RESEARCH Statistics · 2026 edition · updated Oct 2026

Sales Training and Coaching Statistics 2026

2026 edition: what companies spend on sales training, how much of it sticks, what coaching does to win rates and quota, how long reps take to ramp, where role-play and AI fit, and the medtech specifics. Every number links to its source.

The headline number 32%

higher win rates with consistent
sales coaching1

Korn Ferry, 2023 (with 28% higher quota attainment)
32%

higher win rates with coaching

9%

of manager time spent developing reps

52

sourced statistics

The overview

Training works. Retention is the problem.

Companies spend more than $100 billion a year on training, and the research on what happens next is consistent: most of it fades within weeks unless it is reinforced, practiced and coached. The numbers that matter for a sales leader are the ones about coaching frequency, practice before customer calls, time to ramp and the skills gap reps say they feel. Those are the levers, and they are the ones this page collects.

Sources are academic studies, analyst surveys, government and association data and company training programs. Vendor-published research is excluded. Where a figure is a widely repeated claim with no traceable study, it is left out and the methodology note says so.

Key takeaways: sales training and coaching statistics for 2026

  • $102.8 billion was spent on training by US companies in 2024-2025, up nearly 5% year over year, per Training magazine's 2025 Training Industry Report. Training magazine, 2025
  • 50% growth in sales enablement budgets is expected by 2027, per Gartner. Gartner, 2023
  • 12.5% was all that remained of Ebbinghaus's memory savings after 31 days (25.5% after one day), and a 2015 PLOS ONE replication reproduced the forgetting curve, finding only 4% savings at 31 days. Murre & Dros, University of Amsterdam (PLOS ONE), 2015
  • 9% of a manager's time, on average, goes to developing their direct reports, and 45% of managers do not feel confident in their ability to develop the skills employees need today, per Gartner. Gartner, 2019
  • 32% higher win rates and 28% higher quota attainment are reported by sales organizations with consistent sales coaching and impact measurement, along with 2x seller engagement and almost 30% lower voluntary turnover, per Korn Ferry. Korn Ferry (formerly CSO Insights / Miller Heiman Group), 2023
  • 6.2 months is the average ramp time for SaaS account executives in 2026, the highest in the Bridge Group study's history, up from 5.7 months in 2024 and 4.3 months in 2020. The Bridge Group, 2026
  • 47% of Gen Z sales reps say they don't get enough role-play opportunities before customer calls, and 46% rarely get feedback on their sales conversations, per Salesforce's State of Sales, 7th edition. Salesforce, 2026
  • 36% of sales teams with AI agents use them for coaching, and 75% of reps say they are more likely to hit targets with a coach or mentor, per Salesforce's State of Sales, 7th edition. Salesforce, 2026
  • 2.4x more likely to achieve strong revenue growth are sales organizations that prioritize upskilling sellers on AI, and Gartner predicts 95% of sellers' research workflows will begin with AI by 2027, up from under 20% in 2024. Gartner, 2026
  • 72% of B2B sellers feel overwhelmed by the number of skills required for their job, and overwhelmed sellers are 45% less likely to attain quota, per Gartner. Gartner, 2024
  • 12 to 14 months is the length of Johnson & Johnson MedTech's entry-level sales training programs: 12 months for Orthopaedics (STR), 14 months for Surgery (STR), and 12-18 months for the Vision sales leadership development program. Johnson & Johnson MedTech, 2026
  • 94% of sales leaders say sales training positively impacts revenue growth (92% pipeline growth, 85% win rates), and 41% of sales organizations planned to increase investment in sales enablement and training headcount in 2025, per Alexander Group. Alexander Group, 2025
A sales trainer at a desk reviews a printed training guide beside a laptop showing course modules.
01 · What companies invest

Training spend and return

US companies spend more than $100 billion a year on training, and sales enablement budgets are forecast to grow faster than most line items. The return figures that survive scrutiny come from Gartner forecasts and analyst surveys, not from vendor ROI calculators.

  1. $102.8B

    $102.8 billion was spent on training by US companies in 2024-2025, up nearly 5% year over year, per Training magazine's 2025 Training Industry Report.

    VerifiedTraining magazine, 2025[1] Survey of US organizations with 100+ employees, fielded April-July 2025; payroll $64.7B, outside products/services $16B (+29%). All-function training spend, not sales-only. Published Nov 2025.
  2. $874

    $874 was the average training spend per learner in 2025, up from $774 in 2024; small companies spent $1,091 per learner versus $468 at large corporations.

    VerifiedTraining magazine, 2025[1] Midsize companies $782 per learner. 2024 figure ($774) is from the 2024 edition (https://trainingmag.com/2024-training-industry-report/, 251 respondents).
  3. $1,254

    $1,254 was the average direct training expenditure per employee in 2024, with 13.7 formal learning hours per employee, per ATD's 2025 State of the Industry report.

    VerifiedATD (Association for Talent Development), 2025[2] Verified on ATD's webinar subdomain (td.org main site returned HTTP 429). Report covers 2024 data; direct expenditure excludes cost of employee time away from work.
  4. $1,000-1,499

    $1,000-$1,499 per salesperson was the median annual sales training spend in 2022, with sales kickoff meetings adding another $1,000-$1,499 per rep, per ATD's 2023 State of Sales Training.

