Hiring salespeople? Avoid these 3 common (and costly) mistakes
Recruiting the right salespeople can be the difference between explosive growth and months of lost revenue. Yet many companies make the same mistakes time and time again - mistakes that cost time and money, while competitors run away.
When we analyze the recruitment processes of our clients, we see a clear pattern. The companies that are most successful with their sales hires differ markedly from those that struggle. The difference is not in budget or industry, but in how strategically they approach the recruitment process itself.
After following hundreds of sales recruitments, we can identify three critical mistakes that affect most companies. These mistakes are not only common - they are also surprisingly costly when you consider the real impact.
Mistake 1: Starting to look for "someone who can sell" without defining what to sell
It sounds almost ridiculous when you say it out loud, but the vast majority of companies start their sales recruitment with the wrong question. Instead of asking "what will this person do?" they ask "who do we want?"
Saying you're going to hire a salesperson and then start looking for someone to sell is like wanting to bring in an athlete without first checking which sport it is. A table tennis player, basketball player and weightlifter look completely different - and won't be the best, or even work, in each other's sports.
Why does this happen so often?
The pressure to fill a position quickly causes many to skip the groundwork. The sales manager is told "we need a salesperson" and within days an ad has been placed or a recruitment agency contacted. But without a crystal clear picture of exactly what needs to be done, the result is haphazard.
What seems like a time saver at the beginning becomes a huge cost later on. The wrong person in the wrong type of sales role usually results not only in failed sales, but also in frustration, high staff turnover and damaged team dynamics.
The real impact
When the right person ends up in the wrong sales role, we typically see that the budget is not reached for 12-18 months. In the worst case, the person quits and the process has to start from scratch. For a 10 million turnover company, this simple mistake can cost 500,000-1,000,000 SEK in lost growth and recruitment costs.
A complete job description - what we call the 'hat' - must include specific details such as the length of the sales cycle, the average order, the activity budget and exactly what results are expected. Different personalities thrive and perform differently depending on whether the sales cycle is three weeks or nine months.
Mistake 2: Focusing on "good people" instead of productive people
This is perhaps the most costly mistake of all. In the interview room, we are often blinded by charisma, education or industry experts while forgetting the only thing that really matters: does this person have a history of delivering results?
A good person is not necessarily a good person to hire. What determines success in sales is productivity - the ability to start, continue and complete activities with the desired result.
Why this mistake is so common
Many sales managers are former salespeople, which means they are great at getting along with people. It's their super skill. But in the interview room, this strength becomes a weakness when the focus is on "getting along" with the candidate instead of examining their actual performance history.
We see this over and over again: the candidate who made the biggest impression in the interview, who everyone 'liked', turns out to be a disappointment six months later. Whereas the candidate who was perhaps a little less charming, but had clear documentation of their past achievements, becomes a star performer.
What productivity really means
A productive salesperson doesn't just have 'sales experience'. They have concrete, measurable evidence that they have exceeded targets, increased sales and created growth in their previous roles. Equally important, productive people show signs of productivity outside work too. Perhaps they have played sports at a high level, led associations or completed projects with demonstrably successful results.
What appears to be "an honest, nice person with a good attitude" may turn out to be someone who has never delivered under pressure or taken responsibility for their figures. This discovery, unfortunately, often comes only after several months of underperforming sales.
Mistake 3: Focusing on comprehensive introduction instead of first order
The third major pitfall is what happens after the contract is signed. Many companies believe that the key to success is a "thorough and serious induction". But this well-intentioned approach fails to understand what is really going on in the mind of a newly hired salesperson.
A newly hired salesperson has only one thing on their mind until that idea becomes reality: selling their first order. It is only when the salesperson has sold his or her first order that he or she really knows it is possible. Regardless of what the salesperson says or how they behave, no salesperson feels particularly good until the first order is sold.
Why traditional induction programs fail
When a newly hired salesperson is given week after week of training, product reviews and administrative procedures before they are allowed to start selling, an unhealthy imbalance is created. The salesperson gets and gets and gets from the company, but never gets the chance to give back what they are passionate about contributing: sales.
This inevitably leads to the new recruit becoming critical and negative. The peculiar phenomenon of the 'giver and taker' being dissatisfied is well known in psychology, yet ignored in most induction programs.
The effective method
What works is to give the salesperson exactly as little training as it takes to start producing something - then immediately follow this up with more training as a reward for the result. This way, the salesperson and the company are in balance while training becomes something positive instead of a boring bore.
A new salesperson should not be expected to sell the same budget as an experienced salesperson from day one. Instead, a start-up ladder is built where the targets are gradually increased over six months until the person reaches full budget. But the first target should be reached within the first few weeks.
Why these mistakes are so costly
When we calculate the true cost of recruitment errors, the figures become frightening quickly. A mistake in hiring a salesperson costs not only the salary during the hiring period, but also:
Lost sales opportunities during the period the person would have produced
Recruitment costs (both internal resources and possible external costs)
Cost of new recruitment process
Time for training of the next person
Impact on team dynamics and morale
For many companies, the total cost of a recruitment mistake is 1.5-3 times the person's annual salary. For a company hiring salespeople with an annual salary of SEK 600 000, a single mistake can cost SEK 900 000-1 800 000.
The strategic difference
Companies that avoid these mistakes have developed a systematic approach to sales recruitment. They understand that recruitment is not about "finding good people" but about risk minimization through structured process.
Their success comes from being as careful about who they hire as they are about the customers they work with. They have learned to ask tough questions, request concrete evidence of past performance, and build onboarding programs that get salespeople producing quickly.
The difference is already visible within the first few months. While their competitors are still struggling with underperforming salespeople, they already have a functioning sales machine that drives growth.
Next steps towards better sales recruitment
Avoiding these three mistakes requires more than just awareness - it requires systematic change in the way the recruitment process is structured. This means developing clear job descriptions, creating structured interview processes focused on productivity, and building onboarding programs that prioritize quick results.
The real challenge lies in implementation. Moving from ad-hoc recruitment to a systematic process requires both methodological knowledge and the discipline to follow the process even when time pressure arises.
However, for companies that are serious about building a functioning sales organization, this is an investment that pays off in months of successful recruitment ahead. The difference between guessing and having a proven method is clearly visible in the results.
-
Starting to look for a salesperson without first defining exactly what to sell and what specific tasks the role entails.
-
An unclear sales job can cost a company £500,000-£1,000,000 in lost growth and recruitment costs over 12-18 months.
-
Focusing on the candidate's charisma and personality instead of examining their actual history of measurable results and productivity.
-
A productive salesperson has measurable evidence of exceeding targets, increasing sales and creating growth in previous roles, often with successes outside of work.
-
Providing a comprehensive introduction with a lot of training and administration instead of quickly getting the salesperson to focus on selling their first order.
-
Provide minimal training to enable the salesperson to produce something quickly, and then follow up with more training as a reward for results achieved.
-
A misrecruitment can cost 1.5-3 times the salesperson's annual salary, which for an annual salary of SEK 600 000 can be SEK 900 000-1 800 000.
-
A systematic and structured recruitment process that focuses on risk mitigation, clear job descriptions and evidence of past performance.
