© stymbox | stock.adobe.com

“There are worse things than unsuccessfully trying to find a direct salesperson,” said the manufacturer who called me today.

Let me tell you about the call.

Most of the phone calls I’ve gotten from manufacturers recently start out like this: “I have been trying to recruit a direct salesperson for quite a while, but none of the applicants that have contacted me are even close to qualified, so I need to talk to you about reps.”

Today’s call started out like most calls I’ve received recently. The manufacturer and I spoke about some of the more common reasons to use reps:

• Existing relationships with important customers.
• Market knowledge in their territory.
• Experience in their market space.

We also spoke about the fact that even in the current tough hiring environment, reps are still abundant for most markets MANA members serve.

I shared with the manufacturer that searching for direct salespeople and not finding qualified candidates was a common problem. Then he stopped the conversation to correct me.

“My problem is not that I have been searching for direct salespeople and didn’t find qualified candidates. My problem is that after a long search that didn’t turn up qualified candidates, a year ago I got impatient and decided to settle on the least problematic of the candidates who did apply.”

“Between salary, expenses, and medical insurance, I have spent $200,000 on the salesperson I hired a year ago, and I have absolutely nothing to show for it. $200,000 down the drain. That’s why I am calling you today to talk about reps.”

“So, you see,” he concluded, “There are worse things than unsuccessfully searching for a direct salesperson. Worse than unsuccessfully searching for a direct salesperson is unsuccessfully hiring a direct salesperson.

The manufacturer’s lesson learned: Take advantage of experienced, expert MANA rep members to take your product to market. And then you won’t have to call me about $200,000 that went down the drain.

Note: The manufacturer’s comments have been edited for space and clarity.

© Pugun & Photo Studio | stock.adobe.com

Next year marks MANA’s 75th anniversary. A milestone anniversary often prompts discussions about how much has changed over the years. Discussions like: “In the future, will there still be manufacturers’ representatives?”

Yes, many things have changed. But when customers buy mission-critical products that make the difference between keeping their factories running smoothly and shutting down their production lines, there will always be a need for trusted resources. And those trusted resources are very often manufacturers’ reps.

I can’t think of a better example of the ways that some things don’t change than this excerpt from the September 1949 issue of The Agent and Representative (now MANA’s flagship publication Agency Sales magazine) written by manufacturers’ rep Edgar A. Wilcox, MANA’s first president:

“Chas B. Roth pointed out in our columns last month, in ‘The Selling Parade,’ that ‘salesmen’ are still not professionals. But ‘sales agents’ had better be professionals — in business, as they are, for themselves — although there admittedly remain many things yet to be accomplished for the well-being of such agency profession. MANA aims to elevate such profession in the opinion of manufacturers, suppliers and others, as well as in the opinion of agents themselves; to make it an object of true respect rather than of weakness or ridicule; and to improve its position morally, politically and legally.

“It takes energy, initiative, and a great deal of unselfish devotion to a cause to found and establish a national association like MANA — an organization in which any agent, no matter how large or small, may indeed be proud to be a member. It can mean more to you, bring you more satisfaction, and increase your income to a greater extent, than any group to which you as an agent could possibly belong.”

These words from 1949 could just as easily have been written last week. Sometimes, the more things change, the more they remain the same. One thing that has not changed, and probably never will change, is that there will always be a place for trusted resources like manufacturers’ representatives.

Helping manufacturers work effectively with reps is a primary reason MANA exists. So, manufacturers call all the time with questions about switching to reps.

© mast3r | stock.adobe.com

Until today, their reasons were pretty much always one of these three:

• “I need a salesforce that already knows best prospects and is a trusted resource to those prospects.”
• “I need a salesforce that is already familiar with our market space and our technology that can hit the ground running.”
• “I need a salesforce that sells complementary, non-competing products so I can ride the coattails of the manufacturers already on that rep’s line card.”

But the call I got today was different.

“I am in the process of switching to reps,” said the manufacturer* on the phone, “so I joined MANA for the educational materials. I have some questions about Shared Marked Development Fees and Life-of-Part/Life-of-Program rep agreements.”

