For Sales Quota Periods, One Size Doesn’t Fit All

Longer quota cycles motivate high-performing salespeople, while low performers thrive with shorter terms

Based on the research of Doug Chung

When it comes to stimulating sales, quotas are a tried-and-true tactic. But they don’t always provide the lifts companies hope for. A 2022 survey by Salesforce found only 28% of sales professionals were hitting their quotas.

New research from Texas McCombs suggests one reason: varying attitudes toward time periods. Doug Chung, associate professor of marketing, finds that salespeople respond differently to quotas of different lengths based on how forward-looking and motivated they are.

• For some, the promise of a big reward far into the future is enough incentive to consistently sell. They tend to perform better with longer sales quota cycles.
• Others need more frequent and short-term goals and rewards. Performers who aren’t future-motivated seem to thrive amid shorter cycles.

“Sales compensation works,” Chung says. “It’s a way to motivate people, and it does change people’s behavior. But if I don’t value the future at all, then there’s no point in putting in effort in January for a December reward.

“People who are less motivated by the future need pacers. They need more constant motivation.”

With Byungyeon Kim from the University of Minnesota and Byoung Park from the University at Albany, SUNY, Chung studied sales data from a Swedish electronics retailer with 100 retail stores.

The company had been operating on a monthly quota cycle. But executives noticed a problem. If business was slow during the first week of a cycle — for example, if the weather was nice, and consumers spent time outdoors instead of shopping — salespeople didn’t think they could reach their goals. As a result, they put in minimal effort for the rest of the month.

Midyear, in an effort to better motivate employees and boost sales, the company switched to daily quotas. Chung and colleagues compared sales data before and after the switch.

They discovered that after the quota cycle was shortened:

• Low-performing salespeople completed more sales. “These short quota cycles benefit the less motivated salespeople,” says Chung. “It motivated them not to give up.”
• High performers, however, saw a small dip in sales performance with shorter cycles.
• Sales variability dropped, increasing overall predictability.

The findings suggest that when companies design sales compensation structures and schedules, one size may not fit all, Chung says. They should use short quota cycles to motivate low performers. But companies with many high performers will do better with longer cycles.

Time preferences are just one factor in structuring compensation, he notes. Quota cycles should also match sales cycles, which may differ from one industry to another. Long cycles may be disrupted if illness keeps people out of work.

Chung is currently studying the sales impacts of another option: letting salespeople self-select which compensation cycle they prefer.

“Some startups are doing this,” he says. “But it’s still rare because of the perception of fairness. In a company, you want a cohesive culture. Once sales comp is different, even if the salesperson selected it, they might question its fairness.”

“Time Dependence and Preference: Implications for Designing Compensation Structure and Shift Scheduling” is forthcoming in Marketing Science.

Story by Deborah Lynn Blumberg