Illustrative example. A $100,000 deal carries a 35% gross margin, so $35,000 of gross profit. The rep offers 10% off to close it this quarter.
10%discount offered
$500commission the rep gives up
$10,000profit the company gives up
28.6%drop in gross profit
| At list price | With 10% discount | Change |
|---|
| Revenue | $100,000 | $90,000 | Down 10% |
| Gross profit to the company | $35,000 | $25,000 | Down 28.6% |
| Rep commission at 5% of revenue | $5,000 | $4,500 | Down 10% |
| Rep commission at 14% of gross profit | $4,900 | $3,500 | Down 28.6% |
Under a revenue plan, the rep gives up $500 of commission to secure a deal sooner, while the company gives up $10,000 of profit. The discount costs the company nearly three times as much, in percentage terms, as it costs the person granting it. Pay on gross profit and the two sets of interests line up exactly: the rep feels the same 28.6% the company does.
Few companies switch every rep to pure gross-profit commission overnight, and they should not. Plans changed mid-year are disruptive, and some roles, such as new-logo hunters, need a revenue component. The usual design is a blend: revenue credit with a margin or realization multiplier, accelerators only above a price floor, and new-logo targets kept separate. We model each rep’s earnings under the new plan against the last 12 months of their actual deals before anything is announced, so nobody learns about a pay cut from a spreadsheet.
In a rigging hardware distribution business with more than 100 salespeople, recalibrating incentives on revenue, margin, and new logos was part of the work that took the share of transactions at approved pricing from under 40% to 77% in the first year, as the client reported.