    DirectionalATD (Association for Talent Development), 2023[3] td.org returned HTTP 429/403 on every fetch; figures come from search-engine snippets of ATD's own press release (July 5, 2023). Report sponsored by Highspot. Same release: 63% of sales enablement budget goes to internal costs (staff salaries, delivery). Earlier ATD editions reported $2,326 per salesperson (2019) and $2,020 (2021).
  5. 50%

    50% growth in sales enablement budgets is expected by 2027, per Gartner.

    VerifiedGartner, 2023[4] Press release Feb 15, 2023; Gartner prediction, not a measured figure. Verified on Gartner's gcom mirror; same path exists on www.gartner.com.
  6. 40%

    40% faster sales stage velocity is predicted by 2029 for sales organizations with AI-driven enablement functions versus traditional enablement, per Gartner.

    VerifiedGartner, 2026[5] Press release April 1, 2026, based on a survey of 227 chief sales officers (Aug-Sep 2025). Same release: orgs that co-create enablement content with marketing and service are 2.4x more likely to achieve strong commercial growth. Prediction, not a measured result.
  7. 15%

    15% more revenue was generated by companies that allocated more than 50% of their sales force training budget to sales managers, in a Vantage Point / Sales Management Association study of 213 companies with 25,800 sales managers.

    VerifiedVantage Point Performance / Sales Management Association, 2018[6] Article by Michelle Vazzana (Vantage Point CEO), Oct 30, 2018, summarizing joint research with SMA. Older source, labelled by year.

How to use these. Quote Training magazine and ATD for spend, Gartner for the forward view. The widely cited 353% training ROI is a 2006 Accenture figure for Accenture's own company-wide training, not sales training, and is excluded.

02 · What sticks

Retention and reinforcement

The forgetting curve is real and replicated: without reinforcement, most of what a rep learns in a classroom is gone within a month. The techniques with the strongest evidence are spaced practice and practice testing, which is what role-play and coaching cadences operationalise.

  1. 12.5%

    12.5% was all that remained of Ebbinghaus's memory savings after 31 days (25.5% after one day), and a 2015 PLOS ONE replication reproduced the forgetting curve, finding only 4% savings at 31 days.

    VerifiedMurre & Dros, University of Amsterdam (PLOS ONE), 2015[7] Peer-reviewed. 'Savings' = time saved on relearning, not raw recall. Ebbinghaus (1885) values: 58% at 20 min, 44.9% at 1 hr, 25.5% at 1 day, 16.4% at 6 days, 12.5% at 31 days. Replication used a single subject with nonsense syllables, so it demonstrates the curve's shape, not a population statistic. The pop claim '70% forgotten in 24 hours' is not in this paper.
  2. 317

    839 assessments of spaced versus massed practice across 317 experiments were synthesized in Cepeda et al.'s 2006 meta-analysis, which found spaced study reliably beats massed study and the optimal gap between sessions grows with the desired retention interval.

    VerifiedCepeda, Pashler, Vul, Wixted & Rohrer (Psychological Bulletin), 2006[8] Abstract verified via Europe PMC (PubMed 16719566; DOI 10.1037/0033-2909.132.3.354). Canonical academic source for the spacing effect; the abstract gives no single effect size, so do not attach a percentage.
  3. 2 of 10

    2 of 10 learning techniques, practice testing and distributed (spaced) practice, earned a 'high utility' rating in Dunlosky et al.'s 2013 review, while rereading and highlighting were rated low utility.

    VerifiedDunlosky, Rawson, Marsh, Nathan & Willingham (Psychological Science in the Public Interest), 2013[9] Abstract verified via Europe PMC (PubMed 26173288; DOI 10.1177/1529100612453266). Moderate utility: elaborative interrogation, self-explanation, interleaved practice. Low: summarization, highlighting, keyword mnemonic, imagery, rereading. Academic backing for practice-plus-spaced-reinforcement over one-off content review.
  4. Myth

    160+ years is how far back versions of the 'learning pyramid' (the claim that people retain 75% of what they practice and 10% of what they read) have circulated with no empirical origin, per a 2018 Cogent Education investigation.

    VerifiedLetrud & Hernes (Cogent Education), 2018[10] CONTESTED/UNSUPPORTED. The NTL Institute 'learning pyramid' percentages (5% lecture ... 75% practice by doing, 90% teaching others) are widely quoted in enablement marketing, but the paper states the models 'did not originate from empirical research'. If mentioned on the page, present only as a debunked myth with this citation.
  5. 21%

    21% higher quota attainment, 15% higher win rates and 6% higher revenue attainment are reported for organizations where more than 75% of sellers adopt the sales methodology they were trained on, per Korn Ferry.

    VerifiedKorn Ferry, 2024[11] Korn Ferry (owner of Miller Heiman / former CSO Insights), Dec 12, 2024. Exact quote confirmed; no sample size or methodology given. Frames reinforcement and adoption, not initial training, as the performance lever.

The myths. 'Reps forget 70% in a week' and the 'learning pyramid' are repeated on hundreds of vendor pages without a study behind them. The peer-reviewed numbers above make the same practical argument with sources you can defend.

03 · What managers do

Coaching effectiveness

Coaching is the highest-leverage activity in sales management and the least practised. Managers spend a small fraction of their time developing reps, most firms say it is too little, and the organisations that coach consistently report materially higher win rates and quota attainment.

