting.

More firefighting means less time building the business.

If it feels like there aren’t enough hours in the day, don’t reach for more hours. Step back, get clear, pick the three or four big rocks, and align the business around them. That doesn’t slow the business down. That’s how you stop running in circles.

Would you like to discuss your plan and how a strategic planning framework can help you achieve your vision for the organization?

Would you like to schedule a demo of the software tool that helps teams write their plans quickly in 4 sprints?

Would you like to plan a 1-2 day offsite strategic planning session?

Let’s schedule a call to share the process and what to expect.

The No Smoke And Mirrors Analytical Thinking Process

0 Comments

Having held senior leadership roles and served senior leadership teams, PE investors, and business owners for over 40 years, I created an analytical thinking process to help teams find root causes more quickly and build strategies based on truths, not intuition, assumptions, biases, or “how we have always done things around here.” When I first engage with a team, we often experience friction because someone on the team shares an opinion but lacks the evidence to support their suggestion today. Strategic growth plans written on assumptions don’t scale revenue, profit, or enterprise value. So I often have a workshop before strategic planning, sharing the no-smoke-and-mirrors analytical thinking process. In this post, I share content from the analytical thinking workshop I use to prepare teams for strategic planning meetings.

If your goal is to drive explosive growth in revenue, profits, and enterprise value, you will value the no-smoke-and-mirrors analytical thinking process.

If your goal is to hire a consultant, an outside third party to confirm your assumptions, I am not the guy. ( I can and often do refer customers wanting to validate their beliefs to other consultants who will tell your team what you want to hear.)

Before I start helping a CEO, PE investor, or a senior leadership team, I encourage them to read my book: Driving Explosive Growth. In this book, I share the no-smoke-and-mirrors process, how we talk about what matters, and how we use data to make strategic decisions.

What is the No Smoke and Mirrors analytical Thinking Process?

DEFINE — What problem are we trying to solve?

Before looking for solutions, force the team to write the problem in one sentence.

Not: “Sales are down.”

Instead: “New-customer revenue in our industrial segment is 14% below plan because fewer qualified opportunities are reaching proposal.”

Separate the symptom from the problem. Ask: What do we know versus what do we think we know?

FACTS — What does the evidence tell us?

Build a fact base before allowing opinions to dominate the room.

Look across customer/VOC data, financial and transaction data, sales and pipeline data, operational performance, people/capability data, and external market evidence.

Then physically separate three columns:

FACTS | ASSUMPTIONS | UNKNOWN

This matters because research on decision-making shows that simply knowing biases exist isn’t enough; organizations benefit from changing the decision process itself and grounding discussions in a neutral fact base.

QUESTION — What would we need to know to understand why?

This is where leaders build analytical muscle.

Don’t stop at what happened. Keep drilling:

What changed first? Why? Where is it occurring? Where isn’t it occurring? What patterns do we see? What variables move together? What’s different about the exceptions? What information are we missing?

A dashboard starts the conversation—not the conclusion.

HYPOTHESIZE — What are the possible explanations?

Require at least three plausible explanations before choosing one.

If sales are down, don’t immediately decide:

“We need more leads.”

“ We need to hire more salespeople”

Possible hypotheses might be fewer qualified opportunities, lower conversion, longer buying cycles, competitive losses, pricing, poor follow-up, sales capability, customer churn, market contraction, or several acting together.

Developing multiple hypotheses helps prevent teams from building an entire fact base around the first attractive explanation.

CHALLENGE — What if we’re wrong?

This should become mandatory for consequential decisions.

Assign someone to challenge the preferred explanation. Ask:

What evidence contradicts our conclusion? What would have to be true for another explanation to be right? What are we dismissing because it doesn’t fit our story?

For major strategic decisions, use a premortem:

“It’s 12 months from now. This strategy failed badly. Why?”

Premortems are specifically designed to surface risks people may otherwise suppress, while devil’s-advocate roles and deliberately seeking disconfirming evidence can counter groupthink and confirmation bias.

DECIDE — What does the evidence support?

Now make the decision. I find senior leadership teams stall here. My job is to facilitate discussions and help the team decide.

As I share with clients. “Based on the evidence and data we have we have made the decision to _____. As we start executing our plan, if we discover new or contrary evidence we were not aware of, we will meet and discuss and possibly adjust our plan”

Why? Why do I say this?

Fear

The fear of making a mistake often derails senior leadership teams from deciding and aligning around a plan.

