Conflicts are inevitable in agent networks
When multiple independent agents sell your product, disputes will eventually arise. Two agents claim credit for the same deal. An agent feels their territory is being encroached upon. Commission calculations are questioned. These conflicts are normal and manageable if you have clear processes for handling them.
Common dispute types
Double attribution
Two agents both believe they are responsible for a sale. Perhaps one generated the initial lead while the other closed the deal. Or both agents contacted the same prospect independently.
Territory violations
An agent believes another agent is selling in their assigned territory. Or a customer in one agent's territory was contacted by an agent from another region.
Commission disagreements
An agent disputes the commission amount, the attribution of a sale, or the timing of payment. These disputes often stem from ambiguous terms rather than bad faith.
Lead ownership
Who owns a lead that has gone cold and been reactivated? If Agent A contacted a prospect six months ago and Agent B re engages them, who deserves the commission if they close?
Prevention through clarity
Most disputes can be prevented through clear policies established before they arise.
Written territory definitions. Define territories precisely using postcodes, regions, or other unambiguous boundaries. Vague definitions like "greater Sydney area" invite interpretation disputes.
First touch vs last touch rules. Define whether the agent who first contacted the prospect or the one who closed the deal earns the commission. Or define a split if both contributed. Document this clearly.
Lead expiration. Set a time limit on lead ownership. If an agent contacts a prospect but does not progress the opportunity within 90 days, the lead becomes available to other agents.
Commission calculation transparency. Show agents exactly how their commissions are calculated. Transparent calculations prevent disputes about amounts.
Resolution process
When disputes arise despite prevention measures, follow a structured process.
Step 1: Gather facts
Before making any determination, collect information from all parties. Review CRM records, communication logs, and timeline of events. Do not jump to conclusions based on one side of the story.
Step 2: Apply your policies
Refer to your established policies (territory rules, attribution rules, lead expiration) and apply them consistently. If the policies clearly resolve the dispute, communicate the decision and the rationale to both parties.
Step 3: Mediate when necessary
Some disputes are not cleanly resolved by policy. In these cases, mediate a fair outcome. This might involve splitting the commission, assigning the account to one agent with a referral fee to the other, or finding another creative solution.
Step 4: Document and learn
Record the dispute, the decision, and the reasoning. If the same type of dispute keeps recurring, update your policies to address it more clearly.
Platform support
Platforms like Zepys provide automated tracking and attribution that reduces many common disputes. When sales activity, lead contact, and deal progression are tracked systematically, the factual basis for resolving disputes is clear.
Maintaining relationships
Handle disputes fairly and promptly. Agents who feel disputes are resolved unfairly or slowly will disengage or leave. Even when a decision goes against an agent, if the process is transparent and the reasoning is sound, most agents accept the outcome.
Never take sides in agent disputes based on personal relationships or revenue contribution. Fairness must be consistent regardless of who the agents are. Your reputation for fair dealing is essential for maintaining a healthy agent network.
The cost of unresolved conflict
Unresolved disputes poison your agent network. Agents talk to each other. If they perceive that disputes are handled unfairly, talented agents will avoid your program. Quick, fair resolution builds trust and protects the value of your agent network.