  1. 9%

    9% of a manager's time, on average, goes to developing their direct reports, and 45% of managers do not feel confident in their ability to develop the skills employees need today, per Gartner.

    VerifiedGartner, 2019[12] Canonical Gartner HR figure (ReimagineHR 2019), not sales-specific. Companion Gartner sales release (Feb 24, 2021, n=1,122 B2B reps): only 40% of sellers work in a well-established coaching culture; effective manager coaching can lift sales performance by 8% (https://gcom.pdo.aws.gartner.com/en/newsroom/press-releases/gartner-research-shows-only-23--of-b2b-sales-reps-say-they-are-e).
  2. 32%

    32% higher win rates and 28% higher quota attainment are reported by sales organizations with consistent sales coaching and impact measurement, along with 2x seller engagement and almost 30% lower voluntary turnover, per Korn Ferry.

    VerifiedKorn Ferry (formerly CSO Insights / Miller Heiman Group), 2023[13] Article dated March 29, 2023, citing Korn Ferry's Sales Enablement Study; sample size not stated on page. Spot-checked by the lead researcher. Current home of the old CSO Insights 'dynamic coaching' win-rate lift; the often-quoted 32.1% appears here rounded to 32%. Same page: coached sellers spend 23% more time selling.
  3. 7.2 hrs

    7.2 hours per week is the average time sales managers spend coaching (median 5 hours), yet 76% of firms say their managers provide too little coaching and only 46% rate their coaching effective, per the Sales Management Association.

    VerifiedSales Management Association, 2018[14] SMA brief (n=173-193 firms per chart) hosted as PDF by underwriter Integrity Solutions; SMA landing page is member-gated. Same brief: firms effective at coaching achieve sales objectives 9% higher; managers coaching 9+ hours/week outperform by 7%, under 2.5 hours/week underperform by 5%.
  4. 51%

    51% more likely to receive regular, ongoing coaching is how Top-Performing Sellers compare with the rest, and sellers with an effective manager, regular coaching and effective training are 63% more likely to be Top Performers, per RAIN Group.

    VerifiedRAIN Group Center for Sales Research, 2022[15] Global study of 1,004 sales managers and sellers (624 managers, 380 sellers). 51% on RAIN's page; 63% and June 2022 date confirmed on SalesTechStar coverage. RAIN Group is a sales-training firm, not an enablement-software competitor.
  5. 17%

    17% higher Sales Percentile is seen in salespeople coached several times per week versus those never coached (+9% for weekly coaching), yet only 10% of salespeople report being coached multiple times a week, per Objective Management Group.

    VerifiedObjective Management Group, 2023[16] Based on OMG assessment data from 11,078 salespeople and their managers. Also: 20% coached weekly, 8% never. Useful substitute for hard-to-source EcSell Institute frequency claims.
  6. 11.3%

    11.3% of sales organizations run a dynamic, CRM-integrated coaching process, while 34.7% leave coaching to manager discretion and 35% use informal coaching, meaning nearly 70% take a random or informal approach, per CSO Insights.

    VerifiedCSO Insights (Jim Dickie, via DestinationCRM), 2017[17] Column Dec 1, 2017 by CSO Insights co-founder; study of 1,200+ participants. The accompanying win-rate chart (dynamic coaching 55.2% win rate, 13.4 points above random) is referenced but not in page text; treat 55.2% as directional only. Older but canonical.
  7. 19%

    19% performance improvement is the upside of focusing coaching on the middle 60% of reps, according to Sales Executive Council research that found no other productivity investment comes close to coaching.

    DirectionalHarvard Business Review / Sales Executive Council (CEB, now Gartner), 2011[18] HBR page confirms title, authors, date and the 'no other productivity investment comes close to coaching' line, but the 19% figure sits behind the paywall. Related CEB guidance (3-5 coaching hours per rep per month) confirmed only on secondary pages. Canonical; label 2011.
  8. 38%

    38% of sellers say their manager helps them develop the skills they need for their role today, and 42% of sales managers say they lack confidence to develop seller skills, per Gartner as reported by Challenger.

    DirectionalGartner (via Challenger), 2024[19] Challenger (a Gartner spin-off) attributes both figures to Gartner with no release date or sample; no Gartner press release containing 38% was found on www.gartner.com or the gcom mirror. Use with 'per Gartner, as reported by Challenger' or drop.

Read the attribution carefully. Korn Ferry's 32% and 28% figures compare organisations with consistent, integrated coaching to those without; they are correlations in a survey, not a controlled trial. They are still the most-cited coaching numbers in the field and come from a primary source.

04 · Time to productivity

Onboarding and ramp time

Ramp time has been lengthening. SaaS account executives now take more than six months to reach productivity, the longest in the Bridge Group's history, and the older cross-industry benchmarks put full productivity at nine months and top performance at fifteen. Few employees rate their onboarding as good.

  1. 6.2 mo

    6.2 months is the average ramp time for SaaS account executives in 2026, the highest in the Bridge Group study's history, up from 5.7 months in 2024 and 4.3 months in 2020.

    VerifiedThe Bridge Group, 2026[20] 158 B2B SaaS companies. Experience required at hire rose to 3.7 years from 2.7 in 2022. 2024 (5.7 months, 172 companies) and 2020 (4.3) figures from the 2024 AE report (https://blog.bridgegroupinc.com/2024-ae-metrics-compensation-benchmark).
  2. 3.0 mo

    3.0 months is the average SDR ramp time, the lowest since 2010, while only 60% of SDRs are at quota, the lowest on record, per the Bridge Group.