I have found sharing the above helps team members agree, and we can move forward.

We ask you to document five things:

Decision → Evidence → Assumptions → Owner → Expected outcome

And I suggest we ask one more…

“How confident are we, and what would cause us to change our mind?”

That’s a very different conversation from executives defending their positions.

TEST — How can we learn before making the biggest bet?

Not every strategic decision needs to become a company-wide initiative immediately.

Ask:

Can we pilot it? Can we test one market? One salesperson? One customer segment? One location? For 30–90 days?

Here I encourage clients to nail it before you scale it.

Define what success and failure look like before seeing the results.

Otherwise, teams can reinterpret mediocre results as proof they were right.

LEARN — What actually happened?

This step builds muscle memory.

Return to the original decision:

What did we predict?

What actually happened?

Where were we right?

Where were we wrong?

Which assumptions failed?

What did we learn?

What should we change?

Research on decision processes similarly recommends establishing metrics and milestones in advance, monitoring them for course corrections, and conducting postmortems once outcomes are known.

Put our analytical thinking process together

DEFINE → FACTS → QUESTION → HYPOTHESIZE → CHALLENGE → DECIDE → TEST → LEARN

No Smoke & Mirrors Truth: Analytical thinking isn’t knowing more. It’s having the discipline to separate what you know from what you assume, challenge what you believe, and change your mind when the evidence tells you to.

One leadership behavior I’d put above the entire framework: the highest-ranking person speaks last.

The HIPPO, the highest-paid person in the organization, speaks last!

I experienced this way too often when I first started facilitating strategic planning meetings, and meetings to discuss a current constraint. If the CEO announces the answer first, everyone else can unconsciously start assembling evidence around it. As I shared in a recent post, Research on senior-team decision-making similarly recommends that senior leaders initially ask questions rather than state opinions and explicitly encourage dissent.

Please coach your senior CEO, Business Owner, or PE Investor to speak last.

Repeating that process builds the analytical-thinking muscle memory your team needs.

Let’s schedule a call if you would like to discuss our analytical thinking process or if you need someone to facilitate your next senior leadership strategic planning meeting.

10 Ways CEOs Can Rebuild Their Analytical Skills

0 Comments

Part 3 of a 3-part series on the leadership skill AI is making easier to skip

Analytical skill isn’t something you either have or don’t have. In Part One, we discussed the lost art of analytical thinking and why it is critical when writing strategic growth plans. In Part Two, we shared why leaders lose their analytical thinking skills. It’s a muscle. It atrophies under speed, information overload, and confident assumptions, and like any muscle, it comes back with deliberate practice, training, and coaching.

Here are 10 ways CEOs and Senior Leaders can rebuild analytical thinking skills, starting with your next leadership meeting.

Separate observations from interpretations

At every major leadership meeting, run two columns: what the data shows, and what we think it means. “Win rates declined from 31% to 24%” is measurable. “The sales team is struggling to compete” is a hypothesis. You’ll be surprised how much of your current strategy sits in the second column. To drive explosive growth, we must know our numbers and make data-driven decisions.

Define the problem precisely

Weak analysis almost always starts with a vague problem. “Sales are bad.” “Customers are unhappy.” “Growth has stalled.” Push for specifics: which sales, which customers, which market, which period, compared with what. A precise problem statement produces a precise analysis. A vague one produces a vague — and usually wrong — answer.

Break the problem into components ( Chunk it)

Don’t treat revenue as one issue. Break it apart: number of opportunities, conversion rate, average deal size, sales cycle, retention, pricing, product mix, territory performance, salesperson performance, market segment. This helps you find where the change is actually happening, instead of guessing or assuming.

Ask “what makes us believe that?”

Don’t attack the person. Test the conclusion. “Why do we believe customers are leaving because of price?” “How many customers actually told us that?” “Is that data, or anecdote?” “What else changed at the same time?” This single question moves a conversation from opinion to analysis faster than almost anything else. Here, we are looking for evidence for a comment and conclusion shared.

Look for patterns and exceptions

Averages hide the story. Break performance out by customer segment, product, geography, salesperson, industry, deal size, acquisition source, tenure, and buying stage, and then look for the exceptions. If one region is growing while every other region declines, that difference is telling you exactly where to look next.

Look for disconfirming evidence

Don’t just hunt for evidence that supports your hypothesis. Hunt for what could destroy it. Think you have a lead problem? Check conversion rates. Think price is the issue? Interview the customers who bought anyway. Think the market is shrinking? Check what your competitors are doing. Try to prove yourself wrong — that’s where analysis and critical thinking actually meet.

