MEDMEN: What Makes an A-Player

00:00 Pim Roelofsen: Today we're talking about what makes an A-player. 00:03 Andy Whyte: What's a word that springs to mind for you, Lucy? 00:05 Lucy Williams-Jones: Consistent. 00:06 Pim Roelofsen: Funny — I was going to say the same thing. 00:09 Andy Whyte: Why consistent or consistency? 00:13 Lucy Williams-Jones: So for me, if you do things well and you do them consistently — and you don't have peaks and troughs — because if you have peaks and troughs, results will also have peaks and troughs. 00:29 Andy Whyte: Yeah, exactly. We always talk about doing the basics well. And I feel like because sales is so closely associated with game theory, by the time we get experience, we've seen the scenarios ahead of us before. And so if we're just consistently doing the basics — consistently doing them well — we're going to get predictable outcomes. 00:50 Lucy Williams-Jones: Oh, I think the big thing as well — if you think about it from a sales standpoint, you need to consistently keep doing it. Even if you have a big transaction, if you take your foot off the gas with pipeline generation, you're going to have a really bad couple of quarters. So consistency is relevant in every different aspect of the job. Consistently qualifying. Consistently building champions. Consistently going to the EB. All of that. 01:18 Pim Roelofsen: Yeah, absolutely. So much of what you're talking about there is about pattern recognition. And if you have that — if you know what works — then the only thing you need to do is add the consistency and start executing. Then the results will take care of themselves. And I think this is the thing with A-players: they do it consistently, getting the results. I've seen people who were great at times, but then ending up either being great or being really poor — and you get the results that come with that. The predictability is off. You're always chasing the little things. And I say "little things" deliberately — it's not in the complicated stuff. If we put it into the context of what people find in our memberships, it's not in the quality of a value pyramid or the way they open a first meeting. It's in the non-timely follow-ups. It's in not sending an agenda ahead of time. All the basics. 02:16 Andy Whyte: Yeah. And those things are so closely associated with excellence anyway. If you forgot to send an agenda, it's not really that you forgot — it's that you haven't been thinking about the meeting ahead of the meeting. Because if you're sitting down ahead of the week planning for the week, you think: "Oh, I've got this meeting — I need to sort the agenda. I need to start doing my research." So much of it comes down to the mindset you need to have to be consistent. You can't be subconsciously consistent. You have to be actively consistent. 02:43 Pim Roelofsen: Yeah. That makes me think about Toto Wolff and the toilet. 02:46 Andy Whyte: You have to explain this now — you can't just say that's how you think about Toto Wolff and the toilet. 02:53 Pim Roelofsen: OK so — Toto Wolff, team principal of the Mercedes AMG Petronas Formula 1 team. They are so meticulous about every single detail in their process — because they put cars on the circuit that are among the fastest out there. There are a couple of other teams getting the better of them right now, but Formula 1 is the pinnacle of the sport. And their belief is that everything has to be operating at the highest possible level — from the hygiene of the toilets, to the setup of the car, and everything in between. And that for me is: how you do one thing is how you do everything. 03:33 Lucy Williams-Jones: Yeah, yeah. You said something a second ago, Pim, about pattern recognition. You're both sales leaders — you've both hired a lot of great people. What are some of the things, as well as consistency, that you look for when you're hiring to indicate someone's an A-player? 03:47 Andy Whyte: I like people that don't lay blame. If there's a problem, they solve it. They don't throw blame around — they just get on with it. And you actually don't hear about the problem, probably until it's solved. With B-players, there's so much drama. The first thing you hear about is a problem, and they're putting blame on everyone else rather than themselves. 04:09 Pim Roelofsen: Yeah — it's always someone else's fault. Yeah, I definitely agree with that. Complaining — you cannot be part of a winning team. And I think that's something I heard you talk about earlier today as well: A-players take ownership. They see the opportunity in a challenge rather than starting to complain about something that may or may not be right. So that's one thing. And then the other thing I would say: it shows from the very start in the interview process. Approaching it like it's an opportunity — because at the end of the day, it is. It's an evaluation from both sides: is this the right opportunity for me as an individual, and is this the right candidate for the team, the company, and what we're trying to build? Demonstrating that — being a demonstration of yourself in that process — goes a long way. 05:02 Pim Roelofsen: And then ultimately, by the time they land in the team, it's still up to the leader to create the environment where things work. Because sure, someone can be an