The Sales Organization

Effective sales executives insist upon sound organization. They recognize that the sales
organization must achieve both qualitative and quantitative personal selling objectives.
Over the long haul, it must achieve qualitative objectives those concerning personal
sellings expected contributions to achievement of overall company objectives. In the
short run, it must attain the quantitative personal selling objectives not only sales
volume but other objectives related to profit(such as keeping selling expenses within
certain limits) and to competitive position(such as attaining given market
shares).achieving short-run quantitative personal selling objectives precedes attainment
of the long-run qualitative personal selling objectives.
The effective sales executive looks upon the sales organization both with respect to here
and now and to the future. but the sales organization makes its major contribution in
the present and the near term-recognizing this, the effective sales executive builds both
sales-minded less and profit-mindedness into the sales organization. A sales
organization is both an orienting point for cooperative endeavor and a structure of
human relationships. It is group of individuals striving jointly to reach qualitative and
quantitative objectives, and bearing informal and formal relations to one another.
Implicit in the concept of a sales organization is formal relations to one another. implicit
in the concept of a sales organization is the notion that individual members cooperate to
attain ends.
The sales organization is not an end in itself but rather the vehicle by which individuals
achieve given ends. Existence of a sales organization implies the existence of patterns of
relationship among subgroups and individuals established for purposes of facilitating
accomplishment of the groups aims. Organization defects often trace to lack of
attention given to sale organization during the early existence of a company. When
setting up business, management is more concerned with financing and non-marketing
problems. Executives of new enterprises consider organization, but most often these
relate to no marketing activities. In manufacturing, for example, as products are
improved, production quantities increased, new products added, and production
processes developed, the manufacturing organization is adapted to changed situations.
Similar alterations in the sales organization are frequently neglected or postponed. She
organizations in many companies evolve without regard for changing conditions. The
basic setup designed when the company was new remains, despite, for example, changes
in selling style and size of sales force. The sales organization, after all, is the vehicle
through which personal-selling strategy is implemented. A well designed sales
organization, like a well designed automobile, accomplishes more, and more
economically, than does one that is an artifact. The sales organization should be
adjusted to fit-ideally, to anticipate changing situations. Shifts in marketing, in
competition, and in other business factors calls for changes in the sales organization.
The ideal sales organization has a built in adaptability allowing it to respond
appropriately in fluid and diverse marketing environments.

Types of Sales Organization
If sound practices are followed in setting up the sales department, the resulting
structure takes on features of one or more of four basic types: line, line and staff,
functional, and committee. The grouping of activities into positions and the charting of
relationships of positions causes the organization to take on structural form. The first
two types (line and line and staff) are the most common. Functional and committee
organization are rare. Most sales departments have hybrid organizational structures,
with variations to adjust for personalities and to fit specific operating conditions.
The sales departments structure evolves from the needs of the business. No two
companies have identical sales organizations, because no two have identical needs. The
customers, the marketing channels , the company size, the product or product line, the
practices of competitors, and the personality and the personalities and abilities of the
personnel are but a few of factor affecting the organizational structure of the sales
department.
So numerous are the factors influencing the structure of individual sales departments
that it is impractical to draw generalization about the many possible mixed types; the
discussion that follows is an analysis of the four basic types. Organizational planners
should know the chief features of each type, and its respective merits and limitations. If
they have this background and understand the other factors influencing the structure of
the sales department, they are equipped to evaluate its appropriateness. Read on to
know more about sales organizations
1) Types of Sales Organization Line Sales Organization
2) Types of Sales Organization Line and Staff Sales Organization
3) Types of Sales Organization Functional Sales Organization
4) Types of Sales Organization Committee Sales Organization

