A leading company who develops and sells timeshares, was experiencing very high turnover in both their Sales Counselor position in five sales centers.

In all, the company employs approximately 400 Sales Counselors, Turnover on an annual basis at the various locations ranged from 70% to 180%. Due to the high turnover, the company was constantly recruiting and conducted training classes to ensure that there were enough trained employees to support the tour flow in the sales centers.

In March of 2005, a pilot project was approved for one of the sales center to address Sales Counselor turnover. The project focused on using assessments as a basis for developing a comprehensive system to identify high potential candidates.

To begin the project, approximately 40 of the 110 Sales Counselors were profiled using the Thinking, Behavioral and Motivational Style assessments. The management team selected the 40 Sales Counselors who were profiled. The management team was directed to include counselors with a wide range of performance to ensure that the system would effectively differentiate the talent patterns of both high and low performers. To ensure that we had a complete understanding of the responsibilities of the position and the sales process, we went on actual sales tours with both high and low performers and conducted individual interviews and focus groups with approximately 15 sales counselors. After the 40 Sales Counselors completed the profiles, we met with the management team to review the profile results and rate the 40 employees on a one through four scale. The rating process was completed in a group session in which the performance of each incumbent was discussed and a consensus rating identified. At the beginning of the session, performance criteria was identified and agreed to by the management team. While sales volume was the key performance indicator, the team also focused on more subjective criteria such as being on time for their shift, teamwork, and general interaction with employees.

Over the following several months we began the process of developing a quantitative "benchmarking" approach for differentiating the high performers from the low performers using the quantitative measures from the three assessments.

After completing the initial analysis and developing a benchmark pattern which differentiated the high and low performers, we launched the screening project by screening candidates for the next two training classes, with the goal of identifying 15 candidates for each class. The screening process included a phone screen with a recruiter, followed by an in person interview with a recruiter. Then, candidates who were to be moved forward in the process completed the Assessment Suite at this time. After lengthy discussions with the Director of Sales, we agreed to keep the reporting process as simple as possible by only providing an overall rating on the one through four scale for each of the candidates, with one being the best fit. Due to the simplicity of the scoring system, there was a minimal need to train the recruiter or the management team in the interpretation of the assessment results.

When the screening process was initially implemented the local recruiter received comprehensive training on the process and the interpretation of the ratings. In addition to piloting the Screening and Selection System the company developed and implemented a behavior based interviewing program specifically focused on the Sales Counselor position.

Midway through the training class for the first group of new hires, the trainer and management team reported a noticeable difference in the quality of the new hires. They reported that several new hires that they probably would not have historically hired were doing well in the training. Based on these initial results, the management team requested that we begin screening all new hires using the profiling system. At this point, we completed a comprehensive analysis of how the three assessments were used in determining the overall rating. Based on that analysis, we made the decision to eliminate the Motivational Style assessment and continue only with the Thinking Style assessment and the Behavioral Style assessment. Our findings showed that this decision streamlined the process and reduced our overall cost without having a significant impact on the accuracy of the rating.

In succeeding months, as it became clear that the system was working, the management team requested some type of information in addition to the overall one through four rating. Initially, we provided a very simplistic "thinking style pattern" derived from the Thinking Style assessment in addition to the one through four rating. As the management team became more comfortable with the assessment process, we provided them with the comprehensive Behavioral Style Report. Over the next several months, we implemented a more sophisticated "24 Thinking Styles Report" in place of the simplistic "thinking style patterns". Along with the additional information, we initiated multi-day, on site workshops with the recruiter and the management team to teach them how to interpret the additional information and use it in the interview process.

Over the following eighteen (18) months, the turnover for the Sales Counselor position went from 155% to 50%. Turnover stayed at 50% for the following nine months. Toward the end of the eighteen-month period, we analyzed the difference in individual sales volume of those employees and candidates who were projected to be high and low performers based on our benchmark model. The analysis showed that the sales of those identified as high performers ranged from 40% to 70% higher than those identified as low performers. The reduction in turnover and the impact on sales was estimated to have an overall impact on annual sales for the location of $5-$7 million. Before we implemented the screening process, the location was hiring a new training class of approximately 12 new hires approximately every two weeks. Approximately 4 months after implementing our screening process, the location temporarily suspended the hiring of new training classes three months and assigned the recruiter to focus their hiring on the other positions.

During the eighteen-month period, the Vice President of Sales and Marketing made the decision to profile more of their incumbents to enhance the database. At the end of that eighteen-month period, the additional incumbents that were profiled plus approximately 40 new hires were added to the database and an enhanced second-generation model was developed.

Learning and Development

In addition to our initiatives related to the development of benchmark screening models, we continued to improve the project implementation process. During the initial system implementations we provided no feedback to incumbents who were profiled to provide data to build the benchmark model. In the summer of 2007 we began using the Behavioral Style assessment results to conduct communication and teambuilding sessions with those employees who completed the assessments. In future implementations, the communication and teambuilding sessions became a formal part of the implementation process. In addition to providing excellent training, the assessment feedback served to minimize the resistance we received from employees who were asked to complete the assessments as part of the implementation.

From the beginning of the pilot project in March of 2005 until the summer of 2008 our focus was on the development and implementation of the Selection System. As reported above, we confronted a number of challenges related to training the recruiters, communicating the system to management, gaining acceptance for the system from management, monitoring the results, and improving the accuracy of the models. While turnover and productivity results vary by location, company management was pleased with the overall impact of the system and supported the rollouts.

Through the fall of 2008, only the Behavioral Style assessment results were provided to employees through the communication and teambuilding sessions. The results of the Thinking Style assessment were not communicated to employees. In October of 2008, the lead company organizational development consultant began the implementation of a program to train management in the use of the assessment information to coach their employees for improved performance. A key component of the initiative was providing individual coaching to all Sales Counselors who expressed an interest. The training and coaching initiatives were extremely well received by management. Individual meetings with Sales Consultants produced immediate results. In several cases, the organization development consultant reported that employees who had not had a sale in weeks or months had sales the following day. The management team observed the results and became very engaged in the train the trainer program which was designed to train management to provide the same type of coaching which the organization development consultant was providing.. The Selection and Development System had now become a part of the company culture.