Wilson Group
  • Why Wilson Group
    • About
    • Team
    • Clients
  • Solutions
    • Employee Total Compensation
    • Executive Total Rewards
    • Sales Incentive Compensation
  • Blog
  • Resources
  • Schedule a Conversation
Select Page
< Back to All Articles

How Does Your Sales Compensation Plan Compare?

On target earnings

In the process of evaluating the effectiveness of sales compensation on a regular basis, sales organizations want to know how the design of their plans and practices compare to the market. These questions include:

  • What is the state of current plans, are they effective? What type of changes are companies considering?
  • Are sales roles eligible for equity based awards?
  • What are the most common measures used in sales incentive plans?
  • All companies use commissions not bonuses, right?
  • What are the commission percentages based on? When do they change?
  • What is the mix of base salary and incentive? How does it vary by type of sales role?

Wilson Group covered these and many other questions in the 2014-2015 Survey of Sales Compensation Practices. An updated survey report will be available in the fall 2017.

Results of the 2014-2015 Survey

Twenty-seven public and privately-held companies participated in this survey from technology, consumer products/retail, manufacturing and insurance sectors. Two of the sales roles we looked at are Direct Sales professionals and Account Managers. Key findings from this survey include:

Overall, sales strategies are focused on increasing the number of customers/new logos and growing revenue. Companies are continually looking for ways to maintain or make their plans simple, aligned with the business needs and priorities, and effective in rewarding the desired behaviors and results. The most prevalent plan changes were to ‘improve alignment with strategy’ and ‘change performance measures’. In the survey, no company viewed the effectiveness of their sales compensation plan as “Excellent” or “Negative”. Fifty three percent rated their plans “Positive”, 27% “Neutral” and 13% “Problematic”.  Seventy three percent felt their plans motivated their sales professionals either at a “great” or “moderate” level, 20% to “some extent” and 7% to a “little extent”.

In most cases, we confirmed the practice that the plan design is different between Direct Sales and Account Manager roles as follows:

  • 21% to 25% of outside sales professionals are eligible for equity based awards while 57% of first level sales managers are eligible.
  • 82% of Direct Sales roles and 67% of Account Managers are paid based on total gross sales or revenues. It is also prevalent for Direct Sales to be compensated based on revenue from new accounts, followed by revenue from existing accounts.
  • 29% of participants use a combination of commission and bonus for Direct Sales while 33% for account managers. Commission only plans are most prevalent for Direct Sales (41%) and less prevalent for Account Managers (33%).
  • 22% of Direct Sales roles have individual commission rates. Another 22% have commission rates based on new versus existing customers, 28% vary the commission rates by product and another 28% have one fixed rate. For Account Managers, 40% have one fixed rate, another 40% have individual commission rates and 20% have different rates based on products.
  • Most companies (71%) do not provide an accelerator to their commission rates. When accelerators (i.e., an increase in the commission rate) are used, there tends to be 3 or more points of acceleration.  The triggers are annual sales performance.
  • The impact of accelerators is seen in the pay for performance relationship, with aggressive payouts for performance above target. For Account Managers, when they reach 80% of their sales target, they are paid 63% of their target payout, for 110% achievement, 162% payout, 150% achievement and 220% payout. For Direct Sales, there were similar relationships but notably Direct Sales had a better payout of 78% for 80% achievement and 265% payout for 150% achievement. We were surprised that both achieve 357% payout for 200% achievement. See figures 1 and 2.
    Pay for Performance Chart for Account Managers

    Figure 1: Account Manager

    Pay for Performance for Direct Sales

    Figure 2: Direct Sales

  • Direct Sales roles have more pay at risk with 60% of total compensation in base salary and 40% in incentive. Account Managers have 70% in base salary and 30% in incentives.

Wilson Group’s 2017-2018 survey will be available for participation in late summer 2017 and we urge you to participate. Your participation guarantees a FREE survey report just in time for 2018 planning. Review our last complete report Wilson Group Sales Comp Practices Survey Report 2014-15

If you have any questions on this topic or would like to discuss your company’s sales compensation plans… contact Susan Malanowski at smalanowski@wilsongroup.com.

 

Related Articles

Ten Fundamentals of Sales Compensation Plan Design

By Lisa Nivison on November 9, 2023

Sales compensation plan design and communication of plans should reward the sales force for the demonstration of desired behaviors and […]

Tags: MeasuresQuota SettingSales Compensation

Sales Incentives During Challenging Times

By Susan on June 4, 2020

by Susan Malanowski When revenue opportunities significantly drop unexpectedly due to external situations like Covid-19, many organizations’ sales pipelines begin […]

Tags: COVID-19IncentivesSales Compensation

How to Document Your Sales Compensation Plan

By wilsongrpwp on August 27, 2018

We are often involved in reviewing a client’s sales compensation plan document for clarity and completeness.

Tags: Document Your Sales Compensation PlanSales Comp Plan DocumentSales Compensation

Recent Posts

  • Cost of Living vs. Cost of Labor
  • 15 Years of Say-on-Pay
  • Market Refresh: When and How to Do It
  • Setting Your 2025 Salary Increase Budget: Key Considerations and Market Trends
  • Mastering A Pay Equity Analysis – Step by Step

Categories

  • Base Pay Fundamentals
  • Board of Director Compensation
  • Board of Directors Compensation
  • Compensation Philosophy
  • Competitive Market Assessment
  • Cost of Living vs Cost of Labor
  • Employee Compensation
  • Employee Engagement
  • Equity Based Compensation
  • Executive Compensation
  • FLSA
  • Incentive Compensation
  • Incentives
  • Job Architecture
  • Job Descriptions
  • Job Evaluation
  • Job Titles
  • Long-Term Incentive Plan
  • Market Salary Data
  • New Hires
  • Pay Equity
  • Pay Practices
  • Pay Transparency
  • Performance Goals
  • Performance Management
  • Performance Measures
  • Performance Rewards
  • Policies
  • Recognition and Rewards
  • Retirement
  • Salary Increase Spending
  • Salary Ranges
  • Salary Structure
  • Salary Surveys/Market Data
  • Sales Compensation
  • SEC Regulations
  • Sign-on Bonuses
  • Technology for Compensation
  • Total Rewards Philosophy
  • Uncategorized
  • Why Wilson Group
  • About
  • Team
  • Clients

Solutions

  • Employee Total Compensation
  • Executive Total Rewards
  • Sales Incentive Compensation
  • Blog
  • Resources
  • Books, Articles and Papers
  • Presentations
  • Surveys & Reports
  • Resource Network

100 Powdermill Rd, Suite 115 Acton, MA 01720

Tel: 978-371-0476
Email: info@wilsongroup.com

Privacy Policy

Compensation

Member of Compensation Insights with offices in Atlanta, Baltimore, Boston, Dallas, Los Angeles, Nashville, Red Bank, New York, Pittsburgh and Seattle.

© 2025 Wilson Group

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. By closing this banner, scrolling this page, clicking a link, or continuing to browse this site, you agree to this use.OkPrivacy policy