Type of sales organization Line Sales Organization
The line sales organization is the oldest and simplest sales organizational structure.
It is widely used in smaller firms and in firms with small numbers of selling personnel.
For instance, in companies that cover a limited geographic area or sell a narrow product
line. The chain of command runs from the top sales executives down through
subordinates. All executives exercise line authority, and each subordinate is responsible
only to one person on the next higher level. Responsibility is definitely fixed, and those
charged with it also make decisions and take action. Lines of authority run vertically
through the structure. And all persons on any one organizational level area independent
of that level.
The line sales organization sees its greatest use in companies where all sales personnel
report directly to the chief sales executive. In these companies this executive often is
preoccupied with active supervision and seldom has much time to devote to planning or
to work with other top executives. Occasionally, however, the line sales organization is
used where more than two levels of authority are present. Theoretically, there is no cross
communication between persons on the same level. Contacts between persons on the
same level are indirect and are affected through the next higher level. For example, the
assistant sales manger of division 1 arranges to confer with the assistant sales manager
of division 2 through the sales manger. Similarly, contacts by sales personnel with the
office staff flow up through the organization to sales manager and back down through
the assistant sales manager in charge of the office to the office staff.
The basic simplicity of line organization is the main reason for its use. Because each
department member reports to only one superior, problems of discipline and control are
small. Lines of authority and responsibility are clear and logical, and it is difficult for
individuals to shift or evade responsibilities. Definite placement of authority and
responsibility saves time in making policy changes, in deciding new plans, and in
converting plans into action. The simplicity makes it easy for executives to develop close
relations with salespersons. With this working atmosphere, it is not surprising that
executives who come up through a line organization are frequently strong leaders. As
the typical line sales department has few organizational levels, administrative express
are low.
The greatest weakness of the line sales organization is that so much depends upon the
department head. The head needs outstanding ability and rare qualifications, and
should be well versed in all phases of sales management, for there are no subordinates
with specialized skills and knowledge. Even if the head is an all around expert, there is
insufficient time for policy making and planning, since rigidity of the line structure
requires that a great deal of attention be given to direction of sales operations. The liked
often must make decisions and take action without benefit of planning. Under such
conditions, results are often disappointing.
For rapidly growing concerns and for those with large sales staffs, the line
organizational structure is inappropriate. As the department grows, new layers of
executives must be added to retain control. Orders and directions must be passed down
through a growing series of administrative levels. Managerial effectiveness becomes
impaired and result are less predictable, as directions become more and more distorted
and garbled at each succeeding organizational level.; moreover , as salespeople are
sacrificed, and maintaining morale becomes a grater challenge. Not many executives
have the talents needed to manage a large scale line sales department effectively, and
line organization offers little opportunity for subordinates to acquire these skills.
Ordinarily, the stakes are too high, except perhaps in the smallest companies, for
managements to gamble on the availability of a replacement at the time needed. Sound
organizational practice dictates that trained under studies be ready to step into the
shoes of their superiors. But more often than not, chief sale executive in line sales
organizations fail to groom their own replacements.

Types of Sales organization Line and Staff Sales
Organization
The line and staff sales department is often found in large and medium sized firms,
employing substantial numbers of sales personnel, and selling diversified product lines
over wide geographic areas. In contrast to the line organization, the line and staff
organization provides the top sales executive with a group of specialists and experts in
dealer and distributors relations, sales analysis , sales organization, sales personnel,
sales planning, sales promotion, sales training, service, traffic and warehousing, and
similar fields, this staff helps to conserve the top sales executives time and frees them
from excessively detailed work, they make it possible for their chiefs to concentrate their
efforts where they have the most skill. If the top sales executive is not equipped, through
prior training or experience , to handle certain problems, staff specialists assist in
increasing over all effectiveness of the department study or providing detailed analysis
to staff executives. The top sales executive has more time for planning and for dealing
with higher priority matters.
Staff sales executives do not have authority to issue orders or directives. Staff
recommendations are submitted to the top sales executives, who if they approve,
transmit necessary instructions to the line organization. Departures from this procedure
are occasionally made. For example, staffs members may be authorized to deal directly
with line executives regarding execution of plans and implementation of policies
developed by the staff and approved by management. Although staff members act on
behalf of line sales executives in these instances, they assume joint responsibility for
results. This departure from the normal procedure is justified if it speeds the translation
of staff plans into line action. The general sales manager reports to the vice president in
charge of marketing as does the advertising manager and the manager of marketing
research. Six subordinates report to the general sales manager, but only one, the
assistant general sales manger, is a line executive. Four of the five staff executives have
responsibilities in specialized fields; the fifth, the assistant to the general sales manger is
given more general assignment. Note the difference between the assistant to and
assistant. The assistant to is a staff executive who is given a broader operating area than
those staff specialists with more descriptive titles. The assistant general sales manger
carries part of the general sales manger who performs assignments of alien nature in the
name of the superior.
The assistant to the general sales manger carries part of the general administrative loads
that would otherwise be borne by the general sales manger. The advantages of the line
and staff organization are mainly those of specialization. The chief sales executive, being
relieved from much detail work, can take a broader view of the department. Problems a
can be seen in clearer perspective, and connections between apparently unrelated
problems are brought into focus. A pool of experts provides advice and assistance in
specialized fields. Planning activities are subdivided and apportioned to staff members,
and decision and policies rests on a sounder base than in the line organization.
Meanwhile, the top sales executive can concentrate on control and coordination of
subordinates. Staff members assume much of the burden of solving problems in their
areas. Thus, the top sales executive can devote more attention to the human aspects of
administration.
The specialization made possible by line and staff organization is also the source of its
weaknesses. Work of the staff specialists must be coordinated, and this is costly. Other
administrative expenses may also increase, unless the number staff executives is kept in
line switch departmental needs. The staff should be expanded only when it can be
shown that the contributions of new staff members will equal or exceed the costs of
maintaining them. Close control over staff line relations is essential. If staff people
issues instructions directly to line executives, it is difficult to prevent some persons from
evading unwanted responsibilities. All areas in which line and staff executives share
authority and responsibility haul be noted in written job descriptions and in the
organization manual. All other areas of responsibility and authority should be delineate
and assigned to specific individuals.
When the line and staff sales organization is used, the time between problem
recognition and corrective action tends to widen this result from giving staff executives
time to study problems before e making recommendations to the decision makers. This
interval is reduced by permitting staff planners to assist in expediting re implementation
of the plan. But, as already indicated, this may play into the hands of those wanting to
evade responsibility. When time is important, though, it is wises to use staff people in
this capacity. However, when salespeople take instructions from, several sources,
confusion may result, especially if experts oversteps their authority. Then, too, problems
in maintain contact with individual salespersons are multiplied.