A-player — they can have been an A-player in a certain environment. But if you drop them into an environment with no clear structure, no agreements around pipeline generation, no clear guidance around plays — it becomes more difficult for that individual to execute and perform at the level an A-player can. 05:33 Andy Whyte: Yeah. And by nature of being an A-player, they're going to want to be operating at the highest level available to them. A-players have this innate high aspiration for themselves. So if you put them in an environment where they feel like they're striving — climbing towards that high aspiration — they'll be happy. They'll build momentum, enthusiasm, passion for what they're doing. But if you take them out of that environment, if they're not surrounded by people they aspire to be like, not surrounded by other A-players — you get the opposite effect. They start to struggle. 06:12 Andy Whyte: I can think of examples from my own experience where I was on paper doing very, very well — I'd look like a top performer — but I was the most unhappy I'd ever been in my career. Because I just didn't have anyone around me keeping me on my toes, anyone I was learning from. It felt like everyone was walking and I wanted to run. You feel like you can't get too far ahead because they're holding you back. I want to be the one feeling like I'm going slowly, trying to keep up with everyone else running fast. 06:47 Andy Whyte: And so the environment matters enormously for A-players. When we look to bring people into our teams, what signs can we see that someone has been performing as an A-player versus someone who's maybe been a B-player amongst other B-players? What are some things that stand out when you think: given the chance, that person will be an A-player? 07:23 Lucy Williams-Jones: I think the pressure thing. We use the terminology "deck chair" — if you're a deck chair, you collapse under pressure. 07:33 Andy Whyte: Oh yeah — that's good. 07:35 Lucy Williams-Jones: A-players take pressure really, really well. They have the ability to compartmentalize and prioritize — to handle the pressure. Because at the eleventh hour, when you're waiting for something to come over the line and there are a lot of people asking you for updates left, right and centre — from an A-player standpoint, if the deal does slip, you're letting down probably yourself first and foremost. Deals do slip. But someone who can handle pressure really, really well definitely has the A-player traits. 08:17 Pim Roelofsen: I think on that topic — something that's always interesting to me is that a trait A-players carry is an innate confidence in their ability, their experience, and their understanding of the scenario in front of them. And whilst they're super coachable and always interested in other people's perspectives — the idea is that if they're working on an opportunity and there's a challenge, say the decision criteria isn't quite in line with the strengths of their solution, or perhaps they don't have a champion — just a coach — A-players are always the fastest to put their hand up and call those things out. Because they know that sales is not a linear path. It's not a foregone conclusion even if you do all the right things. Their comfort in their own ability means they're happy to call things out. 08:57 Pim Roelofsen: Whereas B-players don't want to be seen as having any insecurity about their opportunities. So if they don't have a champion, they put effort into dressing up their coach to look like a champion. They hide the problem and put a lot of energy into that, because they have this insecurity around how they're perceived. They think that identifying a weakness in their opportunity — which is what good salespeople do — will look badly on them. So they try not to show those things. And what they end up doing is sleepwalking their deal into failure. Whereas they could have either qualified out earlier, or used the expertise around them to help overcome whatever challenges they had. 09:52 Lucy Williams-Jones: Yeah, yeah — there are some excellent points in that. And what it made me think of is the difference I've seen in the same people on either side of hitting quota. Being in a difficult place — not feeling the confidence, becoming a bit "nice": "I don't want to push this deal to a point where it's not going to happen anymore." Versus being over the line: "Everything is a bonus. I'm confident now — I'll ask the difficult question. I'll create whatever experience for the buyer I think is going to serve both of us best." Which is better anyway. But the nucleus of what I'm saying is that people typically end up attached to the outcome — "if I do this, am I putting my deal at risk?" Rather than saying: "I see this gap, I see this challenge" — both internally with your team and your leader, and externally with the customer — "let me raise my hand, talk about it, commit to the action, do it." 11:19 Lucy Williams-Jones: Operating with a compass based on "I know this is the right thing to do, therefore I'm going to do it" — rather than "I want to be liked and I want to be nice to people" — is a really effective way of creating a distinction between A-players and B or even C-players in how they show up. A-players know who they are. They're convinced of their qualities because they've proven themselves. They're not playing to be liked. They're in it to get the result. And then, once you have the results, all of those other things come anyway. 