    VerifiedThe Bridge Group, 2025[21] 351 B2B companies (78% North America, 83% B2B SaaS). Ramp peaked at 3.8 months in 2014; Bridge Group suggests AI-assisted onboarding or tighter productivity expectations as causes.
  3. 12%

    12% of U.S. employees say their company does a good job of onboarding, and new hires typically need about 12 months to reach peak performance, per Gallup.

    VerifiedGallup, 2021[22] Canonical Gallup onboarding figure (from Gallup's 2019 'Creating an Exceptional Onboarding Journey' paper). Same page: employees are 3.4x as likely to call onboarding successful when managers actively participate; one in five say their last onboarding was poor or nonexistent. Not sales-specific.
  4. 9 mo

    9 months of training is needed before a new sales hire reaches full productivity, on top of an average 4 months to recruit them, so a vacancy costs more than a year of selling time, per CSO Insights.

    VerifiedCSO Insights (Miller Heiman Group, now Korn Ferry), 2018[23] Global survey of 321 sales organizations; quote from CSO Insights managing director Seleste Lunsford. Same study: only 16% of sales leaders believe they have the talent needed for future success.
  5. 15 mo

    15 months is how long it takes a new seller to become a top performer, with roughly 3 months to onboard and 9 months to reach competent performance, according to sales leaders surveyed by RAIN Group.

    VerifiedRAIN Group Center for Sales Research, 2019[24] Survey of 423 sales, enablement and company leaders. Same release: 52% named recruiting and hiring a top challenge, 40% developing sales skills.
  6. 82%

    82% higher new-hire retention and over 70% higher productivity are associated with a strong onboarding process, per Brandon Hall Group research commissioned by Glassdoor.

    DirectionalBrandon Hall Group (for Glassdoor), 2015[25] Original Brandon Hall PDF could not be located. Glassdoor's Sept 2015 post announcing the report (via Wayback) confirms the report exists but not the sentence; Glassdoor's live page is bot-blocked. Figure reproduced verbatim on HiBob, SHRM and others. Cite as 'Brandon Hall Group for Glassdoor, 2015'; avoid the 'Gartner' mis-attribution some blogs use.

What it costs. Every month of ramp has a price in salary, recruiting and lost margin. The ramp cost calculator puts a number on it with your own quota and pay.

05 · Practice before the call

Role-play, simulation and deliberate practice

Close to half of reps say they do not get enough chances to role-play before customer calls, and even more say they rarely get feedback on the calls themselves. The research on deliberate practice and simulation training explains why that gap matters, and where practice helps most.

  1. 47%

    47% of Gen Z sales reps say they don't get enough role-play opportunities before customer calls, and 46% rarely get feedback on their sales conversations, per Salesforce's State of Sales, 7th edition.

    VerifiedSalesforce, 2026[26] Survey of 4,050 sales professionals in 22 countries, fielded Aug-Sep 2025. Figures are for Gen Z reps specifically, not all reps. Spot-checked by the lead researcher.
  2. 44%

    44% of sales reps say they do not get enough opportunities to role-play before customer calls, 58% rarely get feedback on their sales conversations, and 66% say traditional enablement does not give them the skills they need, per Salesforce's State of Sales (APAC edition).

    VerifiedSalesforce, 2025[27] Read from the PDF text. Global survey n=4,050, but this is the APAC-localized edition and the page copy references Singapore, so percentages may be regional; global edition PDF not located. Same page: 88% say they are more likely to hit targets with a coach or mentor (APAC); Salesforce's global blog quotes 75% for the same question.
  3. 14%

    20% higher self-efficacy, 14% higher procedural knowledge, 11% higher declarative knowledge and 9% higher retention were found for trainees taught with simulation games versus comparison groups in a meta-analysis of 65 studies (6,476 participants).

    DirectionalSitzmann, T. (Personnel Psychology), 2011[28] Abstract numbers confirmed on Karl Kapp's page reproducing the published abstract (https://karlkapp.com/?p=4333); Wiley primary returned 403. Academic, not sales-specific; simulation games broadly, not sales role-play.
  4. <1%

    26% of the variance in performance in games, 21% in music, 18% in sports, 4% in education and under 1% in professions is explained by deliberate practice, per a meta-analysis in Psychological Science.

    VerifiedMacnamara, Hambrick & Oswald (Psychological Science), 2014[29] Abstract retrieved from Europe PMC (PMID 24986855). Caveat: authors conclude deliberate practice is 'important, but not as important as has been argued'; the professions figure cuts against overselling practice alone, so use honestly.
  5. 10,000 hours

    10 years (or 10,000 hours) of intense training is the minimum even the most gifted performers need before winning international competitions, and expertise is 'the product of years of deliberate practice and coaching, not of any innate talent or skill', per Ericsson in HBR.

    VerifiedHarvard Business Review (Ericsson, Prietula & Cokely), 2007[30] Quotes confirmed in the HBR reprint PDF (https://mrbartonmaths.com/resourcesnew/8.%20Research/Explicit%20Instruction/The%20Making%20of%20an%20Expert.pdf); hbr.org page is paywalled. Canonical; label 2007.

