They must be here. How else will they keep an eye on the salespeople? Imagine a sales team: the head of sales sits next to the salespeople, hears their conversations and answers questions. Then, in the evening, it turns out that a client has once again been sent a quote they had already asked to have corrected.
The head of sales was there all day. The client’s request was in the work correspondence, which they had not looked at. They received a short message from the salesperson: the quote has been sent.
In this situation, an owner is unlikely to entrust the sales team to a remote head of sales. If they missed it even while sitting nearby, things will be even worse at a distance.
I would discuss the schedule for being on site after clarifying one thing: which facts about a deal does the head of sales get for themselves, and which only through the salesperson’s account? In our example, the distance to the desk made no difference. Both people were in the room, but they were looking at different versions of one sale.
From the next chair, you can only hear half the conversation
The salesperson is wearing headphones and discussing an order. The head of sales hears the salesperson’s replies, sees that the conversation took place and can help with product questions. This is a useful part of the job. But they may not have heard the buyer’s request at all.
In the illustrative deal at the start of this article, you only need to open two things: the client’s message saying that the contents of the order must be corrected, and the file sent afterwards. The question is now specific: why was the old quote sent? Did they misunderstand the request, choose the old file or decide that the change could be made later?
Each answer calls for its own action. An unclear request needs to be clarified. The old file needs to be replaced, and the process for sending it checked. The decision to put off the change needs to be discussed with the salesperson: what allowed them to send a proposal that did not match the request?
But if you start by demanding closer supervision of people in the office, that choice will never come up. The head of sales will ask more often whether everything has been sent. The salesperson will be able to answer honestly that it has.
One incorrect file does not in itself prove that the head of sales is managing poorly. They cannot check every email before it is sent. But if the mistake keeps happening, it is worth finding out: does the head of sales lack the facts needed to examine it, or do they get those facts and leave the way of working unchanged?
A salesperson should not choose everything the head of sales sees
In a small sales team, the salesperson’s account is a quick way to get an update. The head of sales does not have to open the correspondence, and the employee does not have to wait for a review. While there are few conversations and the head of sales takes part in almost every one, this approach can work.
But when calls, messages and meetings are happening at the same time, the head of sales cannot physically be everywhere. The account then starts to replace the events themselves. The salesperson reported sending the quote because they saw sending it as a completed task. The mismatch with the client’s request did not make it into their account. They do not even need to hide anything for this to happen.
Now imagine remote work organised in the same way: salespeople send the head of sales selected calls and explain why the other deals are stalled. The problem will remain. Video calls will add faces to the same explanations.
The head of sales must be able to choose a deal themselves and open the available work correspondence, recording of the conversation and the document that was sent. This includes deals the salesperson did not bring for review. Otherwise, what gets checked is determined by the salesperson’s own view of where they might have made a mistake.
Having access does not mean the head of sales uses it. If they have all the correspondence but the owner finds the mistake every time, changing where they work will not lead to more analysis. You need to look at which deals the head of sales chooses to check and why.
Sometimes someone really does need to be on site
I would not conclude from this that any sales team can be managed remotely. Some work cannot be done through access to a CRM system alone.
For example, a buyer has come to an equipment demonstration. During the demonstration, it turns out that the proposed configuration does not suit their task. While the client is in the room, someone needs to notice this, clarify the limitation and offer an acceptable option. An evening report will be too late here.
So, before choosing the working arrangement, you need to name who does this work on site. A trained salesperson? A technical specialist alongside them? The head of sales, without whom the team cannot yet run this kind of demonstration? If there is no one else to do it, a promise to be available cannot replace that person.
This is a reason to be present: a specific action at a specific moment. You can build a workable schedule around it. A general demand to be at the company all the time does not give you that schedule: the head of sales can spend the whole day in the office and miss the only demonstration where they were needed.
There is also an option in between. The salesperson runs the demonstration themselves, but an unusual request needs a decision from the head of sales before the client leaves. In that case, you check whether the head of sales is available at that moment and the limits of what the salesperson is authorised to offer. A weekly call is not enough for this work, even if all the reports arrive on time.
One working day will show where facts get lost
Take a completed day that included different kinds of work by the sales team: calls, correspondence and meetings in person, if there were any. The head of sales chooses deals for review from the full list, rather than only from the successful examples sent by salespeople. For each deal, they reconstruct a short sequence:
- What the buyer requested or changed — where this can be seen, heard or confirmed with someone who attended the meeting.
- When the salesperson learnt about it — before which next action there was still time to correct a mistake or clarify something unknown.
- What the head of sales received and when — the original message, document, recording or just the salesperson’s explanation.
- Whether the head of sales needed to take part — what decision the salesperson could not make themselves and whether the head of sales helped in time.
This sequence reveals different limitations.
If the client’s request is recorded in a work communication channel, but it was not passed on to the head of sales and they have no access, the first step is to give them access to the work data. A camera above the salesperson’s desk cannot replace that data.
If the head of sales has access but only learns about mistakes after a complaint, you need to review how they carry out their checks. Start with deals where the contents of the order, terms or promises have changed and the next action could send a mistake to the client.
If a fact only emerges at a meeting in person and a decision is needed there and then, appoint someone on site with the necessary knowledge and authority. Do not pretend that a late entry in CRM makes remote work suitable for this task.
There is one more boundary: the head of sales does not have to get involved in every deal. If the salesperson noticed the change themselves, clarified the request and sent the correct quote within their authority, the head of sales’ absence from the conversation did not disrupt anything. This is also a finding from the review, and it allows the work to stay with the salesperson.
Test the working arrangement before moving the whole sales team
After the review, choose one recurring point where information gets lost. In our example, it is a change to the order in the correspondence before the quote is sent again. The head of sales clarifies with the salespeople which changes they make themselves and which need approval, and gets access to the original request and the new version of the document.
During the coming working week, they choose new deals with this kind of change themselves and check: was the client’s request taken into account in the file? Did the salesperson correct the quote themselves or wait for guidance again? Did a question beyond their authority reach the head of sales before the file was sent? If approval was needed, was it given in time?
There is no need to dismiss the head of sales who works on site or immediately move them to remote work to do this. First, you check the work itself, which needs to continue under any schedule.
If, at the chosen stage, the head of sales sees the original facts and the team manages to correct mistakes without them being physically present, you can discuss remote work for that particular part of the process. This conclusion does not automatically apply to an equipment demonstration. If a decision comes too late without someone on site, you need to keep someone involved on site or train someone who can take on that work.
At the review meeting, the owner needs examples of these two outcomes and a proposal from the head of sales: what can now be handled remotely, where someone needs to be present and what is still missing. The owner does not need to go through all the correspondence again after the head of sales to do this.
RENTROP is responsible for this work, not for hours on camera
In the “turnkey sales management” model, the head of sales leads the team and handles deals every day. The business development director checks which facts they based a decision on and whether it worked in the next similar situation. AI helps review the available data and communications. It cannot use just one CRM status to reconstruct the content of a meeting that nobody documented.
If access or someone on site is missing for the agreed work, this limitation needs to be stated before promising a result. Decisions about resources, prices and commercial terms stay with the owner. The head of sales is responsible for showing exactly where work will stop without such a decision, and for organising how the agreed work is carried out.
Agreements about access, people on site and the limits of what each person can decide are kept in the project. When the head of sales changes, the next person will not have to find out again who can run a demonstration and what they need to get in touch about before the buyer leaves.
The head of sales’ presence makes sense where a specific sales task cannot be completed in time without them.