Sales Manager Front Line Blog

I would like to welcome everybody to the Sales Manager Front Line Blog. Once or twice per week, we will be discussing an issue currently relevant to the success of sales leaders. Our mantra is that sales leaders must act with edge and take action. Each post will provide ideas on how to deal with sales leader challenges.  We welcome your ideas and comments...

Current Articles | RSS Feed RSS Feed

How to Deal with a "Tiger"

Posted by Mike Stankus on Mon, Jan 04, 2010 @ 09:51 AM

The day after the Tiger Woods story broke, I posted the  following question on LinkedIn:

What would you do ifyour top sales person pulled a “Tiger Woods”? Assume the person is married but not fooling around with people from the office…

I was curious to see how managers would deal with this situation. The question was posted before the full extent of Tiger’s exploits was made public.

The question generated hundreds of responses. People fell into three camps:

Fire immediately (20% of responders)

Try to help (20% of responders)

None of my business (60% of responders)

The majority of responders feel that employees should not be judged by what they do in their personal lives. As long as job performance is not affected, an employee’s extra curricular activities are of no concern.

On the other extreme, some people believe adultery is a character issue and equate it to cheating at golf. Since trust is such a large part of sales, can you trust a person who cheats on their spouse?

Many responders focused on the risk of not addressing the situation citing questionable behavior that becomes public may have a negative impact on the company. In addition, other employees may lose respect for management if the situation is not handled appropriately.

Three weeks after I posted the question, Tiger’s wife and  sponsors (except Nike) have left him. Tiger is still in seclusion and has not yet publically addressed themedia.

Much can be said from the old adage “messy personal lives usually spill over to professional lives”.  I fall into the be pro-active camp – if one of my top performers is engaged in risky behavior, I would address it.  Employers make an investment in their people and should take action to protect that investment.

I wonder if Tiger’s sponsors were aware of his activities? I find it hard to believe that a sponsor paying millions of dollars for image marketing would not conduct extensive background checks on a regular basis.  Accenture’s brand marketing revolved around the “Be a Tiger” campaign. How would you like to be the marketing person who came up with that idea? Yikes!

 

Tags: , ,

COMMENTS

Character gets to the essence of our actions and decision making process in ALL areas of life. It defines the CORE VALUES of who we REALLY are and what we believe and hold to be meaningful and important standards or guiding principles in our life both in public, but even more telling, when in private and nobody is watching. Does our integrity stand when in private as well as in public? If we are willing to compromise in the personal/private areas, then we will very likely be willing to do so in the public arena such as the workplace. The weight of such a person's thinking will often hinge not so much on right or wrong, but on how their decision might reveal their true character ("lapse of judgement" as it is often excused in PC language)and, thereby, tarnish their reputation and future "opportunities". 
 
 
 
In the example of Tiger Woods, I agree that it would be reasonable to expect that the subject of a marketing campaign would be thoroughly scrutinzed before and during the campaign to identify and avoid even a HINT of anything that might cast an unfavorable shadow on the individual endorsing, and by default on the sponsor as well. 
 
 
 
A company affected by actions such as in Tiger Woods' case is forced to protect their investment and mitigate the negative impact to the business by divesting itself from the source for all of the ressons mentioned in the survey above. However, since it is possible that both employees and the consumer might not be able to separate the cause and effect, the company should show it's ability and willingness to acknowledge Tiger's character failure and a sincere desire to see him restored personally. From a strictly objective business perspective, this approach could serve the purpose of mitigating the negative perception and impact to the company.

posted @ Monday, January 04, 2010 11:22 AM by Warren Lutz


Post Comment
Name
 *
Email
 *
Website (optional)
Comment
 *

Allowed tags: <a> link, <b> bold, <i> italics

Receive email when someone replies.