Kienbaum sales study 2026: pay rewards the close, but the company measures the margin

What happened

On 2 September 2026 Kienbaum published results from its 2026 sales study, for which, according to the consultancy, more than 200 companies of various sizes and industries provided information; the survey was conducted together with the Bundesverband der Vertriebsmanager (German federal association of sales managers). The finding has two halves. On the basic requirements — transparency, acceptance, motivational effect — the majority of the companies surveyed rate their compensation systems positively. As soon as it comes to strategic steering, genuine differentiation by performance and adaptability, only a minority reaches a solid level. The authors sum it up like this: in many places the reality of selling has changed faster than the compensation systems have. Success today is measured by profitability, customer development and long-term relationships, while what gets paid for is still predominantly the short-term close.

Who it affects

Sales directors who demand customer retention in the annual review and pay for new revenue in the commission plan. Managing directors of mid-sized companies whose model has run unchanged for years. And every field rep wondering why the target and the payslip point in different directions.

Assessment

The contradiction Kienbaum describes is not a compensation problem but a leadership problem with numbers attached. A salesperson optimises whatever appears on the statement at the end of the month — reliably, every month, without exception. If revenue is what appears there, revenue is what gets delivered: with discounts, with customers who cancel after eight months, with contracts that cost more in service than they earn in sales.

In my own field this is especially obvious, because the business is recurring. A payment contract earns over years, not on the day of signature. Anyone who pays only for the close in payments breeds a portfolio of customers who move on to the next cheapest provider, and a sales team that shrugs at it because it costs them nothing. The correction is uncomfortable but straightforward: part of the compensation has to hang on what is still there in month twelve. Anyone unwilling to do that should stop talking about customer relationships in meetings.

What to do now

1. Put your own commission plan next to the official company strategy and check sentence by sentence where the two contradict each other. Usually one sheet of paper is enough for the proof.
2. Build in a portfolio component: tie a share of the compensation to customers who are still active after twelve months, rather than to the signature alone.
3. Run the changeover with a transition period and grandfathering. A commission model changed overnight costs you your best people, not your weakest.