The honest version of deliberate practice. Macnamara's meta-analysis found practice explains far less of performance in professions than in games or music. Practice is necessary, not sufficient; feedback and coaching on the practice are what move sales skills.

06 · The 2026 shift

AI in sales training and coaching

AI has moved from pilot to default in sales organisations. The coaching use case is growing fastest, reps who use AI daily report better target attainment, and Gartner ties AI upskilling directly to revenue growth. The same research warns that fewer than half of sellers expect AI agents to improve their performance.

  1. 87% use AI

    87% of sales organizations currently use some form of AI, 54% of sellers have used AI agents and nearly 9 in 10 plan to by 2027, per Salesforce's State of Sales, 7th edition.

    VerifiedSalesforce, 2026[26] 4,050 sales professionals, 22 countries, Aug-Sep 2025. Same page: 92% of sellers with AI agents say agents benefit prospecting; top performers 1.7x more likely to use prospecting agents. Spot-checked by the lead researcher.
  2. 36%

    36% of sales teams with AI agents use them for coaching, and 75% of reps say they are more likely to hit targets with a coach or mentor, per Salesforce's State of Sales, 7th edition.

    VerifiedSalesforce, 2026[31] Salesforce blog attributing both figures to the 7th-edition State of Sales (n=4,050). Most direct AI-coaching adoption number from a non-competitor source.
  3. 2.4x

    2.4x more likely to achieve strong revenue growth are sales organizations that prioritize upskilling sellers on AI, and Gartner predicts 95% of sellers' research workflows will begin with AI by 2027, up from under 20% in 2024.

    VerifiedGartner, 2026[32] Survey of 227 CSOs, Aug-Sep 2025; released May 20, 2026. Verified on gcom mirror. Companion buyer survey (n=645): buyers 39 points more likely to say a rep, not GenAI, understood their needs.
  4. 3.7x

    3.7 times more likely to meet quota are B2B sellers who effectively partner with AI tools, per a Gartner survey of 1,026 sellers.

    VerifiedGartner, 2024[33] 1,026 B2B sellers surveyed Jan-Mar 2024; released Sep 16, 2024. Same release carries the 72% 'overwhelmed by skills' figure (listed under turnover and skills gap).
  5. 56%

    56% of sales professionals now use AI daily, and those using AI daily are 2x as likely to exceed their targets, per LinkedIn.

    VerifiedLinkedIn, 2025[34] Published Mar 11, 2025; page does not state sample size (secondary coverage cites an Ipsos survey of 1,250 sellers). Also: 69% of AI users cut sales cycles by about a week.
  6. 10x

    10x: by 2028 AI agents will outnumber human sellers tenfold, yet fewer than 40% of sellers will report that AI agents improved their productivity, Gartner predicts.

    VerifiedGartner, 2025[35] Prediction from 'Predicts 2026: Leading Sales in the Age of AI Contradictions', Nov 18, 2025; no survey sample stated. Useful as the 'AI is not a substitute for skill-building' counterpoint.

Vendor data excluded. Every AI-coaching vendor publishes adoption and improvement numbers from its own platform. None are used here. The figures above are from Salesforce, Gartner and LinkedIn surveys of sellers and sales leaders.

07 · Who leaves and why

Rep turnover and the skills gap

Sales turnover runs at roughly twice the rate of the labour force, most reps feel overwhelmed by the skills their job now requires, and quota attainment has slipped below half in several large studies. Training and coaching are the main levers sales leaders say they have.

  1. 27%

    27% is the estimated annual turnover rate among U.S. salespeople, twice the rate of the overall labor force, per Harvard Business Review.

    VerifiedHarvard Business Review, 2017[36] Canonical figure; exact wording 'estimates of annual turnover among U.S. salespeople run as high as 27%, twice the rate in the overall labor force.' Same article: U.S. firms spend $15B a year training salespeople. Label as 2017.
  2. 72%

    72% of B2B sellers feel overwhelmed by the number of skills required for their job, and overwhelmed sellers are 45% less likely to attain quota, per Gartner.

    VerifiedGartner, 2024[33] Survey of 1,026 B2B sellers, Jan-Mar 2024. Also: 50% overwhelmed by the amount of technology. Verified on Gartner's gcom mirror of the same path.
  3. 74% / 58%

    74% of chief sales officers say a significant change in seller skills is required to meet future revenue goals, and 58% of sellers will need reskilling or upskilling by 2026 because of AI, per Gartner.

    VerifiedGartner, 2025[37] 243 CSOs and senior sales leaders surveyed Nov-Dec 2024; only 45% met several 2024 strategic goals. Verified on gcom mirror.
  4. 89% / 54%

    89% of B2B sellers report feeling burned out, and 54% say they are actively looking for a new job, per Gartner.

    VerifiedGartner, 2022[38] 908 B2B sellers, Dec 2021-Jan 2022; label as 2022. Lack of development opportunities is a top cause of seller 'drag'; 70% of high-drag sellers are job hunting vs 7% of low-drag.
  5. 40%

    40% was the median annual SDR attrition rate in 2024 (13% involuntary, 11% voluntary, 16% promoted), with average SDR tenure of 1.9 years, per the Bridge Group.

