aberdeen sp white paper

7/29/2019 Aberdeen Sp White Paper

1/21

AberdeenGroup

Business Value Research Series

Sales Performance Management

January 2005


2/21

The Business Value Research Series

All print and electronic rights are the property of Aberdeen Group 2005.

AberdeenGroup i

Executive Summary

Executive Summary

Key business value findings from this research include:

The most important strategy to generate successful sales performance management isperceived as implementing a culture of continuous improvement (91%)

The key influences on sales performance management today include the inability toplan for strategic sales (83%), and the lack of actionable data (78%)

The business capabilities with the greatest positive impacts are improved sales plan-ning data for forecasting and strategic planning, and increased visibility and timelyaccess to data relevant to future planning

Better, more accurate software solutions were seen as providing the greatest positiveimpact by 50% of the respondents

Companies seek to better coordinate their overall sales activities and plans with visibilityto ongoing sales performance. They seek to motivate and reward top performance,thereby retaining their top revenue-generators and sales talent. Successfully managedsales-driven enterprises strive to deliver definite benefits, such as the following:

Focused employee activity and behavior (sales and the rest of the workforce)

Increased productivity potential

Profitable sales and channel operations

Increased likelihood of shareholder value


3/21



AberdeenGroup

Table of Contents

Executive Summary .............................................................................................. i

Executive Summary........................................................................................ i

Chapter One: Sales Performance Management: Issue at Hand .......................... 1

Introduction:................................................................................................... 1

Business Drivers: Key Issues at Hand........................................................... 1

Barriers to Improvement: Why Isnt Sales

Performance Management Better Today? ..................................................... 2

Overcoming the Challenges.................................................................... 2

Chapter Two: Managing a Sales Force What Keeps Executives Awake ........... 3Pressures, Actions, Capabilities, Enablers (PACE)........................................ 4

Chapter Three: Plan of Action: Improving Sales Performance Management........ 7

SPM in the Sales-Driven Enterprise .............................................................. 7

View of Technology........................................................................................ 7

What Should Managing a Sales Rep Cost?................................................... 8

Conclusions and Implications for Action ........................................................ 8

Author Profile ..................................................................................................... 11

Appendix A: Research Methodology .................................................................. 12Demographics of Respondents ............................................................. 12

Appendix B: Related Aberdeen Research & Tools ............................................. 15

About Aberdeen Group ...................................................................................... 16


4/21



AberdeenGroup

Figures

Figure 1. Key Issues in Sales Performance Management....................................2

Figure 2: View of Strategic SPM vs. the Competition...........................................3

Figure 3: Executive Views of Sales Performance Management...........................6

Figure 4: State of the SPM Art..............................................................................7

Figure 5. Titles or Positions of Respondents......................................................12

Figure 6. Respondent Breakdown by Company Size (Employee Count) ........... 13

Figure 7: Respondent Breakdown by Annual Revenue (2003)........................... 13

Figure 8: Payees on Plans in Responding Companies ...................................... 14

Tables

Table 1: PACE Framework ................................................................................... 4

Table 2: PACE (Pressures, Actions, Capabilities, Enablers)................................. 5

Table 3: Cost and Optimal Cost Per Sales Representative Per Month................. 8


5/21



AberdeenGroup 1

Chapter One:Sales Performance Management: Issue at Hand

Introduction:

Sales performance management is the business process that structures the oversight of allaspects of sales planning, performance, visibility, and review. As such, it exceeds inbreadth such disciplines as sales force automation (SFA), customer relationship manage-ment (CRM), or enterprise incentive management (EIM). Past technology solutions havefocused on the automation of sales compensation, forecasting tools, and territory andquota management, among others. These solutions often provide valuable data, yet fail toprovide full sales performance management support due to a lack of full integration andanalysis capability.

This research, conducted by AberdeenGroup in December of 2004, surveyed the chal-lenges and solutions that motivate companies to use technology in support of corporate-wide sales performance management and the kinds of choices they see as valid.

