Salesman put me in a quandry

[mjf]

Hmmmmm. Is the salesman by any chance related to the company owner/boss/CEO ?:slaphead:

 

[stevebea]

Hmmmmm. Is the salesman by any chance related to the company owner/boss/CEO ?:slaphead:

You are a wise man Mike. No blood there but a good friend. You know if the job dosent make any money who's going to be the "fall guy" ?

 

[cdslotz]

'

I think you are missing something from the OP's post:

The salesman works for the shop that OP also works for. He is not a supplier's salesman.

Oh...you are right. My bad.

All I can say about that is, we always have a "hand off" meeting where we sit down (the estimator/salesman, and the installers), go through the scope of work, the contract, the quotes, etc. At that time any problems will be flushed out. At that time, possible solutions are dealt with up front.
None of this "hear is your next job, the file, and you're on your own"

 

[stevebea]

Oh...you are right. My bad.

All I can say about that is, we always have a "hand off" meeting where we sit down (the estimator/salesman, and the installers), go through the scope of work, the contract, the quotes, etc. At that time any problems will be flushed out. At that time, possible solutions are dealt with up front.
None of this "hear is your next job, the file, and you're on your own"

Now you understand my frustration? We always have pre-job meetings for the bigger projects but never for the 30-200 hour jobs which I do alot of. The only way the office judges the salemans competence is wether his jobs sold consistently make or lose money. If his jobs consistently lose money....he's gone. Too many of our salesmen have limited experience in the field but they are great salesmen and would do just as well selling used cars, vaccum cleaners etc.

 

[hbiss]

The only way the office judges the salemans competence is wether his jobs sold consistently make or lose money.

Then it sounds like this guy should be gone to me.

I also don't know what the problem is. He screwed up make him fix it.

-Hal

 

[hillbilly1]

More than likely the existing generator is 120/240 single phase, don't see too many 5 kw three phase units, it is also very likely that the existing transfer switch is also 120/240 single phase. This kind of setup is done quite often, and I know personally of one that's been in operation for over ten years now without a problem. Don't know why everybody is getting their knickers in a knot over this?:lol:

 

[stevebea]

More than likely the existing generator is 120/240 single phase, don't see too many 5 kw three phase units, it is also very likely that the existing transfer switch is also 120/240 single phase. This kind of setup is done quite often, and I know personally of one that's been in operation for over ten years now without a problem. Don't know why everybody is getting their knickers in a knot over this?:lol:

Hillbilly, you are right on both counts. Correct me if I'm wrong, on the Kohler RDT transfer switch based on 230 volts nominal undervoltage dropout of 80% would occour at 184 volts and undervoltage pickup at 85% would be 195 volts? With a 208 volt system would these parameters not be acceptable? Thanks.

 

[JES2727]

maybe put a xfmr on the sensing line?

I had the exact same problem a couple years ago, for the exact same reason. This was my solution - a buck-boost transformer on the sensing line.

 

[hillbilly1]

maybe put a xfmr on the sensing line?

I had the exact same problem a couple years ago, for the exact same reason. This was my solution - a buck-boost transformer on the sensing line.

I thought that was what I was going to have to do on my first one like that, easy enough to do with the Generacs since the voltage sense was external wiring on those back then, but never had a problem with false starts. But the Generacs have a much greater time delay on start up than Kohler.

 

[renosteinke]

Looks to me that you only have one choice: use the correct equipment.

You then go over the figures, and the original quote, and see if there's any profit in the job.

If not, maybe there's an error or omission on the customer's part that will give you an opening to ask for more money. If, not, get ready to eat the loss.

Even if you honor your quoted price, you need to re-submit your proposal to the customer, this time specifying the correct equipment. If you're losing money, you might get lucky and have the customer cancel.

The salesman is another issue, and one to adress in-house. His selecting the wrong equipment might be a cause for concern; was he in over his head? Given bad information? Make too many guesses?

Maybe the customer is the one who specified the gear. That's a real break if that happened. You would then have an opportunity to say "I won't hook up the wrong stuff. The right stuff will cost $X."

 

[gadfly56]

Now you understand my frustration? We always have pre-job meetings for the bigger projects but never for the 30-200 hour jobs which I do alot of. The only way the office judges the salemans competence is wether his jobs sold consistently make or lose money. If his jobs consistently lose money....he's gone. Too many of our salesmen have limited experience in the field but they are great salesmen and would do just as well selling used cars, vaccum cleaners etc.

When I started with my present company, it was explained that we were a "many hats" operation. We were all engineers, and we were expected to develop our own leads, write our own quotes, close the sale, design the installation, procure the material, manage the project, and make sure the company got paid. We have a "target" bonus system, and a portion of my compensation is tied to my sales, the division's sales, the company's sales, and the same structure for revenue, and profit margin. I didn't sell much that wouldn't meet the target goals, though meeting the target sales level was a little tough, since the profit margin targets were really high.

We were growing the company at about 20% year-over-year, and it wasn't too long before that "many hats" model started to break down. When you do it all, you're not very proficient at any of it. I'd concentrate on selling, then a bunch of jobs would come in and I'd have to run them, during which time I couldn't put much energy into selling, which would lead to a drought in jobs, so I'd start trying to sell like gangbusters again. This was especially true as we were trying to land larger jobs that required more design and project management.

Over the last year and a half we've brought in folks whose only function is sales. The problem now is exactly what you've experienced. From what I understand, our current target system doesn't include job profitability as an element for the salesmen. So we get jobs that don't have enough, or sometimes ANY engineering/supervision in the budget, or too little labor, or specify the wrong material. We're still trying to formalize the process, but we've started to turn jobs back to the sales group to be requoted. There's also a push to make job profitability a factor in the salesman's target so he has more skin in the game.

 

[stevebea]

When I started with my present company, it was explained that we were a "many hats" operation. We were all engineers, and we were expected to develop our own leads, write our own quotes, close the sale, design the installation, procure the material, manage the project, and make sure the company got paid. We have a "target" bonus system, and a portion of my compensation is tied to my sales, the division's sales, the company's sales, and the same structure for revenue, and profit margin. I didn't sell much that wouldn't meet the target goals, though meeting the target sales level was a little tough, since the profit margin targets were really high.

We were growing the company at about 20% year-over-year, and it wasn't too long before that "many hats" model started to break down. When you do it all, you're not very proficient at any of it. I'd concentrate on selling, then a bunch of jobs would come in and I'd have to run them, during which time I couldn't put much energy into selling, which would lead to a drought in jobs, so I'd start trying to sell like gangbusters again. This was especially true as we were trying to land larger jobs that required more design and project management.

Over the last year and a half we've brought in folks whose only function is sales. The problem now is exactly what you've experienced. From what I understand, our current target system doesn't include job profitability as an element for the salesmen. So we get jobs that don't have enough, or sometimes ANY engineering/supervision in the budget, or too little labor, or specify the wrong material. We're still trying to formalize the process, but we've started to turn jobs back to the sales group to be requoted. There's also a push to make job profitability a factor in the salesman's target so he has more skin in the game.

BINGO! You get me.... well put.