Barrow (Qualitative and quantitative analysis)
I/P Based parameter
It 2012 call per year was 1370 and its potential accounts was 515, hence * Calls/potential accounts = 2.66(Barrow)
In comparison, New England district 2012 average calls were 1062.14 and its potential accounts average was 467.28, hence. * Calls/potential accounts = 2.27
It is seen that Barrow had performed well based on 2012 I/P based parameter were satisfactory as compared to New England district average .
O /P Based parameter * GM = Cardio (167968.39) + Strength (179917.18) +Technology (77838.82) + SEE (163871.36) = 589595.75 and average of the districts is = 487478 so, Barrow is just better than average of the district performance. * GM % = 589595.75/1706994 = 34.54% is also below average that is 36%. * sales per call is also low(1246) as compared to (1330) average so she should be asked that why she is unable to convert prospects into actual buyer.
Since, GM= 589595.75 TCE (total compensation and expenses) =168,586 * GM-TCE = 589595.75-168,586 = 421009.75 * Exp/sales = 168586/1706994 =9.87% * Sales* BPI /actual % of 2011 sales =9483, 300*(7.49/5.29) =13427205.48 * sales potential (Barrow)=1.8/7.49*134272.06=32268.31 * The value of % BPI achieved is 1706994/32268.3 =52.90% of BPI which is less than the average (71%)so she should be asked about her underperformance. She was not updated about sales record of her company and thus sighted data of year that was irrelevant for sales so she should prepare herself well before approaching customers. . She should be given sales coaching to correct this problem. Her potential accounts per sq km is very low so it should be increased.BPI goal is very high as compared to average bpi goal for sale person and BPI goal per sq km is low foe Barrow .