Page 32 - The Sales Acceleration Formula: Using Data, Technology, and Inbound Selling to go from $0 to $100 Million - PDFDrive.com

commoditized buyer context, I would bet that work ethic, rather than
intelligence, is the superior predictor of success. However, in the HubSpot buyer
context, intelligence proved to be a strong predictor of sales success. In
retrospect, I believe intelligence was a key trait because our industry was
evolving so rapidly. For context, Twitter was a garage project when we first
started selling HubSpot. Just seven years later, it is $25 billion technology titan.
That should give you a sense of how quickly the industry was transforming in
the late 2000s. Our salespeople needed to keep pace as the industry around us
took shape. They needed to understand new concepts and communicate to our
target customers exactly how those concepts impacted optimal marketing
strategies. Because most early-stage companies operate in rapidly evolving
industries, I expect that intelligence would be a predictor of sales success in their
buyer contexts as well.

I tested intelligence by effectively commencing HubSpot sales training during
the interview process. I exposed candidates to new information early in the
interview process and observed their ability to absorb the information and
communicate it back to me at a later stage in the process. For example, at the end
of my first phone screen with a candidate, I would send her training materials on
the concepts of inbound marketing, SEO, blogging, and social media. I would
ask her to learn the material before our next interview. Then, I would be sure to
reference the materials in our next role-playing session.

Here's an example of testing for intelligence and information retention:

[Mark] “Jess, I noticed on your website that you offer SEO services. I
always wanted to better understand how I could improve my business's
ranking in Google searches. Could you explain how I might go about doing
that?”

Her response would offer me a first impression of her performance on this
characteristic. To reinforce my earlier point, I am trying to understand two things
here: first, how well did she understand the concepts to which I had I exposed
her? Second, how well did she communicate those concepts back to me in a
simple manner? I would always ask follow-up questions until I eventually
stumped the candidate. The deeper I was able get on a topic before her responses
suffered, the better it meant she was performing.

Intelligence: the ability to learn complex concepts quickly and communicate
those concepts in an easy-to-understand manner.