I'm in Northern Ca. I guess the summer was a bit dryer than normal, but all together this pattern isn't unusual. I've just become a sunshine addict since moving here and only grudgingly accept the arrival of bad weather. Ours is an operating "ranch"... but here a ranch is a place where you have to throw a rock pretty hard to hit your neighbor's house <g>, so it sounds like more than it is.
I once thought of intravenous coffee, but never "piddle packs"... I think my wife would object :-o . > think we've all pretty much agreed that simply going on total dollars > of gross profit, while simple (simplistic?) may not be a good measure > of performance either. Absolutely not. That's what good managers are for, to let their people know if they're falling shy in some aspect of their performance, or, what they're doing right. I just think it's folly to try and aggregate all the aspects of profitability into a single number by which to evaluate a salesperson. Thank you for your indulgence on a rainy, windy day :) Ben Petersen On 8 Nov 2002, at 12:53, J. Stephen Wills wrote: > Well, I actually agree w/you about "life", even if it means that I'm > sorry 'bout the drought and now the mud. Didn't some parts of Nevada > get around 6 inches ; is that where you are? This is cotton territory > and, while we've had good rainfall this year, and last, I think, we > also had record monthly rainfalls f/much of the area in both SEP and > OCT, which are usually quite dry and, therefore, the time to defoliate > and pick. I'm not a grower and haven't even planted any ornamental > brown or green since they've been trying to eradicate the boll weevil > ... > > Anyway, I didn't mention real life, much less as part of a "balanced > scorecard" approach to performance measurement. And, I'd never > suggest that some set of (possibly arbitrary and even irrelevant) > numbers, alone, would be a reliable metric. Lots of things look > "good" on paper, but it still takes 9 months to make a baby, no matter > how many women are put on the project (w/apologies to Frederick > Brooks, "The Mythical Man-Month"). Heck, I've got ideas about > improving programmer productivity by making mandatory the use of > intravenous feeding tubes and "piddle packs" - the numbers look great > on paper, but, for some strange reason, nobody has given me any > "buy-in" ... > > Well, what I intimated previously w/re: NPV would probably be > overkill, especially given limited scales of most organizations and > their available resources, especially time and labor. However, I > think we've all pretty much agreed that simply going on total dollars > of gross profit, while simple (simplistic?) may not be a good measure > of performance either. I'm still ruminating (at my desk, not the > ranch) on this and no doubt will add more later. > > In the meanwhile, feel free to "take it out" on me. ;-) > > Later, > Steve in Memphis > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Ben Petersen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Friday, November 08, 2002 4:02 AM > Subject: Re: Statistics experts needed > > > > Steve, > > > > It's raining here. Our ranch has turned to mud (hasn't rained since > > May and our soils don't handle it well). So I thought I'd take it > > out on you <g, just kidding>. > > > > IMHO, here's the problem w/ Net Present Value calculations > > involving people and organizations. They are just too variable. If > > you were working with a bond portfolio, or some other kind of paper, > > it's the only way to go. Even if you were trying to evaluate a > > company's options as to future operations over an extended period of > > time, wanting the best guess as to best profitabililty, OK. But > > trying to apply that logic to individuals or small groups doesn't > > work because "life happens" to everybody. And the small yield > > differences from NPV calcs would simply be overwhelmed by babies > > being born, parents dieing, alcohol, elicit affairs and (especially > > for salesreps) burnout. > > > > Of course, the return of double digit bond yields could change > > things completely <g>. > > > > Ben Petersen > > > > > > On 8 Nov 2002, at 11:01, J. Stephen Wills wrote: > > > > > Okay, gang, this one's killin' me, and I like it. So, I'm gonna' > > > try to put my MBA to use here. I've just cracked the book(s) and > > > will report more later, as I proceed, but, at the moment, I'd > > > suggest taking a peek at "excess present-value index", or > > > profitability index. > > > If all the costs of sales as well as revenue streams/inflows can > > > be > > > identified, quantified, and dated, then the Net Present Value of > > > the profit can be determined. This appears to be typically > > > applied to project initiatives rather than the efforts of the > > > individual members of the sales team. > > > > > > However, if a salesperson's profit margin varies, their customers > > > time-to-pay (a form of Days Sales Outstanding per Salesperson) > > > varies, their Book-To-Bill numbers vary (here, inventory carrying > > > costs would be factored in), as well as, potentially, a number of > > > other factors that can have a measurable impact on "the bottom > > > line", then the monetary worth to the firm of each salesperson's > > > efforts will also vary. > > > > > > Anyway, I'm going to continue looking into this and will