    VerifiedThe Bridge Group, 2025[39] 351 B2B companies; published Feb 6, 2025. 25th-75th percentile attrition 21%-57%.
  6. 48%

    48% of account executives are at quota in the 2026 Bridge Group study, down from 51% in 2024.

    VerifiedThe Bridge Group, 2026[20] 158 B2B SaaS companies; median OTE $200K. Report landing page does not publish an AE turnover figure.
  7. 67%

    67% of sales reps did not expect to meet their quota in 2024, and 84% missed it the prior year, per Salesforce's State of Sales, 6th edition.

    VerifiedSalesforce, 2024[40] 5,500 sales professionals in 27 countries, surveyed Mar-Apr 2024. Same release: reps spend 70% of time on non-selling tasks.
  8. 42.7%

    42.69% was average quota attainment across roughly 47,000 quota-carrying sales professionals at 246 cloud companies in Q2 2025, meaning 57% missed their number, per RepVue.

    DirectionalRepVue, 2025[41] Primary page returned HTTP 429 on every attempt; figures confirmed on QuotaPath's write-up (https://www.quotapath.com/blog/saas-sales-reps-missed-quota/) and consistent across search snippets (Q1 2025: 43.3%).
  9. $115K

    $114,957 is the average all-in cost to replace a sales rep ($29,159 to hire, $36,290 to train, $49,508 in lost productivity), per DePaul University's Center for Sales Leadership.

    DirectionalDePaul University Center for Sales Leadership (via Performio), 2012[42] DePaul primary report is not online. The widely repeated '$97,690 per rep' variant was not found verbatim on any fetched page; the $29,159/$36,290/$49,508 breakdown appears verbatim on the cited page. Label as DePaul 2012; Performio notes inflation-adjusted >$150K.

The connection. Overwhelmed sellers are 45% less likely to hit quota (Gartner). Replacing a rep costs six figures all in. Those two numbers together are the business case for every training line above.

08 · The hardest field

Medical device and life sciences training

Medical device sales training runs longer than almost any other field because reps need clinical fluency, operating-room etiquette and hospital credentialing before they can sell. The large manufacturers run formal programs of a year or more, and access to clinicians has tightened since 2020.

  1. 12-14 mo

    12 to 14 months is the length of Johnson & Johnson MedTech's entry-level sales training programs: 12 months for Orthopaedics (STR), 14 months for Surgery (STR), and 12-18 months for the Vision sales leadership development program.

    VerifiedJohnson & Johnson MedTech, 2026[43] Surgery 14-month wording verified at the URL above (exits to Associate Account Executive). Orthopaedics 12 months verified at https://www.builtincolorado.com/job/sales-training-representative-january-june-2027-johnson-johnson-medtech-orthopaedics/10062127; Vision 12-18 months at https://www.builtincolorado.com/job/sales-leadership-development-program-johnson-and-johnson-medtech-vision/10498044. careers.jnj.com pages returned 404 at fetch time; Built In mirrors J&J's posting text.
  2. 2-3 yrs

    2 to 3 years is the length of Medtronic's paid Sales Training Excellence Program (STEP) for Cardiac Rhythm Management, while the Medical Surgical STEP runs an 18-month rotation.

    DirectionalMedtronic, 2026[44] Wording 'paid two-three year training program' appears consistently in multiple job-board snippets (joinrise, swooped, illinoisjoblink) but every mirror returned 403/404 on fetch. Confirm on jobs.medtronic.com before publishing.
  3. 45%

    45% of U.S. hospitals give medical device reps full access (49% in Europe, 26% in Asia-Pacific), and 1 in 4 physicians globally say field-force knowledge is very important when interacting with device companies, per Sermo.

    VerifiedSermo, 2022[45] 200+ hospital-based physicians, 8 countries, 11 specialties; page updated Dec 2024. Also: 66-67% of U.S./APAC physicians prefer hybrid (in-person + digital) rep engagement; only 22-24% want in-person only. Small sample; label year.
  4. 47%

    75% of surgeons preferred in-person medtech rep visits before Covid-19, and 47% of that group now prefer virtual or less-frequent visits, per Bain & Company.

    VerifiedBain & Company, 2020[46] Published Sept 3, 2020; older but canonical. About 60% of surgeons and administrators expected in-person rep access restrictions to persist; orthopedic surgeons most value in-person OR support. Sample size not stated on page.
  5. 21,358 hrs

    21,358 hours per year is what the average medical device company spends on vendor credentialing across administrative, HR and sales departments, and 93% of health systems expect the vendor-compliance burden to increase, per GHX.

    VerifiedGHX (Vendormate), 2023[47] 21,358-hour figure is '2021 GHX internal data' on the Aug 29, 2023 article; the 93% figure is from GHX's infographic PDF (https://www.ghx.com/media/q44kk0gx/ghx_vendor-credentialing-managed-service_infographic.pdf), citing the Orbees Medical Providers Vendor Credentialing Survey 2020. GHX is a credentialing vendor.
  6. 94%

    94% of sales leaders say sales training positively impacts revenue growth (92% pipeline growth, 85% win rates), and 41% of sales organizations planned to increase investment in sales enablement and training headcount in 2025, per Alexander Group.

    VerifiedAlexander Group, 2025[48] Cross-industry (200+ executives in sales, rev ops, marketing, finance, C-suite), not medtech-specific; Alexander Group is a leading medtech sales-effectiveness consultancy. Also: only 20% use AI for training content, 9% for training delivery.

