As it becomes increasingly harder for sales people to achieve quotas, many sales leaders need to make decisions on how to deal with under-performing reps.

Let's agree that under-performance could be a result of ineffective sales management - poor hiring decisions, lack of training and coaching, minimal over-site, etc. With that said, I recently posed the question, "How much time do you give under-performing sales reps to turn it around?" to a group of sales leaders.

As expected, this question generated significant dialogue. Responders focused on two areas, the first being factors to consider before making a decision. Suggestions included:

• Length of sale cycle
• Past track record
• Length of time in current position
• Support, training provided to date
• Market conditions
• Territory
• Personal problems (divorce, illness, etc)
• Expectations
• Performance compared to peers
• Cost to company (salary, other expenses)
• HR termination policy

Secondly, responders shared their opinions on how much time to give a rep to turn it around. Most were in agreement that 90 days is more than enough time, but cut ties quicker if documented milestones are not being met. In fact, many sales leaders said that turn-a-rounds are a waste of time and follow the philosophy "hire slowly, fire quickly."

Obviously there is no right answer to this question. Circumstances will dictate the best approach - whether it is a 90-day plan or fire immediately.

My two cents - consider who takes the initiative in an under-performance situation. I have observed that sales reps who realize they are failing AND pro-actively approach the manager for help have a much higher likelihood of success. Results, focus and self-awareness are critical traits for sales reps. If a rep doesn't understand or admit they are under-performing, will additional nurturing make a difference? I think not.