Business Drivers: Key Issues at Hand

The lack of visibility into sales activities on an ongoing basis haunts the majority of ex-ecutives today who rely on a sales team to generate corporate revenue. They often simplycannot tell how a quarter or period is going until it is too late and course corrections areimpossible. Many of these companies are basing much of their decision making onspreadsheets, a medium that they report does not provide the quality of decision-supportdata that they need to remain competitive. The effect is more often the reporting of past

results, than accurate forecasting of revenues in process. Striving to be proactive, theseexecutives seek improved decision-support data data that is accurate and timely. Con-comitantly, sales managers seek to decrease the time their field members spend onshadow tracking, as they calculate their own commissions because they do not trust theaccuracy of legacy corporate plan management programs.

Issues of primary importance to responding executives are shown in Figure 1. Respon-dents rated the items on a five point scale from not at all important to extremely im-portant. Results of the important, very important, and extremely important aresummarized here. Ninety-three percent stated that visibility into sales activities on an on-going basis is the most important issue. Some issues did not resonate with the respon-dents: only 46% thought the ability to better comply with Sarbanes-Oxley was importantto sales performance management, with 27% noting it as not at all important. The abil-

ity to model sales outcomes based on business simulations was only seen as important by28% of the population surveyed.


6/21



AberdeenGroup 2

Figure 1. Key Issues in Sales Performance Management

0 20 40 60 80 100

Increase visibility into sales activities

on an ongoing basis

Obtain better decision-support data

Decrease reliance on management-

by-spreadsheet

Decrease sales reps time spent on"shadow tracking"

Percentage of Respondents

Source: AberdeenGroup, January 2005

Barriers to Improvement: Why Isnt Sales Performance Management

Better Today?

Given these clear issues keeping sales executives up at night, what is preventing salesmanagement improvement? Two areas tied at the top with 50% response each: budget

constraints, and lack of a compelling business case or unclear ROI. Forty-five percentcited the lack of active executive support as a barrier to improve sales performance man-agement.

Overcoming the Challenges

Respondents report three top ways to overcome these challenges:

Demonstrable effects of improved sales performance management on revenue

Demonstrable effects of improved sales performance management on sales forceproductivity

And a tie for third:

o An ROI-based case-for-action or demonstrated proof of savings in acompany like ours

o An easy-to-use business application


7/21



AberdeenGroup 3

Chapter Two:Managing a Sales Force What Keeps Executives

Awake

For the most part, companies in this study perceive themselves as average in their overallmanagement of their strategic sales force initiatives compared to their competitors. Nonethought they were dramatically worse than their competition; three percent thought theywere dramatically better (Figure 2). Close to a quarter thought their company was aboveaverage compared to their competition.

Figure 2: View of Strategic SPM vs. the Competition

0%21%

52%

24%

3%

Dramatically Worse

Below Average

Average

Above Average

Dramatically Better

Source: AberdeenGroup January 2005

Yet even when seeing themselves as average or better, these sales-driven companies

readily identified the business drivers that challenge their sales processes today.


8/21



AberdeenGroup 4

Pressures, Actions, Capabilities, Enablers (PACE)

Aberdeen applies a methodology to benchmark research that evaluates the business pres-sures, actions, capabilities, and enablers (PACE) that indicate corporate behavior in spe-

cific business processes. These terms are defined in Table 1.

Table 1: PACE Framework

PACE Key

Pressures external forces that impact an organizations market position, competitiveness, or businessoperations (e.g., economic, political and regulatory, technology, changing customer preferences, com-petitive)

Actions the strategic approaches that an organization takes in response to industry pressures(e.g., align the corporate business model to leverage industry opportunities, such as product/service

strategy, target markets, financial strategy, go-to-market, and sales strategy)

Capabilities the business process competencies required to execute corporate strategy(e.g., skilled people, brand, market positioning, viable products/services, ecosystem partners,financing)

Enablers the key functionality or technology solutions required to support the organiza-tions enabling business practices (e.g., development platform, applications, network con-nectivity, user interface, training and support, partner interfaces, data cleansing, and man-agement)

Here the PACE methodology is applied to a study of sales executives (CXO level, execu-tive management, VPs outside of sales, and sales management) to determine and priori-tize the business drivers and challenges they face managing sales performance in theirorganizations.

Respondents noted their pressures (what keeps them awake at night), the actions theyforesee as responding to those challenges, the capabilities that need to be in place to re-spond successfully, and the enabling technologies in use today that may assist in alleviat-ing those pressures. The inability to plan for strategic sales ranks as the number onepressure. (Areas where responses tied are noted with both items in the same box, con-nected with AND.)