Talk to the customer

This is probably the most underused analytical tool in business. Don’t assume you know why customers buy; we ask them in voice of customer research interviews. Why did you choose us? Why did you almost choose someone else? What problem were you actually solving? What nearly stopped you from buying? Then compare what they say against what your internal data shows. Voice of Customer isn’t a marketing exercise. It’s strategic evidence.

Follow the data to the transaction

Don’t stop at revenue. Go deeper — gross margin, customer profitability, rep profitability, win rate, average deal size, sales cycle, retention, quote-to-close, net profit by customer, pipeline movement. The closer you get to the actual transaction, the easier it becomes to tell a symptom from a cause.

Force multiple explanations

When something goes wrong, require three possible explanations. Not one, but three. Then ask what evidence would distinguish between them. If sales are declining, the real cause could be fewer qualified opportunities, lower conversion, pricing pressure, weaker execution, longer decision cycles, or product-market misalignment. Forcing three options before you commit to one dramatically raises the quality of the conversation.

Use AI as an analytical partner, not a substitute for judgment

AI is genuinely useful here; use it. Ask it to organize complex information, identify patterns, compare scenarios, generate alternative explanations, surface missing data, challenge your assumptions, and expose risks. Then evaluate the quality of what it gives you. AI should raise the quality of your thinking. AI should shorten your data-gathering time.

No Smoke and Mirrors Truth: AI doesn’t get to inherit your responsibility to actually think.

One more bit of advice if you are facilitating this meeting internally without an independent third party…

The CEO speaks last in Strategic Discussions!

Extensive research in psychology, organizational behavior, and behavioral economics strongly validates the strategy of leaders withholding their opinions and speaking last.

Psychologist Irving Janis, who pioneered Groupthink Research, identified directive leadership as a primary catalyst for flawed decision-making.

As shared in the article: GroupThink in Organizational Decision-Making….

“When a strong, authoritative leader dominates a group and signals a preferred decision, groupthink is more likely. Team members may refrain from disagreeing with the leader or may tailor their opinions to what they think the leader wants to hear. In Janis’s framework, “lack of impartial leadership” — where the leader overtly or subtly steers the group toward a certain conclusion — is a structural fault that fosters groupthink. Such leadership creates pressure to conform because contradicting the boss could be seen as disloyal or career-limiting.”

Please coach your CEO, Business Owner, or PE investor to speak last.

The CEO’s new questions when reviewing data with their leadership teams:

Add these questions to your leadership vocabulary:

What does the data show?

How do the pieces connect?

What are we assuming?

What evidence would change our conclusion?

We need to retire these:

Who thinks this is happening?

Who said it?

Have we always done it this way?

What does the dashboard say?

The analytical-skills test for CEOs

Give your leadership team a real business problem, then ask seven questions:

What exactly is the problem?
What does the data show?
Where is it occurring?
What patterns or relationships do we see?
What are we assuming?
What alternative explanations exist?
What evidence would prove our conclusion wrong?

If your team can answer all seven honestly, you have the beginning of a real analytical culture. If they jump straight to solutions, you have work to do — and now you know exactly where.

No Smoke & Mirrors takeaway: Before your next major decision, stop and run it through six questions: What is the problem? What does the data show? How do the pieces connect? What are we assuming? What else could explain it? What evidence would prove us wrong? Then decide. That’s analytical thinking backed by critical thinking — and in the age of AI, it may be the single most valuable combination a leader can build.

No smoke.

No mirrors.

Just evidence, behavior, and results.

Let’s schedule a call if you would value having someone with 40 years of experience helping leadership teams write and execute strategic plans that drive explosive growth.

Why Leaders Lose Their Analytical Muscle and Don’t Notice It Happening

0 Comments

Part 2 of a 3-part series on the leadership skill AI is making easier to skip

Success creates confidence. Confidence creates trust in your own pattern recognition. And pattern recognition, left unchecked, quietly replaces analysis with assumption. That’s the trap leaders fall into that we discussed in part one of this series. Business leaders need to build their analytical thinking skills- analytical thinking muscle memory. They struggle today not because they’re careless, but because experience is wired to work that way.

Here are seven ways leaders lose their analytical thinking skills.

It just happens, and none of them require a bad leader. They just require a busy one.