Why practice matters more here. A device rep's first real conversations are with surgeons and value analysis committees, and access is limited. That is why structured role-play against those personas, rather than shadowing alone, is the training pattern device teams are moving to.

FAQ

Frequently asked questions

How effective is sales coaching?

Sales organizations with consistent, integrated coaching report 32% higher win rates and 28% higher quota attainment than those without, according to Korn Ferry's 2023 research, and Objective Management Group finds salespeople coached several times a week score 17% higher on its sales percentile than those never coached. The gap is in practice, not belief: managers spend about 9% of their time developing reps (Gartner), and 76% of firms say their managers coach too little (Sales Management Association).

How much of sales training is forgotten?

A 2015 replication of Ebbinghaus's forgetting curve found only 12.5% of memory savings remained after 31 days without reinforcement. The specific claim that sellers forget 70% within a week and 87% within a month is repeated widely but has no traceable study behind it, so this page does not use it. The techniques with the strongest evidence for retention are spaced practice and practice testing (Dunlosky et al., 2013).

How long does it take a new sales rep to ramp?

SaaS account executives took a median 6.2 months to ramp in 2026, the longest in the Bridge Group study's history. Older cross-industry benchmarks put full productivity at about nine months (CSO Insights) and top performance at fifteen months (RAIN Group). Medical device training programs run longer: Johnson & Johnson MedTech's entry-level sales programs run 12 to 14 months.

How much do companies spend on sales training?

US companies spent $102.8 billion on training in 2024-2025 (Training magazine), about $874 per learner. ATD's sales-specific survey put median annual sales training spend at $1,000 to $1,499 per salesperson in 2022, with sales kickoff meetings on top. Gartner expects sales enablement budgets to grow 50% by 2027.

Do sales reps get enough role-play practice?

No, by their own account. 44% of sales reps said they do not get enough opportunities to role-play before customer calls in Salesforce's 2025 research, rising to 47% among Gen Z reps in the 2026 edition, and most say they rarely get feedback on their calls. The deliberate-practice literature shows practice with feedback is what builds skill; practice alone explains a small share of performance in professional work.

How is AI being used in sales training and coaching?

87% of sales organizations use AI in some form (Salesforce, 2026), 36% of teams with AI agents use them for coaching, and 56% of sales professionals use AI daily (LinkedIn, 2025). Gartner finds sellers who partner effectively with AI are 3.7 times more likely to meet quota, and organizations that prioritise AI upskilling are 2.4 times more likely to achieve strong revenue growth. Vendor-reported results from individual AI coaching platforms are excluded from this page.

About this page

How this page is compiled

Statistics on this page come from analyst research (Gartner, Korn Ferry, Alexander Group, The Bridge Group, RAIN Group, Sales Management Association), peer-reviewed studies (Murre and Dros 2015, Cepeda et al. 2006, Dunlosky et al. 2013, Macnamara et al. 2014, Letrud and Hernes 2018), industry surveys (Training magazine, ATD, Salesforce, LinkedIn, Gallup), and current company training-program postings. Each entry was checked against its source on 6 October 2026 and carries the source, year and sample size where stated.

Verified means the figure was read from the publisher's own page or an official republication. Directional means a paywalled or snippet-only source, or a secondary citation of a study whose original is no longer online. Two widely repeated claims are deliberately absent: that sellers forget 70% of training within a week and 87% within a month, and the 'learning pyramid' claim that people retain 75% of what they practice. Neither has a traceable study behind it; the pyramid is included only as a documented myth.

Research published by sales enablement and training vendors is excluded as a source. The page is maintained by SoloFire's marketing team and reviewed quarterly; corrections and newer sources are welcome at info@solofire.com.

Last reviewed 06 October 2026 · next review January 2027

Citation

Cite these statistics

Every number carries its original source. Quote the original and credit SoloFire as the compiler, or cite this page directly. Suggested citation:

SoloFire (2026). Sales Training and Coaching Statistics 2026. https://solofire.com/research/sales-training-coaching-statistics/

Journalists and analysts: for chart files or a custom cut, email info@solofire.com. Found a stat that its source has updated or retracted? Same address, and the page will be corrected.

