A team paid on deals closed starts closing deals that churn within ninety days, with every individual acting sensibly inside the incentive they were given
Nobody Cheated — Volume I, Understanding Humans Before Products · Human Systems · Investigation · Core. A team paid on deals closed starts closing deals that churn within ninety days, with every individual acting sensibly inside the incentive they were given
01 · Opening
A team paid on deals closed starts closing deals that churn within ninety days, with every individual acting sensibly inside the incentive they were given
02 · The setup
New deals are up thirty-one percent on the quarter. It is the best number the sales team has posted.
Sam: Every rep hit target. First time in two years.
03 · The setup
The retention chart arrives a quarter later.
New accounts, this cohort — Deals closed: up 31%; Churned within 90 days: up 74%; Net accounts after 90 days: down 4%; Deals below fit threshold: up 3x
04 · The evidence
Maya: We closed more and ended with fewer.
Sam: I know what you are about to ask and nobody on my team did anything wrong.
05 · The evidence
Maya sits with three reps and asks each of them to walk through one deal they nearly did not take.
Maya thinks: I am not looking for a bad actor. I want to know what the sensible move was.
06 · The evidence
Priya: They were a poor fit and they wanted to sign. Turning that down costs me the month and helps someone I never meet.
07 · The evidence
Three reps, three versions of the same arithmetic. Each of them made the right choice given what they were paid on.
Maya thinks: There is no one here to talk to about this. The behaviour is the measure working.
08 · The evidence
Sam: So you want me to tell them to turn down revenue.
Maya: No. Telling them costs you a hard conversation every week and changes nothing.
09 · The evidence
People optimise for what they are measured on. This is not a character flaw, it is the measure doing exactly what it was installed to do, and it happens fastest among the people who are trying hardest.
That is why blame does not work here. Every rep faced a real choice between a deal that counted this month and a consequence that landed on someone else next quarter, and each of them chose the way the incentive told them to.
So the thing to change is the measure. A count of deals closed is a proxy for revenue that stays, and the gap between a proxy and the real goal is exactly where this behaviour lives. Close the gap and the conversation becomes unnecessary.
10 · The evidence
Maya: Commission holds back until day ninety-one.
Sam: Then turning down a bad fit costs them nothing. That I can sell to the team.
11 · You make the call
The story does not tell you first.
A. The reps, through coaching on qualification
B. The measure, so the proxy matches the real goal
C. The target, since 31 percent growth was too aggressive
12 · What happened
Next quarter closes eleven percent fewer deals and keeps more of them, and net accounts rise for the first time in a year.
Maya thinks: Same people. Same effort. We changed what the effort was pointed at.
13 · Complete
When a measure produces bad outcomes with nobody misbehaving, the measure is the thing to change. Next: what the shape of the org quietly writes into the product.