Success reinforces existing beliefs

When a strategy has worked for years, leaders trust it reasonably. The problem is that yesterday’s winning formula doesn’t automatically solve tomorrow’s problem. Experience should inform analysis. It shouldn’t replace it. The moment “this worked before” or my favorite “ this is the way we have always done things around here” becomes the whole argument, analysis has already stopped.

Leaders confuse data with insight

A dashboard tells you what happened. It rarely tells you why. Revenue is down, win rates are lower, sales cycles are longer, retention has slipped — those are observations, not explanations.

The analytical work starts with the next round of questions:

What changed first?

Which segments are affected?

Where in the process is performance breaking down?

Is the pattern consistent across customers, products, territories, and salespeople?

What moves together, and what’s merely correlated versus causal?

No Smoke and Mirrors Truth: Data isn’t insight until someone interprets it. Most leaders stop at the dashboard.

Confirmation bias distorts the analysis

We look for information that supports what we already believe. If a CEO believes the sales team needs more leads, every pipeline conversation starts looking like proof that more leads are the answer, even when the real issue is conversion, pricing, weak discovery, poor follow-up, or a value proposition customers don’t actually understand.

Analytical thinking examines the full system. Critical thinking challenges the preferred explanation. The question shouldn’t be “what proves I’m right?” It should be “what does the evidence show, and what might it fail to explain?”

Leaders are busy

Busy leaders make decisions based on the first reasonable explanation, because they don’t have time to investigate every issue. Understandable. Also, expensive. A CEO can spend six months fixing the wrong problem because nobody stopped long enough to examine the data, the process, and the customer experience together. Activity creates the illusion of progress. Analysis creates clarity. They are not the same thing, and only one of them fixes anything. This is particularly true in strategic planning. This is one reason I strongly suggest doing strategic planning offsite to remove leaders from the busy whirlwind for two days.

Information overload creates shallow thinking

We have more information available than any generation in business history: email, dashboards, LinkedIn, podcasts, AI, news, CRM reports, voice-of-customer interviews, customer surveys, industry reports, internal meetings. That volume hasn’t made decisions better. The problem was never a lack of information. It’s knowing which information matters, how it connects, and what it means.

No Smoke and Mirrors Truth: Analytical skill organizes the noise. Critical thinking decides what deserves your confidence.

Groupthink takes over

When the CEO says, “I think the problem is X,” the room usually goes quiet. Nobody wants to be the person who challenges the boss. So, the leadership team starts analyzing X even when X isn’t the problem. The strongest leadership teams don’t simply agree with the CEO. They help the CEO analyze better and ask harder questions. In strategic planning, my job is to facilitate conversations so everyone is focused and writes a strategic business plan that drives profitable growth. This challenge is magnified if the teams’ culture is not one that has high psychological safety. Writing strategic growth plans that drive explosive growth requires everyone sharing insights and data.

Speed destroys analysis

Business culture now rewards speed above almost everything else: respond immediately, decide immediately, fix it immediately, post immediately, automate immediately. I believe Amazon created this new expectation for speed, and leaders are bringing this expectation to the workplace. AI makes all of this even faster. Faster isn’t always better. Some decisions genuinely require time to gather information, weigh alternatives, and understand consequences. The discipline isn’t slowing everything down; it’s knowing which decisions deserve the pause and taking it before you speed up execution. Teams racing for quick answers with AI must also investigate if the AI data is accurate.

The common thread in how leaders lose their analytical thinking skills

None of these seven patterns look like a mistake in the moment. Each one feels like efficiency, confidence, or good instincts. That’s exactly what makes them dangerous. They don’t announce themselves. They just quietly replace analysis with assumption, one reasonable-sounding shortcut at a time.

No Smoke & Mirrors takeaway: Pick one recent decision your leadership team made quickly and confidently.

Go back and ask which of these seven patterns was driving it.

A reinforced belief, mistaken data for insight, confirmation bias, time pressure, noise, groupthink, or speed.

If you can’t identify one, look harder. There’s almost always one there.

Next in this series: ten practical ways to rebuild your analytical muscle—starting with your next leadership meeting.

Let’s schedule a call if you want to use an outside third party to help with analytical insights to write or update your strategic plan.

Page 1
Page 2
Page 3
Page 4
…
Page 84
Next

NO SMOKE & MIRRORS™

Performance Culture

Transition Diagnostic

A 10-Category, 50-Question Sales Culture Assessment for B2B Sales Organizations

PURPOSE

To determine whether an experienced B2B sales organization is prepared to transition from an autonomy-based, experience-driven culture to a performance-based culture.

