Know Your Players: How the Hunter-Farmer Sales Model Drives Growth for Distributors

Three distribution executives share how they define sales roles, manage handoffs, and align talent to maximize both customer acquisition and account growth.

By Tim O'Connor
Communications Manager and Editor

Not all revenue is created the same way — and treating it as such can slow growth. In a distribution environment where even mom-and-pops are competing on a national level, the hunter-farmer sales model can provide one framework for successfully pursuing new business while still cultivating existing relationships.

The premise is straightforward. Hunters thrive on prospecting, momentum, and the thrill of opening new doors. Farmers excel at deepening trust, expanding value, and ensuring that hard-won accounts stay and grow. Popularized as a way to balance the customer pipeline with long-term account management, the approach recognizes what sales leaders often discover through trial and error: the skills required to close a new customer often differ from those needed to retain and develop one.

In this article, three distribution executives — Dustin Bennett, president of The Kitchen Guys; Eric Schmitt, president of Rapids & Affiliates; and Dave Stafford, president and CEO of Stafford-Smith — share how they apply, adapt, and build upon this model in their own sales organizations.

Defining the Roles
For Bennett, the distinction maps closely to the traditional inside-outside sales divide. Hunter roles belong to outside salespeople pursuing new business, while farmer roles are filled by inside sales staff managing inbound requests and existing accounts. The difference, in his experience, comes down to temperament as much as job description.

“Hunter candidates are more difficult to attract as they are not looking for a lot of boundaries and rules,” Bennett said. “They are seeking the next best opportunity and are not averse to risk.”

Schmitt draws the distinction in terms of purpose. At Rapids & Affiliates, hunters identify and pursue relationships where none existed before. The role requires someone who isn’t afraid of hearing “no,” understands that credibility takes time, and is willing to consistently invest energy into outreach. Farmers, on the other hand, are charged with deepening trust and expanding value within accounts already on the books. As such, their skills are more centered on listening, curiosity, service, and accountability.

“Where hunters build the bridge, farmers strengthen and widen it over time,” Schmitt said. “Separating these roles allows us to protect pipeline creation while simultaneously maximizing client lifetime value.”

Stafford-Smith takes a different approach entirely. Rather than separating the two roles, Stafford builds his sales organization around the expectation that everyone is a hunter and remains one, even after landing a customer. Salespeople are involved with customers from the initial contact to coordinating with general contractors and following up after the job is done. At every point, Stafford-Smith trains its salespeople to remind operators they are there to help.

“We teach our account executives to maintain that hunter mindset even after establishing the customer relationship,” Stafford said of his team’s customer ownership philosophy. “You may turn into a farmer, but the hunter instincts never go away because those individuals continue calling on their franchisees or corporate contacts to identify any new needs.”

The Importance of Structure
All three executives agree that new customer acquisition is, at its core, a hunting exercise. Where they differ is where the farming aspect kicks in. A poorly executed transition can leave clients feeling passed off rather than supported, undermining the goodwill the hunter spent weeks or months building.

Bennett keeps the distinction practical: hunters land the opportunity, and farmers manage the account from there. “All customer acquisition is gained through hunting, but the retention and long-term value lie within the ability to keep the client happy.” The key, he said, is to match people with the work they do best. “Hunters cannot be bogged down with minutia,” he continued. “Farmers enjoy the process and tasks associated with their sales.”

Schmitt is more formal in his approach. At Rapids & Affiliates, a structured introduction meeting — what the company calls a FIT meeting — brings the hunter, farmer, and client together at the point of transition. The hunter frames the opportunity and the high-level issues. The farmer then steps in to go deeper on process and long-term execution. After that alignment is established, ownership shifts to the farmer, though the hunter stays involved at key checkpoints to ensure the commitments made during the initial pursuit are honored.

“The goal is simple: clear ownership, warm handoffs, shared accountability, and no surprises for the client,” Schmitt said.

At Stafford-Smith, project-based bid work adds a layer of nuance. Once a contract is awarded, a project manager takes over to “farm” the job — managing budget, timeline, and execution. But when change orders arise, that same project manager shifts back into hunting mode to protect scope and pursue additional revenue.