9/21



AberdeenGroup 5

Table 2: PACE (Pressures, Actions, Capabilities, Enablers)

Priorities

Prioritized

Pressures

Prioritized

Actions

Prioritized

Capabilities

Enablers in Use

Today1

Planning

Inability for strategic

planning

Implement a culture

of continuous im-

provement

Improved sales

planning data for

forecasting and stra-

tegic planning

Sales force automa-

tion

AND

Customer contact

management sys-

tems

2

Data

Lack of actionable

data from current

use of spreadsheets

Achieve a more

flexible environment

for plan manage-

ment that is easier

to change

Increased visibility

and more timely

access to data rele-

vant to future plan-

ning

Customer relation-

ship management

system

3

Performance

No compelling evi-

dence of use of

SPM in our enter-

prise

Improve reward

structure to retain

star performers

Better, more accu-

rate software solu-

tions

Sales rep access to

static customer in-

formation

4

Cost

Cost of new soft-

ware, hardware and

implementation time

Eliminate reliance

on spreadsheets

Move to hosted ap-

plications for sales

planning, compen-

sation tracking and

management

AND

Cheaper software

solutions

Territory manage-

ment system

5

Timeframe

Protracted time to

ascertain and deliver

commissions

Reduce administra-

tive costs by de-

creasing in-house

software, hardware

We are great the

way we are today

Quota management

system

AND

Sales rep access to

dynamic information

on progress toward

quota achievement

AND

Integration of the

SPM and the CRM

systems

6

Error Rate

High error rate in

tracking, allocating

commissions

Create a less error-

prone commission-

tracking environ-

ment

Source: AberdeenGroup, December 2004


10/21



AberdeenGroup 6

Sales executives see their sales-supporting technologies as insufficient for their needs.Overall, they rarely perceive that their companies are excelling in sales performancemanagement, while believing that improving SPM is a valuable strategy for competitiveadvantage (Figure 3).

Figure 3: Executive Views of Sales Performance Management

0% 20

%

40

%

60

%

80

%

100

%

Our current SPM is excellent today

Our company should not spend

money on SPM software

Improved SPM is a valuable strategyfor competitive advantage

SPM applications are nice to have,

but not mission-critical

SPM is best provided as hosted,

web-accessed solutions

Disagree

Neutral

Agree


Overwhelmingly, improving sales performance management is viewed as central to com-petitive advantage and mission-critical. The majority saw SPM as meriting expenditurein their companies.


11/21



AberdeenGroup 7

Chapter Three:Plan of Action:

Improving Sales Performance Management

SPM in the Sales-Driven Enterprise

Over half of the respondents in this research described their companies as sales-driven,with nothing more important than the efforts and outcomes of sales, hence the importanceof sales performance management on an ongoing basis. These sales executives cite alitany of needs towards the improvement of their sales performance management:

The sales-supporting technology is insufficient

The technology they do use is not integrated so planning information is incompati-

ble

They selected their current solutions on price, not best functionality

Their views are presented in Figure 4.

Figure 4: State of the SPM Art

43%

37%

20%

Insufficient sales support

technology

Unintegrated technology,

thus incompatible data

Picked o ur current

solution on price

Source: AberdeenGroup January, 2005

View of Technology

Given disparate, unintegrated solutions, and an overall lack of technology supportingsales today, many companies are ready to consider a move to a better solution. Some areindeed satisfied with the methods in place in their companies today, and some bemoantheir original selection criteria price over functionality.


12/21



AberdeenGroup 8

What Should Managing a Sales Rep Cost?

Managing the cost of sales is always an issue for a sales-driven company. In addition to

the strategic planning behind successful sales execution, the sales effort is generally la-

bor-intensive. It is also typically an area of fairly high turnover, with ensuing reiterativecosts of training, and potential negative effects on customer relations through churn.

Aberdeen surveyed sales executives on their current costs for sales performance man-

agement today on per sales representative basis per month. We also inquired what they

though the optimal cost per rep should be (Table 3).

Table 3: Cost and Optimal Cost Per Sales Representative Per Month

$1-20 $20-50 $50-75 $75-100 $100-200

Over$200

Cost

perSalesRepToday

6% 14% 17% 14% 25% 25%

OptimalCostperSalesRep

14% 33% 25% 22% 3% 3%


Today, half of the surveyed organizations pay over $100 per sales representative in inter-

nal performance management activities. For this population, with payees on plan, the

cost ranges to $1,000,000 a month in sales management costs, excluding commissions.