BEFORE YOU BEGIN

How to Use This Diagnostic

Who Should Complete It

How to Score Each Question

Rate each statement honestly, using the scale below. Resist the instinct to score generously. A diagnostic that reflects aspiration instead of reality won’t identify anything worth fixing.

How the Results Are Used

Strategic Alignment

1. Our sales team understands exactly where the company is going over the next 1–3 years.

2. Revenue goals are supported by a specific sales strategy.

3. We know where incremental revenue is expected to come from.

4. Salespeople understand which customers, markets, and opportunities have the greatest strategic value.

5. Individual territory plans are connected to the company’s strategic plan.

NO SMOKE QUESTION

If I asked five salespeople where the next $5 million of revenue is supposed to come from, would I get essentially the same answer? If not, you don’t have alignment. You have individual interpretations of the strategy.

Performance Expectations

1. Everyone understands exactly what constitutes strong sales performance.

2. Expectations include behaviors as well as revenue results.

3. Salespeople know the weekly activities required to achieve their goals.

4. Underperformance is addressed quickly rather than tolerated.

5. High performers and low performers are managed differently based on objective performance data.

WARNING SIGN

If the dominant cultural phrase is “I’m doing the best I can,” ask: “How do we objectively know?” Effort is important. Performance is measurable.

Sales Skills

1. We have objectively assessed our sales team’s skills.

2. Salespeople are strong at discovery and questioning.

3. Salespeople can clearly articulate customer value and differentiation.

4. Salespeople know how to diagnose objections rather than simply overcome them.

5. Salespeople have the skills necessary to prospect consistently.

NO SMOKE TEST

Ask each salesperson: “Why should your ideal customer choose your company instead of your three strongest competitors?” If answers vary dramatically — or focus primarily on products and features — you have a capability issue.

Sales Process

1. We have a defined sales process.

2. Salespeople consistently follow it.

3. Sales stages have objective exit criteria.

4. Pipeline stages reflect buyer behavior rather than salesperson optimism.

5. Managers use the sales process to coach opportunities.

THE NO SMOKE TEST

Look at 10 opportunities. Ask: “What specifically has to happen for each opportunity to move to the next stage?” If the answer is different for every salesperson, the company probably doesn’t have a sales process. It has individual selling styles.

Territory & Account Planning

1. Every salesperson has a documented territory strategy.

2. Target accounts are prioritized using objective criteria.

3. Major accounts have growth plans.

4. Salespeople know which accounts have the greatest unrealized potential.

5. Territory plans are reviewed and coached by management.

NO SMOKE QUESTION

If you removed the salesperson tomorrow, could another salesperson understand how the territory generates revenue? If the answer is no, you may have a relationship-dependent business rather than a scalable sales organization.

Sales Management & Coaching

1. Sales managers regularly coach salespeople.

2. Coaching focuses on specific behaviors and skills.

3. Managers spend time observing salespeople in real customer situations.

4. Pipeline reviews are coaching conversations rather than forecast interrogations.

5. Managers hold people accountable for agreed-upon actions.

CRITICAL QUESTION

Ask the sales manager: “Who did you coach last week, what behavior did you coach, and what changed as a result?” If you can’t answer, you don’t have a coaching culture. You have a management culture.

Data & Accountability

1. We know the key numbers that drive sales performance.

2. Sales activity is measured where activity is predictive of results.

3. Pipeline data is accurate.

4. Sales performance is reviewed consistently.

5. Decisions are based more on evidence than opinion.

NO SMOKE PRINCIPLE

You can’t manage what you don’t measure. But don’t measure everything. Measure the numbers that tell you why revenue is happening — or isn’t happening.

Culture & Change Readiness

1. People understand why the organization needs to change.

2. Experienced employees feel respected during the transition.

3. Employees are willing to learn new approaches.

4. Resistance to change is discussed openly.

5. People believe accountability applies consistently to everyone.

RED FLAG

If experienced salespeople say “we’ve always done it this way,” don’t immediately label that resistance. Ask: “What specifically about the new approach do you believe won’t work?” Legitimate market knowledge may be buried in the resistance. Listen. Then test it against the data.

Knowledge Transfer & Retirement Risk

This section becomes particularly important when a significant percentage of the sales team may retire within the next three years.

1. We know which critical customer relationships are concentrated with individual salespeople.

2. Key account knowledge is documented.