Types of Sales Organization Functional Sales
Organization
Some sales departments use functional organization. This type, derived from the
management theory developed by Frederick W. Taylor, is based upon the premise that
each individual in an organization, executive and employee, should have as few distinct
duties as possible the principle principle of specialization is utilized to the fullest extent.
Duty assignments and delegation of authority are made according to function. No
matter where a particular function appear in the organization, it is in the jurisdiction of
the same executive.
In the functional sales department, salespeople receive instructions from several
executives but on different aspects of their work. Provision for coordinating the
functional executives is made only at the top of the structure; executives at lower levels
do not have coordinating responsibilities. In contrast to the line and staff organization,
all specialists in a functional organization have line authority of a sort or, more properly,
they have function authority. Instructions, and even polices, can be put into effect with
or without prior approval of the top level coordinating executive.
The outstanding advantage claimed for the functional sales department is improved
performance. Specialized activities are assigned to experts, whose guidance should help
in increasing the effectiveness of the sales force. The sheer size of the sales force in many
large firms makes the highly centralized sales operations of a functional organization
impractical. This limitation is traced to the requirement in the functional model for a
lone official to coordinate the specialists. Most large firms need more administrative
levels when the marketing area is extensive, when the product line is wide, or when large
numbers of selling personnel are required. It is possible to use modified versions of the
functional model versions providing for a modicum of decentralization and for more
administrative levels but in its pure form, at least, functional organization for the sales
department is inappropriate.
The practicality of functional organization for sales department is open to question.
small and medium sized firms do not find it feasible, or financially possible, to utilize
the high degree of division of labor. Functional organization is suitable for large firms
with stable operations and with opportunity for considerable division of labor; however,
certain characteristics of functional organization cause it to be rejected even by most
large firms. Large companies with stable selling operations are the exception rather than
the rule.

Types of Sales Organizations Committee Sales
Organization
In committee sales organization the committee is never the sole basis for
organizing a sales department. It is a method organizing the executive group for
planning and policy formulation while leaving actual operations, including
implementation of plans and policies, to individual executives. Thus, many firms have
a sales training committee (comprised of the general sales manger, his or her
assistants, the sale training manager, and perhaps representative divisional or regional
sales mangers) that meets periodically to draft training plans and formulate sales
training policies. Implementation of these plans and polices, however is the
responsibility of the sales training manger, if the company has one, or of the line and or
staff executives responsible for sales training in their own jurisdictions.
Other committees found in sales organization include customer relations, operation,
personnel, merchandising, and new products. The use of committees in the sales
department has advantages. Before policies are made and action is taken, important
problems are deliberated by committee members and are measured against varied
viewpoints. Committee meetings, where idea are interchanged and diverse opinions are
present, promote coordination among members of the executive team. When problems
are aired in the give and take of committee meetings, cooperation is likely to be better
than under any other organization plan. Co ordination is of utmost importance
in Committee sales organization.
However, unless decision-making and policy formulation are left to specific individuals,
it is impossible to fix responsibility. Committees render their most important service in
providing focal points for discussion and for the making of suggestions; so many
companies prohibit committees from making decision or formulating policies. No
committee should development in to a vehicle for the evasion of responsibility.
For committees to operate effectively, other precautions are necessary. The agents must
be planned and controlled to avoid wasting time of executives not directly interested in
the topics considered. The tendency for committees to consume large amount of the
counteracted if the chairperson keeps the discussion focused upon the subject at hand.
But the chairperson should not dominate. Chairpersons should guide discussion within
specified bounds, but they should not force their opinions on others.