So your brilliant plan is to set unrealistic quotas because… what? You think salespeople perform better when chasing impossible targets? Or maybe you’re just trying to avoid paying commissions?

Let me share what actually happens when you play this game:

Your top performers – you know, the ones actually making you money – will see through this faster than expense reports disappear at month-end. And they’ll leave. Not for 5% more base, but because you’ve shown them exactly who you are.

Meanwhile, your middle performers spiral into a motivation death cycle:
“Why bother if the target is fiction?”

I watched a SaaS company try this recently. Their CEO proudly explained their “aggressive target philosophy” to me. Translated from corporate-speak: “We make up numbers and hope nobody notices.”

The Psychology of BS Quotas

When you set quotas at 150% of what’s actually achievable, you’re not being “strategic.” You’re being lazy.

It’s the management equivalent of saying, “I don’t know how to help you sell better, so I’ll just move the goal posts and hope for the best.”

Your reps aren’t inspired by this. They’re doing math.

The Actually Intelligent Approach

  1. Set honest quotas based on real market potential and historical performance
  2. Design commission structures with accelerators that reward overperformance
  3. If you want better economics, invest in making your team better sellers
  4. Be transparent about how the company makes money

Here’s your homework: Calculate the actual cost of replacing your top one or two performers. Include lost deals, recruitment costs, and ramp time.

Now compare that with what you’re “saving” by manipulating quotas.

Not feeling so clever anymore, are you?

Stop trying to trick your way to better financials. Build a high-performance sales culture instead.