What a new sales head should fix before reviewing targets

Target reviews are the first thing most incoming sales heads want to do. Are the numbers realistic? How were they set? Who is above target, who is below, and why?

It is a natural starting point — but it is also, in most cases, the wrong starting point.

Before you can have a meaningful conversation about targets, you need to know whether the data feeding into your target review is trustworthy. And in most field sales organisations, the honest answer is: not entirely.

The data integrity question

Target reviews are only as useful as the underlying performance data. If the data shows that Territory A is at 94% and Territory B is at 78%, the useful question is not just "why is B underperforming?" — it is "do I trust these numbers?"

Secondary sales data in FMCG and pharma OTC companies frequently has gaps. Outlet-level data is often incomplete or delayed. Rep-level activity data is often self-reported and partially retrospective. When you review targets against data like this, you may be making decisions based on a picture that is 60–70% complete.

The first thing a new sales head should audit is not the targets themselves — but the quality of the data those targets will be measured against. This is a less exciting conversation to start with. It is the one that determines whether everything else that follows will be grounded in reality.

The beat plan question

Before a target conversation, you also need to understand whether your reps' beat plans are being executed.

A rep who is at 80% of target but covering only 60% of their assigned outlets is a very different problem from a rep at 80% who is covering 95% of their beat.

Beat plan compliance — whether reps are visiting the right outlets at the right frequency — is one of the most predictive indicators of future sales performance.

Companies with high beat compliance consistently outperform those without it, because outlet coverage directly drives order volume in distribution-led businesses. If you do not have reliable beat compliance data, you cannot diagnose underperformance accurately. You will end up adjusting targets or changing rep assignments when the actual problem is execution consistency.

What to fix first

In the first 30 days, focus on three things before touching targets:

1. Establish what the actual visit frequency per outlet looks like across territories
2. Understand where the order data pipeline has gaps
3. Identify which parts of the reporting process require human intervention versus what is automated

These three diagnostics will tell you whether your target review will be grounded in solid data — or whether you are about to have a very expensive conversation based on an incomplete picture.

The parallel track

None of this means deferring the target conversation indefinitely. It means running two tracks in parallel — begin the target review with appropriate scepticism about the data, while simultaneously identifying the infrastructure gaps that need to be closed.

Sales heads who do this well typically emerge from the first 90 days with both a clearer picture of their targets and a roadmap for the visibility improvements their organisation needs. Those who skip the infrastructure audit often spend the next two or three quarters adjusting targets in response to data anomalies they could have identified earlier.

Sources: FieldAssist — SFA for FMCG and CPG · Channelplay — SFA Adoption in India