At the end of our conversation, I asked: “How did you decide to go with reps?”

“I had no choice,” explained the manufacturer. “We tried to hire a direct salesperson, but we couldn’t find any qualified applicants.”

“However,” he continued, “as we dug deeper into the problem of finding salespeople, we discovered that there are abundant, highly-qualified manufacturers’ reps available to sell our products, so we went with reps instead.

“Other manufacturers must have discovered the same thing because, even though highly-qualified reps are readily available, we find that we have to compete aggressively with other manufacturers to get reps’ attention. That’s why I called to learn more about Market Development fees and ‘Life of Part/Life of Program’ commissions. We’ve had to offer more generous contracts to compete with other manufacturers, but we’re very impressed with reps we’ve been able to bring on board.”

Today was the first time I heard a manufacturer say: “I hired reps because I had no choice.” But it sounds like I will be hearing that again.

Note: The manufacturer’s comments were edited for space, clarity and content.

© muratart | stock.adobe.com

It’s a little bit like science fiction.

What would a rep do if, one day, that rep woke up to find that the names of the companies on their line card were the same, but those companies were all subtly different?

• The people at the factory were subtly different.
• The products were subtly different.
• The service levels and policies were subtly different.

Did this rep wake up in a parallel universe?

Nope.

The rep woke up to find out that their lines are just not the same after 18 months of Covid.

• Some of the companies are grateful for the efficiencies they get from a commissioned sales force.
• Some of the companies have developed sharp elbows and started squeezing rep commissions.
• Some of the companies kept the experienced people who know how to keep production lines humming.
• Some of the companies cut staff too far, and everyone there is new and just learning how things work.

What’s a rep to do? Take the time to look at your line card and conduct a methodical Line Card Profitability Analysis. Does the commission earned from each line justify the time it takes to support each of those lines? Do all the lines fit my target market, or does supporting some of these lines pull me into areas that are not my core competency?

How can I do that methodically? I’m glad you asked.

MANA’s 18-page Line Card Profitability Analysis Workbook is free to download in the members-only area of www.MANAonline.org. Inside you’ll find worksheets and step-by-step instructions on how to create a Line Card Profitability matrix that will tell you which lines deserve more of your time, which lines deserve less of your time, and which lines may not belong on your line card.

Having trouble finding the workbook on www.MANAonline.org? Members can email us at [email protected], and we’ll respond with the file.

“Based on my recent experiences, common courtesy is not common practice with reps,” said the manufacturer. “And, frankly, the absence of basic common courtesy gives the entire rep industry a black eye.”

© Texelart | stock.adobe.com

Is this manufacturer right? Let me share his story, and you be the judge.

This manufacturer joined MANA with high hopes of partnering with reps, and he embraced the idea of a win-win relationship. And MANA has at least 200 rep members in this manufacturer’s market space, so it’s likely that right rep is among our members.

“We tried all different ways to contact prospective reps. We tried email. We tried phone calls. We tried contacting them through their websites’ ‘contact me’ pages.

“We finally reached a few, and they were very personable, knowledgeable and helpful. But, overwhelmingly, we were just ignored.

“Any response at all would have been fine. ‘Not a fit for my line card,’ or ‘I have a competing line,’ or even just ‘I am not interested.’ But, with only a few exceptions, I got nothing. Radio silence. Zero.”

“If reps can’t respond when we reach out to them — even with ‘no thanks’ — then how can I trust that if they had our line that they would not ignore customers or prospects the same way they ignored us?

As reps, we are a community, and the actions of each of us impact all of us. Even if we are not interested in a line, there is probably a rep somewhere who would love to have that line. Taking a moment to respond to each manufacturer’s inquiry can go a long way to encourage that manufacturer to keep searching MANA’s RepFinder® for the right rep.

Let’s find time to say “no thank you” to manufacturers who don’t fit our line cards but could be a great line for another member of the rep community.

Note: The manufacturer’s comments were edited for space, clarity and content.