In the world of revenue generation, “accountability” has some... baggage.
Don't believe me? Okay then, say it, loudly so everybody can hear... “Accountability!!!”
Now… do you hear that?
That’s the sound of millions of tortured sales-rep souls wailing in the distance.
And that’s kinda merited.
When RevOps or sales leaders dish out "There's a Need for Accountability” in your weekly chats, reps all know what they're saying: Some version of “Do your freakin’ admin work, reps.” or "Follow my freakin' process, reps."
Of course, in the face of more difficult targets and this lovely current macroeconomic climate — *toilet flushing noises* — maintaining real accountability among your sales reps is absolutely vital. Existential, even.
You probably know this.
But one thing that many RevOps practitioners get wrong: the response to this new pressure.
Under these market conditions (again: 💩), it may be tempting to fight the rule-breaking by making more rules. However, to get the most out of your reps, RevOps shouldn't loom over them, switch in-hand like some hawkish schoolmarm named Mrs. Pendergrast.
"OK," you may say, "maybe I should keep them accountable kinda... secretly then? Like... kinda trick them into being accountable?"
You mean like children?
Well....
No, no that's also not advisable.
Erring on the side of coddling and/or patronizing doesn't work either. First: none of that is scalable or cost-effective and second, more importantly, after a certain point, the more you tighten the screws on your sales team, the more pain you’re going to cause yourself.
A seeming paradox, really.
Although your intentions may be to ensure sh*t gets done, a hardline tact often results in unintended negatives. Extensive research, including many studies by Harvard Business Review, show that excessive micromanagement results in decreased job satisfaction, dwindling motivation, and increased turnover among sales teams. Yup. As it turns out, operating with a vague-and-constant sense of scrutiny leads to decreased performance. Whodathunkit.
In all: it’s a delicate balance. You need real, reliable accountability but enforcing it right now is tough. Thankfully, there’s a way to strike a perfect equilibrium without reducing your reps to mere puppetry. And that, my friends, is by incorporating something known as "automated intervention." AKA...
No More Manual Intervention!
A great way to think of the main differences between manual and automated intervention is in this scenario:
Waking a friend up in-person vs. setting an alarm clock.
The first method — which may include shaking them by the shoulders — may be viewed as intrusive, annoying, etc. (even if well-intentioned), especially over time. While the second, automated intervention allows the person you're trying to wake up the autonomy to do it.
Automation also holds a considerable advantage for sales process adherence in particular in that it eliminates the negativity that often surround manual intervention.
A manual Slack message that goes “Hey, update Salesforce,” from your otherwise-innocent RevOps bystander carries with it essentially the same sort of baggage that “Hey c'mon *poke* get up, we're going to be late” does.
An automated solution that fires off a “Hey, update Salesforce'' — with its clearly defined rules that the rep understands — that’s more like the tried-and-true alarm clock. Reps have nobody to blame for "sleeping in," but themselves. And better yet… the alarm clock itself in relatively short order creates habitual action (your body just starts getting up at a certain hour, e.g.) that reduces how often its necessary!
To tease out the metaphor more, too: Which one is scaleable?
Both interventions may get the job done, but if you've got more than a few "friends" that you need to wake up — those of you with larger sales teams, e.g. — only one method can last at-scale.
Obviously, the metaphor dies out here in that alarm clocks are annoying and Sir Ding-A-Lot, our dino mascot, is nothing but 120% delightful. But the point stands: automated tools can get around the perception that a process, and adherence to that process, is subjective, paving the way for a more transparent and fair-seeming system.
For instance, with the right tools, you can automatically include sales leaders in a deal when the opportunity value reaches a predefined threshold. This automated process ensures that significant opportunities receive the necessary oversight or coaching without the need for subjective judgments or biased interventions — or really, the perception that those things are happening (which is often just as harmful to team morale whether or not they are happening).
Automation removes any concerns about favoritism or arbitrary decision-making.
So to sum that all up, with automated intervention you get:
• Greater scalability
• More fairness
• Higher morale
• The perception of more fairness
• A greater chance that what you want reps to do will actually happen without need for intervention at all.
That's a really good bit of stuff right there.
The Button: An Intersection of Accountability and Autonomy
It's not just Rattle. Anything that you can make happen for your reps in the literal click of a button will serve you well, here. But for the sake of ease, as you can see below, it sure doesn't feel like you're being harassed when the thing you need to do is just handed to you in Slack or Teams... with a button you can click and just... get it done... right there.
This automated message delivers an objective cue that guides the sales rep towards the goal, without the need to manually do or say anything. The point we're trying to make here: Accountability is the natural byproduct of an system that makes process into something easy, immediate, and delightful.
This empowers your reps by allowing them to complete tasks directly within the message itself. It's a streamlined workflow that minimizes distractions, reduces the risk of overlooking crucial details, and keeps reps focused. It basically acts as a perfectly fair, perfectly supportive teammate, offering guidance while preserving the autonomy and decision-making capabilities of your sales team. Plus, ours looks like a cartoon dinosaur.
So however you do it, an automated solution that alerts reps is the way to go in the future. A system like that should not only signal action but also provide clear instructions, ensuring that reps have the necessary information to make decisions and take appropriate actions, too.
Cultivating a Culture of Empowerment
By leaning into automation, sales and RevOps leaders the world over can foster a culture of accountability that fuels real, actual success and empowers those well-meaning sales reps to do more — and do better, too.
Automation that focuses on simplifying process enables leaders to set clear expectations, provide resources, and establish a system that encourages ownership and responsibility.
As sales reps start experiencing the benefits of automation in their daily tasks, they feel supported, motivated, and confident in their ability to meet targets and contribute to the team's success.
They become, in a way, delighted to be doing stuff.
So in the end…
My dear RevOps experts, in this "challenging" sales landscape ( again: 💩), maintaining a balance between accountability and autonomy is what you should be thinking about, but mainly how to automate away the nasty and/or laborious parts of "accountability."
As we said above... we all know that excessive monitoring and micromanagement can negatively impact morale, increase employee turnover, and ultimately hurt productivity.
But now, by adopting automation, you can really empower your reps by offering objective insights, clear instructions, and streamlined workflows, helping them stay on-task, on-track, and on-target without feeling on-the-defensive.
By fostering a culture of accountability and empowerment, we can promise you this: Your sales team will thrive.
Because in the end, no human makes for a great puppet. Except maybe Shari Lewis.