be back > > > to the topic as soon as I have more to share. > > > > > > Later, > > > Steve in Memphis > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > From: "tellef" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > Sent: Friday, November 08, 2002 9:55 AM > > > Subject: Re: Statistics experts needed > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Ben: > > > > > > > > >The simplest thing I can think of is to use a multiplier that > > > > >amplifies the % profit and still consider the $profit: SP1 = > > > > >(10,000*.4)+(.4*1,500)) = 4600 SP2 = (10,000*.4)+(.4*150)) = > > > > >4060 SP3 = (10,000*.38)+(.38*2000)) = 4560 > > > > > > > > I see the profit% in there (the .4 and the .38), and I see the > > > > profit$ in there (1500,150,2000). What does the '10,000' > > > > represent? Just a constant number? Your formula seems to work! > > > > > > > > > > > > Tom: > > > > > > > > >By that I mean to take the $sales and the percent of > > > > >profit, drop the decimal from the percentage and multiply the > > > > >two. While > > > > the > > > > >number has no real meaning, it would sort them such that your > > > > >example > > > > would > > > > >rank them as 1-60000, 2-6000, 3-76000, 4-57000 > > > > > > > > Your way of calculating gives salesman3 the edge, while Ben's > > > > gives salesman1 the edge. I think I'll take both solutions to > > > > the client and ask them which person, in their opinion, they > > > > would want to see 'on top'. Then maybe I'll use that formula! > > > > > > > > > > > > Larry: > > > > > > > > >Assign each salesperson a rank from 1 to X (where X is the > > > > >number of salespeople) according to total dollar profit. > > > > >Assign them a separate > > > > rank > > > > >according to percentage profit. Add the two ranks together, > > > > >and print > > > > your > > > > >list in ascending order of combined rank. < > > > > > > > > That might work. I'll have to run some numbers through on the > > > > actual data and see if it represents that they would want to > > > > see. > > > > > > > > > > > > >So, my friend, I would not worry too much. Go to sleep and > > > > >know that whatever your solution, most likely they will not be > > > > >happy. Because you > > > > are > > > > >trying to quantify the unquantifiable. > > > > > > > > That's pretty funny, Enrique. True, but funny. Loved reading > > > > your reply. > > > > > > > > Thanks everyone!!!! > > > > > > > > Karen > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ================================================ > > > > TO SEE MESSAGE POSTING GUIDELINES: > > > > Send a plain text email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > In the message body, put just two words: INTRO rbase-l > > > > ================================================ > > > > TO UNSUBSCRIBE: send a plain text email to > > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the message body, put just two words: > > > > UNSUBSCRIBE rbase-l > > > > ================================================ TO SEARCH > > > > ARCHIVES: http://www.mail-archive.com/rbase-l%40sonetmail.com/ > > > > > > ================================================ > > > TO SEE MESSAGE POSTING GUIDELINES: > > > Send a plain text email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > In the message body, put just two words: INTRO rbase-l > > > ================================================ > > > TO UNSUBSCRIBE: send a plain text email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > In the message body, put just two words: UNSUBSCRIBE rbase-l > > > ================================================ TO SEARCH > > > ARCHIVES: http://www.mail-archive.com/rbase-l%40sonetmail.com/ > > > > > > > > > ================================================ > > TO SEE MESSAGE POSTING GUIDELINES: > > Send a plain text email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > In the message body, put just two words: INTRO rbase-l > > ================================================ > > TO UNSUBSCRIBE: send a plain text email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > In the message body, put just two words: UNSUBSCRIBE rbase-l > > ================================================ TO SEARCH ARCHIVES: > > http://www.mail-archive.com/rbase-l%40sonetmail.com/ > > ================================================ > TO SEE MESSAGE POSTING GUIDELINES: > Send a plain text email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > In the message body, put just two words: INTRO rbase-l > ================================================ > TO UNSUBSCRIBE: send a plain text email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] In > the message body, put just two words: UNSUBSCRIBE rbase-l > ================================================ TO SEARCH ARCHIVES: > http://www.mail-archive.com/rbase-l%40sonetmail.com/ > ================================================ TO SEE MESSAGE POSTING GUIDELINES: Send a plain text email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the message body, put just two words: INTRO rbase-l ================================================ TO UNSUBSCRIBE: send a plain text email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the message body, put just two words: UNSUBSCRIBE rbase-l ================================================ TO SEARCH ARCHIVES: http://www.mail-archive.com/rbase-l%40sonetmail.com/