Not surprisingly, these executives see lower per capital management costs as more attrac-

tive, citing ranges from $20-$100 per representative per month as optimal ranges for in-

ternal management costs.

Conclusions and Implications for Action

Efforts at enterprise-wide sales performance management are fragmented. The fragmen-tation is due to both a hodge-podge of tools (spreadsheets, for example) and unintegratedapplications (SFA, CRM, quota, or territory management). Often these latter applica-tions were selected on the basis of low cost, rather than their ability to manage the task at

hand.

The larger challenge for sales executives is the inability to manage current sales activityand to accurately plan a sales strategy for the future. The data simply is not there, andwhat data is available is often inaccurate and out of date. The business process is broken.

The key issue is really twofold: the lack of visibility into current sales activities and pro-gress and the inability to get solid decision-support information for future planning. Inboth cases, the result is the same: you cannot control what you do not know.


13/21



AberdeenGroup 9

Yet, sales executives are very pragmatic. Perhaps burned in the past by poor technologychoices, they look for a solid business case behind future solution decisions; a businesscase that demonstrates a clear return on the investment and, if possible, demonstrates theability of the investment to positively impact revenue acquisition or sales force produc-

tivity. They also ask for references to validate savings in companies similar to theirs.

Companies, for the most part, express neutrality as to whether the solution resides in-house or is a hosted solution, but all express reticence for expensive infrastructure over-hauls or protracted implementation cycles. In any event, they articulate a requirement fora more flexible environment for plan management, an environment that is easier tochange. And the majority sees business solutions that address sales performance man-agement as mission-critical.

Companies cited perceived barriers to entry:

37% thought that investments in SPM were not perceived as feasible for a com-pany their size

37% thought the added cost of infrastructure was prohibitive

34% saw a lack of technology maturity or functionality to support such an en-deavor

29% thought that implementations were too long or costly

AberdeenGroup, which has been following the enterprise incentive management marketsince 1998, notes that either Excel spreadsheets or rudimentary and fragmented function-ality were used to manage sales performance in the past. Implementations were indeedoften both protracted and expensive. Todays technology, however, far better addressesissues of performance and functionality than earlier predecessors. Optional deliverymethods, including hosted on-demand support or total business process outsourcing,

address both the pressure of infrastructure investment and of long implementations. On-demand solutions hosted at a third party site also provide lower entry opportunity forsmaller companies through subscription pay as you go pricing.

Only recently have technology providers begun to address the fragmentation of the busi-ness process, as functionality characteristically provided in sales force automation andcustomer relationship management tools and commission management and tracking pro-grams are combined or integrated.

Overall sales performance excellence is beyond simply the application of automatedmanagement programs. Automating a bad plan provides no business value. Best practicesin plan development and compensation management are required to create motivatingplans that incent a sales force. Professional plan designers can provide those best prac-

tices, and some vendors have incorporated best-practice plan templates into their solu-tions to speed implementations. Once created, automated solutions can be modeled andmanaged to provide the ongoing, dynamic tracking and information analysis required forcontinuance improvement initiatives.

Sales performance management is an end-to-end business process and has to be viewedas such. Technology suppliers have addressed a great many of the parts, from the cus-tomer to the commission plan, but savvy companies today will require the integration ofthe parts into a comprehensive solution, a solution that provides actionable data points


14/21



AberdeenGroup 10

early in the sales cycle and reduces the overall cost of ownership. Executives shouldevaluate new solutions, both hosted and on-premise, that provide this integration to helpcompanies achieve competitive advantage through optimized sales performance man-agement.


15/21



AberdeenGroup 11

Author Profile

Katherine Jones,

Research Director

Enterprise Applications

Aberdeen Group

Area of Focus

Katherine Jones provides research and consulting services in business applications -those software solutions that are essential to the conduct of enterprise-wide business intoday's challenging environments. She focuses on the fundamental processes of businessoperations and strategy, and the effects of technological change and innovation on theseprocesses within the global organization. In addition to traditional Enterprise ResourcePlanning (ERP) environments such as business, industry, and manufacturing, Jones ad-dresses the application of enterprise solutions in education, the public sector, and the fed-eral government. She provides consulting support and market positioning to new andgrowing companies.

