I’ve mentioned today’s subject before, but recent events prompt me to bring it up again.
As regulars readers know, I’ve spent most of may career in financial sales and later on, managing others as well. And throughout, the single factor above all others that determined the worth of my employment was sales production. Because, for businesses, if they don’t produce revenue, they’re forced to close.
Consequently, for the sake of example, I might be the nicest, wittiest, most articulate, personable individual imaginable, but that’s not what pays the company’s bills. And if I, and my sales staff ,don’t produce, it doesn’t matter how much we’re liked, we’re not affordable.
And along the same lines, sales professionals are the simplest employees' to evaluate because their productivity’s easily measured and at the end of each period, be it weeks, months, quarters, years or whatever, goals have either been reached or not.
In that regard, when it comes to failure to meet goals, another business tenet kicks in, whereby poor performers are simply replaced. And that too, has nothing to do with anything personal, but merely reflects the fact that if the problem’s not fixed, there won’t be a business left at all.
Now, to me the preceding premises are precisely true and that’s why most employers follow them in their own way. Because, above all else, an entity's survival is always preeminent. And that brings me to my question for today.
Why is it that politicians can get away with incredible failure by making speeches? And why aren’t they regularly tested against their stated and given objectives? Because if the current administration ran like most businesses must, it would have been forced to close a couple of years ago.
That’s it for today folks.
Adios
No comments:
Post a Comment