Sources

Every source on this page

  1. Training magazine (2025). 2025 Training Industry Report
  2. ATD (Association for Talent Development) (2025). 2025 State of the Industry
  3. ATD (Association for Talent Development) (2023). 2023 State of Sales Training (press release: More Than Half of Organizations Invest in Sales Enablement)
  4. Gartner (2023). Gartner Expects Sales Enablement Budgets to Increase by 50% by 2027
  5. Gartner (2026). Gartner Predicts AI-Driven Sales Enablement Will Deliver 40% Faster Sales Stage Velocity Than Traditional Enablement Methods by 2029
  6. Vantage Point Performance / Sales Management Association (2018). The Domino Effect of Investing in Sales Manager Training (Training magazine)
  7. Murre & Dros, University of Amsterdam (PLOS ONE) (2015). Replication and Analysis of Ebbinghaus' Forgetting Curve
  8. Cepeda, Pashler, Vul, Wixted & Rohrer (Psychological Bulletin) (2006). Distributed practice in verbal recall tasks: A review and quantitative synthesis
  9. Dunlosky, Rawson, Marsh, Nathan & Willingham (Psychological Science in the Public Interest) (2013). Improving Students' Learning With Effective Learning Techniques
  10. Letrud & Hernes (Cogent Education) (2018). Excavating the origins of the learning pyramid myths
  11. Korn Ferry (2024). Why a Proven Sales Methodology Is a Roadmap to Success
  12. Gartner (2019). Gartner Says 45% of Managers Lack Confidence to Help Employees Develop the Skills They Need Today
  13. Korn Ferry (formerly CSO Insights / Miller Heiman Group) (2023). Building the business case for sales coaching
  14. Sales Management Association (2018). Research Brief: Sales Coaching Practices
  15. RAIN Group Center for Sales Research (2022). Top-Performing Sales Manager Benchmark Report
  16. Objective Management Group (2023). How Often Do Sales Managers Need to Coach Their Teams?
  17. CSO Insights (Jim Dickie, via DestinationCRM) (2017). Dynamic Sales Coaching Can Help Your Players (Sales Reps) Win, citing the 2017 World-Class Sales Practices Study
  18. Harvard Business Review / Sales Executive Council (CEB, now Gartner) (2011). The Dirty Secret of Effective Sales Coaching (Dixon and Adamson)
  19. Gartner (via Challenger) (2024). The hidden management problem that costs you millions
  20. The Bridge Group (2026). 2026 AE Models, Motions & Metrics Report
  21. The Bridge Group (2025). Sales Development Models, Metrics & Compensation: 2025 Research Report (10th edition)
  22. Gallup (2021). 8 Practical Tips for Leaders for a Better Onboarding Process
  23. CSO Insights (Miller Heiman Group, now Korn Ferry) (2018). 2018 Sales Talent Study (press release: Study Reveals Widespread Sales Talent Shortage)
  24. RAIN Group Center for Sales Research (2019). Top Sales Leadership Challenges and Priorities (press release)
  25. Brandon Hall Group (for Glassdoor) (2015). The True Cost of a Bad Hire, as cited in HiBob's State of Employee Onboarding report
  26. Salesforce (2026). State of Sales Report, 7th Edition (announcement: The Productivity Gap)
  27. Salesforce (2025). State of Sales, 7th Edition (Asia-Pacific edition PDF, p.25)
  28. Sitzmann, T. (Personnel Psychology) (2011). A Meta-Analytic Examination of the Instructional Effectiveness of Computer-Based Simulation Games, Personnel Psychology 64(2)
  29. Macnamara, Hambrick & Oswald (Psychological Science) (2014). Deliberate practice and performance in music, games, sports, education, and professions: a meta-analysis
  30. Harvard Business Review (Ericsson, Prietula & Cokely) (2007). The Making of an Expert, HBR July-August 2007
  31. Salesforce (2026). 40 Sales Statistics that Reveal How Teams Can Succeed in 2026 (citing State of Sales, 7th Edition)
  32. Gartner (2026). Gartner Survey Finds Sales Organizations That Provide AI-Enabled Next Best Actions Are 2.6x More Likely to Achieve Commercial Growth
  33. Gartner (2024). Gartner Sales Survey Reveals Sellers Who Partner With AI Are 3.7 Times More Likely to Meet Quota
  34. LinkedIn (2025). The ROI of AI: New research on how AI is transforming B2B sales
  35. Gartner (2025). Gartner Predicts by 2028 AI Agents Will Outnumber Sellers by 10x, Yet Fewer Than 40% of Sellers Will Report AI Agents Improved Productivity
  36. Harvard Business Review (2017). How to Predict Turnover on Your Sales Team
  37. Gartner (2025). Gartner Survey Reveals Less Than Half of CSOs Report Their Organization Met Several 2024 Strategic Goals
  38. Gartner (2022). Gartner Sales Survey Finds Nearly 90% of Sellers Feel Burned Out
  39. The Bridge Group (2025). SDR Metrics & Compensation Report (10th edition): SDR tenure and ramp time
  40. Salesforce (2024). State of Sales (6th edition): Sales AI statistics 2024
  41. RepVue (2025). Cloud Sales Index, Q2 2025
  42. DePaul University Center for Sales Leadership (via Performio) (2012). Sales Effectiveness Survey, as cited in 'Hiring and Retention'
  43. Johnson & Johnson MedTech (2026). Sales Training Representative (STR) and Sales Leadership Development Program job postings
  44. Medtronic (2026). Cardiac Rhythm Management: Sales Training Excellence Program (STEP) job posting
  45. Sermo (2022). How to apply medical device industry trends & insights to better meet physician needs (HCP Sentiment Survey)
  46. Bain & Company (2020). Medtech and Pharma Sales Go Virtual (US Front Line of Healthcare survey)
  47. GHX (Vendormate) (2023). Vendor Credentialing in Hospitals: A Guide for HCIRs; Credentialing Managed Service infographic
  48. Alexander Group (2025). Cross-Industry 2025 Sales Pulse Survey

Related reading

The cost side of ramp is on the rep ramp cost calculator, and the pay side on the medical device sales salary statistics page. SoloFire's LMS and certification, AI role-play and AI coaching are built for the practice and reinforcement these numbers point to, for medical device field teams.

Put the numbers to work

See what a ramped rep actually does with content

The 2026 Sales Content Engagement Report shows how buyers open, read and download what device reps send. Free PDF, no form. Or book 20 minutes and see SoloFire with your own content.