As part of Aberdeen's Human Capital Management practice, Jones covers variable com-pensation management, staff hiring and retention issues, application service provider(ASP) solutions, and employee self-service.

Current Research

Jones is charged with forwarding Aberdeen's research efforts in process manufacturing,supply chain management and execution, and alternative delivery methods for business

applications, such as application hosting through ASPs, mid-market programs, and Web-based access.

Experience

A veteran in enterprise applications, Jones has been responsible for technical productmarketing and strategic alliance management in several computer companies since 1984.Prior to a high technology career, Jones was a university dean, involved in academic ad-ministration, research, and teaching.

Jones is a frequent speaker and is widely published in the U.S. and abroad.

Education

Jones has a PhD and MA from Cornell University and a BS from the University of Min-nesota. She conducted post-graduate work at the University of Connecticut.


16/21



AberdeenGroup 12

Appendix A:Research Methodology

Demographics of Respondents

This study surveyed populations intimate with sales management. The majority was insales management or were vice presidents in areas other than sales. The breakdown bypositions is shown in Figure 5.

Figure 5. Titles or Positions of Respondents

14%

11%

34%

35%

3%3%

CEO,CFO, COO

EVP

Non-sales Sr.Mgnt

Sales Mgnt

Sales Ops

Comp Admin

Source: AberdeenGroup, January 2005.

Respondents company sizes ranged from small (1-50 employees) to over 5,000 employ-ees. The majority of the surveyed population was from companies with fewer than 1,000

total employees. The distribution is shown in Figure 6.


17/21



AberdeenGroup 13

Figure 6. Respondent Breakdown by Company Size (Employee Count)

31%

11%12%

13%

11%

3%

3%

0%

3%

13% 1 to 5051-100

101-200

201-500

501-1000

1001-2000

2001-3000

3001-4000

4001-5000

5000+


By annual revenue for fiscal year 2003, the majority of companies were less than $50million, with the next greatest range up to $249 million (Figure 7).

Figure 7: Respondent Breakdown by Annual Revenue (2003)

56%

18%

5%8%

5%8%

Less than $50M

$51-$249M

$250-$499M

$500-$999M

$1-5B

Over $5B


Of greater interest in a study of sales performance management, however, is how manyof the employees were payees on plans those employees that are paid through variablecompensation or commission programs. Fifty-three percent of the responding companieshad between one and 50 payees on plans; 18% had 51-100 payees on plans; and 16% had251-500 payees on plans. The remainder ranged from 100 to over 10,000 payees on vari-able compensation plans (Figure 8).


18/21



AberdeenGroup 14

Figure 8: Payees on Plans in Responding Companies

52%

18%

3%

16%

0%3%

5% 0%3%1 to 50

51-100101-250

251-500

501-1,000

1,001-2,500

2,501-5,000

5,001-10,000

10,000+

52%

18%

3%

16%

0%3%

5% 0%3%1 to 50

51-100101-250

251-500

501-1,000

1,001-2,500

2,501-5,000

5,001-10,000

10,000+


Industry Representation

Forty-one percent of the companies responding were high technology or software com-panies; 24% were finance, banking, or accounting. Other industry areas represented in-clude computer equipment and peripherals; consumer durable goods; consumer electron-ics; education; healthcare, including medical and dental services; industrial equipmentmanufacturing; insurance, real estate or legal services; retail/wholesale; or telecommuni-cations equipment.

Geographies Represented

Eighty-two percent of respondents were from the United States. Other companies repre-

sented included Argentina, Canada, Germany, India, the Netherlands, South Africa, andthe United Kingdom.


19/21



AberdeenGroup 15

Appendix B:Related Aberdeen Research & Tools

Related Aberdeen research that forms a companion or reference to this report includes:

Enterprise Incentive Compensation 2003: Buyers Guide for Variable and TotalCompensation (December 2003)

Enterprise Incentive Management: Variable Compensation 2002 (April 2002)

Compensation Management in the Internet Age. (November 2000)

From Bricks to Clicks: The Effect of the Web on Sales Compensation Management,(July 2000)

Information on these and any other Aberdeen publications can be found atwww.aberdeen.com
http://www.aberdeen.com/http://www.aberdeen.com/


20/21



AberdeenGroup 16

AboutAberdeen Group

Our Mission

To be the trusted advisor and business value research destination of choice for the GlobalBusiness Executive.