Because the same person embodies both the hunter and farmer role, Stafford-Smith uses extensive cross-training to ensure its salespeople can switch between both mindsets. A former Marine himself, Stafford draws inspiration from Semper Fi: Business Leadership the Marine Corps Way. The business book extols the philosophy of ensuring that every individual, regardless of rank or specialty, is proficient in the fundamentals. “It doesn’t matter what your role is, you need to have basic skills so you can serve a customer,” Stafford said. “Even if you are just handling small replacements for a chain restaurant, that’s an opportunity to use your training and find out what else they might need.”

Measuring Success
Defining success looks different for hunters and farmers, but all three executives emphasize that having measurable, real-world numbers is essential to understanding the effectiveness of the sales model.

Schmitt recommends building distinct key performance indicators for each role. Hunters should be measured on pipeline creation, qualified opportunities, and market penetration. Farmers should be evaluated on retention, account expansion, and long-term revenue stability. Without clear metrics, he said, confusion and burnout follow.

Bennett keeps his evaluation grounded in economics. “Everything comes down to numbers,” he said. “Are the people in these roles bringing in or executing the business needed to pay for themselves?”

Stafford-Smith recently formalized its measurement approach by implementing a customer relationship management (CRM) system — a shift Stafford said has delivered more insight than he expected. “It gives us better insight into our sales performance, and our leadership team can follow up with individuals and coach them, if necessary,” Stafford explained. “When people start utilizing the CRM and they see what comes out of it, they’re like ‘This is pretty cool. This actually helps me schedule and organize.’”

Moving Between Roles
One of the more nuanced questions facing any sales leader is whether hunters and farmers can cross over. Even for those who can learn the other role’s skills, managers must still weigh whether the results are worth trying to develop their salespeople in new directions.

Bennett is candid about the limits of role flexibility. After years of testing, he has concluded that the hunter-farmer divide is about more than job roles. It reflects fundamental differences in how individuals are predisposed to initiate and respond. “This thought process is a conative behavior that is ingrained in individuals and cannot be taught,” he said. “It is key to have salespeople in the correct seat, understanding their strengths and weaknesses.”

Schmitt agrees that personality is the deciding factor. Hunters must be comfortable with rejection and thrive in uncertainty. Farmers excel in trust-based environments where the relationship is already established. When a farmer is forced into heavy prospecting, they may hesitate around rejection. Conversely, when a hunter shifts exclusively to maintaining relationships, they may become ineffective. Forcing either type into the other’s role tends to produce disengagement, not development, Schmitt warns.

“Leaders can support transitions through coaching and clear expectations, but long-term success often comes from aligning natural wiring with role responsibility,” Schmitt said. “Both roles are essential and celebrating those differences strengthens the team.”

At Stafford-Smith, that strength comes from cross-training. But Stafford still acknowledges that it takes the right person to handle both the hunter and farmer mindsets. It’s for this reason the hiring phase is so important for the company. Candidates go through a structured profiling process that gauges how well their instincts align with the distributor’s womb-to-tomb ownership model. There’s still room for a new hire to receive coaching and skills development, but Stafford said it’s essential that they be open to learning new strategies.

“If a person comes to us and thinks all they have to do is sell and someone else will handle all the other customer pieces for them, they’re probably not going to fit our mold,” Stafford said.

What Else to Consider
For executives evaluating whether to adopt or refine a hunter-farmer structure, all three leaders point to the same starting place: Understand your people before you restructure your team.

Schmitt believes analytics and data are an important piece of the answer. He recommends using behavioral assessment tools — such as Culture Index or StrengthsFinder — to identify who is naturally wired for each role, then building expectations and metrics around those strengths rather than hoping a salesperson will adapt. “In our experience, it’s far easier to find strong farmers than true hunters,” he said. “Hunters require confidence, resilience, social courage, and the ability to initiate relationships in a world that’s becoming increasingly impersonal.”

Bennett’s advice is to review the business itself: Evaluate the existing book of business, define the target market, and let the organizational structure follow from those realities.

For Stafford, a successful sales team values culture and leadership by example. No model works, he said, if the people at the top are not willing to do what they are asking of their teams. “As a business owner or manager, you can’t ask somebody to do something you wouldn’t do yourself,” Stafford said. “You’re not going to win every customer, but you can win your fair share just through hard work.”

The hunter-farmer model is not a rigid prescription. As these three executives demonstrate, it can look like a clean organizational split, a flexible hybrid, or a deeply embedded cultural expectation. What unites each version is the recognition that properly aligning talent with those skills is one of the most significant impacts a sales leader can make for their organization.