Comments on: The difference between Hunters and Farmers, and how to organize your sales force

By: TomPier

TomPier — Sat, 08 May 2010 21:44:09 +0000

great post as usual!

By: Michelle

Michelle — Mon, 19 Apr 2010 22:27:26 +0000

In my experience the best sales organisations do organise into hunters and farmers and I definitely agree that a smooth transition between the two when a sale has been made is key to ensure that the new customer gtets a happy ‘launch ‘ experience. There is a case for re-engaging hunters in an existing account when trying to penetrate an entirely new part of the organisation but this, inevitably, can lead to compensation issues. I do agree that salespeople are pre-disposed to one of the roles although i have occasionally seen someone able to cover both roles and , of course, understanding both is a key requirement for sales management.

By: Dave Richardson

Dave Richardson — Fri, 19 Mar 2010 16:45:08 +0000

Some of the most succesful sales people I have ever met are the actual hybrid of these 2 roles. They are worth their weight in gold, as they are few and far between in my experience.

As for how to organise a sales force, I agree with Ted and the approach that IBM took to Sales. I worked in a very similar environment at BTGS, and never was it easier to position sales people within accounts, defining roles and responsibilities for the customer, to secure revenue growth whilst maintaining the relationship.

By: Matthew Smith

Matthew Smith — Fri, 19 Mar 2010 16:43:01 +0000

Growing accounts is different that winning new logos in virtually all business models. I think it’s imperative you do this to create repeatable success. Great article too, thanks for sharing with the group!

–Matt

By: Ted Ehling

Ted Ehling — Thu, 11 Mar 2010 20:05:57 +0000

I agree with Paul; in very large accounts when trying to make a sale to a new division or of a totally different offering, it makes sense for the farmer to bring in the hunter who has the skills and time to dedicate to this sale. My advice to all is that you draw up an agreement between the hunter and farmer on what is expected from each, who will run specific parts of the campaign, and how the commission will be shared after the successful sale. Getting this up front will make the whole process run much smoother, and improve the probability for success.

By: Paul Brown

Paul Brown — Thu, 11 Mar 2010 20:03:58 +0000

By: John Gies

John Gies — Wed, 10 Mar 2010 23:46:53 +0000

Eric,

Great job at defining hunter v. farmer roles and how the competencies of one type can hinder an individual in the other role.

I also appreciate your point on Account Managers being seen as non-revenue generating. Some of my largest deals over time have come from smaller deals that were nurtured.

All of that being said, many firms can’t afford to have separate hunter and farmer teams. In my career I have had to do both. I figured farming took care of the meat and potatoes. Hunting delivered the gravy every year.

Take Good Care,
John

By: Ted Ehling

Ted Ehling — Wed, 10 Mar 2010 23:18:11 +0000

At one time IBM was known for their sales prowess. They had multiple sales categories and job description/compensation plans. They had true Hunters who had a high percentage of their compensation pegged to commission. They had Account Mangers with their compensation tied to retention and growth, true Farmers. And they had special products sales execs who would Hunt on in the existing accounts, teaming with the Farmers.
Each type had a unique personality. The New Account sales execs had all the characteristics we see in the Hunter: risk takers, not afraid to make a call or knock on a door, laser focused on the deal and their commissions. The Farmers were more customer-focused and long -term thinkers. They planned, and executed their plans with one eye on this quarter and the other on next year. The special products sales execs were a hybrid. Most came from the sales support role, were more technical, and recognized that they were hunting on the farm that was owned by another sales exec, and needed that person’s complete cooperation and support.
I have seen Farmers fail at the New Account Hunting process and Hunters almost destroy an account when handed an account to manage as a Farmer. The lesson that I learned is that no matter how much training and determination, MOST sales execs have a DNA for either Hunting or Farming. Many will be able to cross over for a short time, but will quickly drift if they are not in the right mode.
I have done all three of these sales functions that IBM had; I know that I’m a really good Farmer who likes to hunt, but I am just not great out in the woods by myself hunting for business.

By: Gerry

Gerry — Wed, 10 Mar 2010 19:47:08 +0000

Brilliant,

This is a clear understanding of the client base , the sales process and how to maximize reveune.

By: Mark

Mark — Wed, 10 Mar 2010 12:31:29 +0000

My organization has evolved this model over the last several years, and I’ve seen many things work and not work. One important distinction to make as you look at this structure, is what is the type of business that you are in. For example in the world of software, is the business an enterprise software model or a SaaS model. In an enterprise software model the expectation of the farmer is maintenance. In a SaaS model you have to turn this completely over, where for the most part the hunter gets an initial deal that is probably smaller in terms of dollars, and the role of the farmer would be to aggressively drive more business into that new customer. I never did like the term farmer, as I do think of a farmer as more of support person, and in a SaaS model the account manager has to be much more strategic in nature, and be focused on selling, not supporting, which falls to the responsibility of the overall account team. In looking at your first concern in regards to incentives…. What we do is the following, the account managers are commissioned like the hunters, albeit at a lower commission rate, however, only commissioned on the additional dollars brought in. They also receive the bonus on retention rates. However, the bulk of their variable comp is around driving more sales from existing customers. In terms of the transition the customer, we incent the hunter that brought in the deal a small rate for any additional sales in the first 12 months of the initial deal. Therefore, although the account manager takes on responsibility of the account after the deal is sold there is some incentive to have the hunter to stay involved on a very limited basis to ensure a proper transition of the customer, and give the customer the feel that they are not being “abandoned” by the person they purchased from.