Our Approach

Aberdeen delivers unbiased, primary research that helps enterprises derive tangible busi-

ness value from technology-enabled solutions. Through continuous benchmarking andanalysis of value chain practices, Aberdeen offers a unique mix of research, tools, andservices to help Global Business Executives accomplish the following:

IMPROVE the financial and competitive position of their business now

PRIORITIZE operational improvement areas to drive immediate, tangible valueto their business

LEVERAGE information technology for tangible business value.

Aberdeen also offers selected solution providers fact-based tools and services to em-power and equip them to accomplish the following:

CREATE DEMAND, by reaching the right level of executives in companies

where their solutions can deliver differentiated results

ACCELERATE SALES, by accessing executive decision-makers who need a so-lution and arming the sales team with fact-based differentiation around businessimpact

EXPAND CUSTOMERS, by fortifying their value proposition with independentfact-based research and demonstrating installed base proof points

Our History of Integrity

Aberdeen was founded in 1988 to conduct fact-based, unbiased research that deliverstangible value to executives trying to advance their businesses with technology-enabledsolutions.

Aberdeen's integrity has always been and always will be beyond reproach. We provideindependent research and analysis of the dynamics underlying specific technology-enabled business strategies, market trends, and technology solutions. While some reportsor portions of reports may be underwritten by corporate sponsors, Aberdeen's researchfindings are never influenced by any of these sponsors.


21/21

Aberdeen Group, Inc.

This research study is the result of research performed by Aberdeen Group.

Founded in 1988, Aberdeen Group is the trusted advisor to the Global 5000 for value chain strate-

gies and technology advice. Through its continued benchmarking and analysis of value chain prac-

tices, Aberdeen offers a unique mix of research, tools, and services to help G5000 executives assess

their value chain performance, develop improvement strategies, and select value chain solution

partners.

Aberdeen delivers unbiased primary research that helps enterprises derive tangible business value

from technology-enabled solutions. Through continuous benchmarking and analysis of value chain

practices, Aberdeen offers a unique mix of research, tools, and services to help G5000 executives

accomplish the following:

IMPROVEthe financial and competitive position of their business now

PRIORITIZEoperational improvement areas to drive immediate, tangible value to

their business

LEVERAGEinformation technology for tangible business value.

Aberdeen also offers selected solution providers fact-based tools and services to empower and

equip them to accomplish the following: CREATE DEMAND, by reaching the right level of executives in companies where their solu-

tions can deliver differentiated results

ACCELERATE SALES, by accessing executive decision-makers who need a solution and

arming the sales team with fact-based differentiation around business impact

EXPAND CUSTOMERS, by fortifying their value proposition with independent fact-based

research and demonstrating installed base proof points

Aberdeen was founded in 1988 to conduct fact-based, unbiased research that delivers tangible

value to executives trying to advance their businesses with technology-enabled solutions.

Aberdeen's integrity has always been and always will be beyond reproach. We provide independent

research and analysis of the dynamics underlying specific technology-enabled business strategies,market trends, and technology solutions. Although some reports or portions of reports may be un-

derwritten by corporate sponsors, Aberdeen's research findings are never influenced by any of

these sponsors.

To provide us with your feedback on this research, please go to

www.aberdeen.com/feedback.

The information contained in this publication has been obtained from sources Aberdeen believes to be reliable, but is notguaranteed by Aberdeen. Aberdeen publications reflect the analysts judgment at the time and are subject to changewithout notice.

The trademarks and registered trademarks of the corporations mentioned in this publication are the property of their re-spective holders.

Warning: This publication is protected by United States copyright law and international treaties. Unless otherwise noted,the entire contents of this publication are copyrighted by Aberdeen Group, Inc. and may not be reproduced, stored in aretrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means without prior written consent. Unauthorized reproduction ordistribution of this publication, or any portion of it, may result in severe civil and criminal penalties, and will be prosecutedto the maximum extent necessary to protect the rights of the publisher.

2005 Aberdeen Group, Inc., Boston, Massachusetts
http://www.aberdeen.com/feedbackhttp://www.aberdeen.com/feedback

aberdeen sp white paper

Documents