11:56 Andy Whyte: Yeah. And the thing not said there — but it goes hand in hand — is how much customers respect that. The salesperson who just wants to be liked is very rarely respected by the customer. They may like the free steak dinners and all that jazz. But when it really matters, customers want someone who holds presence, who respects themselves, who carries credibility — someone they can trust and can put in front of other people in the business. So the outcome-oriented person is favorable to customers too. 12:41 Lucy Williams-Jones: So do you think — if we had an A-player and a B-player, and I walked into a bar and I'd never met either of them before, and the bar was an interview — is there a question you could ask that would definitively tell you which one is the A-player? 12:56 Pim Roelofsen: He's saying yes, so he can answer first. 13:02 Andy Whyte: Yeah — it's a bit of a cheat question because it's a deep one. But I'd say: "Tell me about a deal you love to talk about." And I'm not just looking for tactics — "all I did was get to the point by doing this." I'm looking to hear how they talk about it. First and foremost: plural. I want to hear about the team — because in this game, you can't do it alone. I want to hear about the SDR they'd spent hours with preparing to source the opportunity. How they'd involved the channel. How they'd spent time briefing and prepping with their SE, and what a brilliant job the SE did that really made the difference. How they used new marketing campaigns, new case studies. And I want to hear that they're passionate. I want to hear about where it went wrong and what they learned. It's almost like a "day in the life" question — but it's not the story itself I care about. In fact, it'd probably be better if they told me about a deal they hadn't won. 14:09 Lucy Williams-Jones: Yeah. But I'm going to sound like a broken record — because I was going to say the same thing. I think of how we do this in our live sessions with customers sometimes, to make them aware of who their champion was in previous scenarios: "Talk to me about the best deal you've ever won." They can always reference this one person as their main champion. But the inverse of that question invites coachability and transparency — and shows whether someone can say: "This is where I fell short. This is what I would do next." It shows a lot of the traits we'd typically be looking for in A-players. 14:49 Pim Roelofsen: I totally agree. For me, if someone came in — a B-player would talk about the deal they've won. The one deal in their career that they've done really well — all about how they did it: EB, champion, the value. An A-player would actually choose a deal they've lost — and then talk about the lessons they learned and how they'd do it differently. 15:09 Andy Whyte: It reminds me of a great short story from when I was hiring. I was hiring for an AE. And we shouldn't admit to this, but we do do it — this CV came in, referred to me by someone else in the business. I looked at it and the last company the person was at wasn't great. They weren't there very long. I just wasn't excited to meet them. But I thought: yeah, I'll see them. I'm definitely prejudging, which you shouldn't do — and I don't do anymore. So they came and sat down, small talk — and I said: "You weren't there very long. What happened?" They said: "I got canned." I said: "Yeah?" They said: "I didn't hit my numbers. Things weren't working." And I tell you what — I was so interested to continue that interview from that point forward. Because they carried such confidence. They didn't give me some sob story about restructuring or a terrible patch. They just said: "Yeah, I didn't hit my numbers. I'm unhappy about it. I wish I'd done a better job." And they came in and did a great job. 16:23 Lucy Williams-Jones: Did you hire them? 16:24 Andy Whyte: Yeah. To their credit. And it completely made me rethink. Not that I would have ever held that against someone, because I've been fired more times than I can count. But looking back on myself, I used to put this veil in front of it. I would never lie — but I'd say: "It felt like it was time to move on." So it really made me rethink. And what you're talking about there is that confidence to just be yourself, and be confident in what you bring to the table — regardless of the good and the bad along the way. 17:03 Pim Roelofsen: Absolutely. I think that is a perfect circle back to the beginning of this episode and a great way to wrap up. The first thing we spoke about was consistency — and that is something every individual contributor listening to this can decide for themselves: 2026 is around the corner. This is going to be my most consistent year. If your behavior is most consistent, your results will be too. And then on the other side — and this is for leaders — it is up to you to create an environment where A-players will thrive. Because then you will unlock the performance that is possible with each and every member of your team. 17:38 Andy Whyte: Love that, Pim. Cheers! 17:45 Lucy Williams-Jones: Cheers! 17:46 Pim Roelofsen: Cheers!