The closest thing to a triangle arrangement that I have been a part of is when I was a student worker in my current apartment complex working as a housing consultant. I worked for an hourly wage but also received commission for any lease I signed. For corporate, their primary goal was to sign as many contracts as possible. They constantly expressed the need to close on anyone that walked through the door or called us for a tour. They always reminded us that constant following up with a prospect was the best way to get them to sign, even if we got annoying with the constant emails or phone calls.
For the most part the student workers and corporate principles seen eye to eye but there were several instances where it seemed like the tactics that they wanted us to use got to be a bit excessive and overwhelming. Corporate could not really relate to the students searching often for their first apartment like us, the student workers could. Most of the workers were attending university and have been on the other side of leasing so we understood the pressures and commitment of renting our first apartment. Although we wanted to earn commission as well, there were often times where the students we were touring were simply not ready to sign the lease. They also did not deserve to be constantly bombarded with frequent phone calls and emails that were expected of us by corporate. In my case, I put myself in the student's shoes and decided to do what I thought was the right thing and not pressure them into doing something they were not yet ready to do, even though I was very good at it. I sometimes ignored the policies that I was told to do and lied about it to corporate. In some cases the students picked up on me being genuine and ended up signing. In others, the prospect was simply lost; possibly to me not following up enough. At the end of the day, I understood that it was impossible to always keep both sides happy and made decisions based on my best judgment on what I thought was right and most efficient.
The times when I was ordered to do constant following up, often ended badly for both sides. A student would get fed up with the constant emails and phone calls and would tell us to stop contacting them and that they did not want to sign with us. I often expressed that this happened to management and they said they understood but there was nothing they could do because that is what corporate wanted.
One possible way to have resolved this issue would have been that instead of having a general policy for all prospects, to put more trust in the student workers themselves and allow them to make their own judgements based on the observations they noticed while giving a personal tour. Either way it is now I went against the common policy most of the time when I worked there and that worked for me. If corporate wants to become more productive and efficient, they should listen more to the hands on workers that they are currently employing and maybe they'll receive better results with new and improved policies.
In this case it is principal, not principle.
ReplyDeleteYou are the second student to write about high pressure sales tactics to close a deal, though I gather in your case the the students would have to first come in to look at an apartment, so they initiated a transaction.
I wonder if you know about the market conditions behind the particular sales tactic. What percentage of apartments were filled by your employer (and was it at one location or at several different locations)? Likewise, what fraction of apartments were filled in the CampusTown area after the move in date. (Is that August 15?)
You might imagine that with substantial excess demand for apartments, the pressure tactics would work while with substantial excess supply they would not. Also, there are issues about price and quality variation of apartments might matter. And, finally, there are landlord reputations that could impact things. So, if you have information on any of that, you might comment about it.
As far as sales percentages, the apartment doesn't reach full capacity until maybe late July or August since we are located off campus. Location is the primary indicator for capacity percentage. This is evident because most near campus apartments reach full capacity relatively soon in first semester. For this reason, we don't regard these apartments when comparing sales percentages. We compare our sales to similar apartments at similar distances from campus.
DeleteSince demand for apartments off campus isn't as high as near campus ones, I don't fully agree on the pressure tactic for all prospects since it may steer those who are unsure away.
The landlord reputation is also not very good for us. I think a part of this is because of the tactics that we are told to do causes people to become fed up with us and leave bad reviews for us. This would be a good reason to reevaluate the current sales tactics that are in place.
This sounds like the issue was between corporate and the employees, more than the resulting triangle dilemma that employees have between the customers and the managers. As someone who has worked a sales job, I totally agree that corporate is fully aware of how this makes employees uncomfortable and often encourages them to lie or otherwise not follow the guidelines. Honestly, I think this is just a way to weed out people who aren't willing to go the extra mile and sell their soul for commission.
ReplyDeleteI'm not sure I agree with the values of the apartment complex. You said they wanted you to sign a contract with anyone and everyone that walked through the door and went on a tour, but if the prospective buyers are not quality ones and do not have the funds this would defeat the purpose of signing with everyone. In addition, I don't think sending out constant emails and bombarding the possible buyers about signing will encourage them to sign. Most people look at who an email is from and then decide wether to open it or not. So, I agree that the companies tactics were excessive.
ReplyDeleteI'm not sure I would use this as a triangle model example, though. From your post, it seems like there is obvious tension and disagreements between staff and the employer. Also, I don't see any loyalty to the potential buyers. Because of these things, I don't see what connects the staff to the employer or the clients.
Did other people who worked with you implement the same tactics? Did they also go against corporate policies, or did you let them know it was working for you? I think it is interesting to consider this situation from the student perspective where you can relate to the potential prospects more. You could have passed this along perhaps if you had an exit interview of some sort. However, maybe you would have been able to recommend changes in company policies while you were still working there and this could have been an opportunity for you to move up in the ranks.
ReplyDelete