This practice-based paper looks at a common problem in pharmaceutical field management: people with the same job title can work under very different conditions. In a large city, representatives may work near many colleagues and customers. In a remote city, a small team may cover a much wider area with less day-to-day visibility. Drawing on the author's management experience with geographically dispersed pharmaceutical sales teams, the paper discusses four practices that became important in that setting: regular field presence, different spans of control for compact and dispersed territories, diagnosis of weak performance before corrective action, and a tiered incentive system in which higher target realization led to higher bonus levels. During periods of field-force responsibility, the author aimed to spend about 10-12 days each month in the field. In dispersed territories, a regional manager could supervise roughly four field employees; in major cities, the number could rise to about twelve. These figures are examples from one operating setting, not proposed universal ratios. The paper argues that sales reports are most useful when managers also understand territory conditions, employee history, customer feedback, and what is happening in the field.