|
These days, it's very fashionable to talk about things like Net Promoter Scores, Touchpoint Marketing and Employees that Live the Brand....
After all, we're -- once again -- finding out that it's the employees of the organization that ultimately define the customer's satisfaction with our products and services.
So after spending a few years of slashing their heads off, the people are once again "our most important asset" (irony intended)....That is why, today, I'd like to explore some uncomfortable truths about these "people." Yet before you start gloating as you go along, remember there's a stinger when I upload part two next week. Each of the areas discussed will lead straight back to the marketing department, and what it should be doing to be true to the business.
A big tip of the hat to my friends at MCE, who's thinking on alignment inspired this post (to avoid confusion, the rants below are my own ;-)
Truth #1: Most people in your organization haven't got a clue what you're on about.
There is a saying that strategies are typically researched in 6 months, written in 6 weeks (by 6 people?) and communicated in 6 days. This leaves the people in the organization 6 hours to change their behavior before the next quarterly results.
The result - according to über-professors Nolan and Norton - is that only 5% of the people in any organization actually understand its strategy. So even if they have the best of intentions, it is quite probable and plausible they'll go off and do something completely different than what you had intended when writing that PowerPoint.
Truth #2: Many leaders in the organization behave against the best interest of the company.
And frankly speaking, you can't even blame them for it. Politics-free exceptions aside, building a corporate careers is 30% achieving results and 70% talking about them in the right places. If you have a kid in school, a mortgage to pay and a social status to uphold, you're not going to stick your neck out on that daring innovation which may backfire, and you're definitely going to go along when the long-term strategy gets hit by the quarterly numbers axe. This leadership behavior is, however, also seen by the troops and sends a stronger message than any corporate policy manual on the face of the planet.
Truth #3: The people in the organization are often paid to do something else than what the strategy says.
While some of us work for glory, most people's behavior is still influenced by the performance bonuses at the end of the month. Yet comparing these against your brand's objectives often gives interesting results.
This goes beyond the cliché of the sales team that is supposed to "help the customer," yet is commissioned on volume. How about the researchers who are bonused on # patents, rather than customer insights. Or call-center agents who are on the clock when talking to customers. Or - back to truth#2 - managers who get stock options tied to quarterly results. If "what you say" and "what you pay" disconnect, what are you really saying ?
Truth #4: Quite a few people in your organization are at a loss when it comes to the customer.
If you go for a walk to every part of your organization to ask them about your customers and their needs, you'd be amazed at how some of the answers differ from what's in those expensive insight and market reports you ordered. This may say something about the reportsn, yet if different people go around the organization with different pictures of the customer and his needs, all talk about consistent touchpoint experiences remains just "talk."
Next week … on this screen.
All the above can be resolved by connecting marketing ("the guys who spend money") and HR ("the guys who shuffle payslips") into a strong people management function focused on getting the brand's employees truly aligned to its strategy.
If you already have some suggestions on how this could be done … don't hesitate to hit that comments button.
Technorati tags: marketing
href="http://www.technorati.com/tag/strategy" rel=tag>strategy HR management
|
Comments
Alain,
I couldn't agree with you more. I'm eager to see next week's post because I believe (and have experienced this both in my consultancy and in my corporate life) that while alignment (in your example, marketing and HR) is the way to go, it only works if the CEO and the Executive Management Team insist on it and support it with actions. Furthermore, monthly communications regarding the annual goals and how the business is doing in reaching those goals is a must to increase strategic understanding and participation.
Posted by: Lewis Green | 08.08.06
I think this is very true, and it's also a part of a larger problem.
Marketers always talk about "authenticity," yet are disconnected with what is really happening at the ground level - where the customer interacts with the brand directly. Synching HR with marketing is only the first step in what this might mean.
In fact, I'd argue the world "authenticity" is merely an attempt to SPIN the word "honesty."
Maybe if we started using the word "honesty," we'd get ideas that could be delivered at every level of the organization.
So let's stop spinning. Let's be honest about what we have to offer, and deliver it.
Then, maybe the employees could execute off of simple truths about the business - rather than to ridiculous "brand pyramids" and "need state/value propositions."
Posted by: Dave Weaver | 08.08.06
It's simple really - isn't it (irony intended too!)
shared vision
shared values
shared goals
knowledge of individual contribution
delivery against goals
success...
oops forgot the customer-silly old me!!!
Alain - I think your point - This leadership behavior is, however, also seen by the troops and sends a stronger message than any corporate policy manual on the face of the planet. - is the most poignant.
Leaders who say one thing, mean another and demonstrate another are the single biggest cause of non delivery.
Looking forward to part 2.
Bev
Posted by: Beverley Hamilton | 08.08.06
I know this is all possible having experienced it during three years at Saturn.
Only after I left did I realize how difficult it must have been and how demanding a task it was for leaders and followers alike.
Looking forward to Part Deux!
Keep creating, Mike
Posted by: Michael Wagner | 08.08.06
I, too, applaud your point about leadership setting the example. There can never be too much repetition when trying to undertake this transition in an organization. By associating the details of everyday tasks with the overarching vision, the details, too, become the vision.
Being on the interactive side of things, I've often been tasked with (or been on a team tasked with) solving a problem with technology only to find it's really a broken internal people process or the requested improvement breaks another part of the site that the current project isn't concerned about because it's not their focus. Collaborating with various parts of the organization, who themselves rarely collaborate, continues to give me a valuable, holistic view of an organization. Even if it's by example of what not to do at times. I think this exposure to and some sense of responsibility for the entire organization breeds better 'brand care' because you find the disconnects and mixed messages faster and want to remedy them. Maybe companies need to find a way for their employees to engage in more areas of the organization including, but certainly not limited to, those who interface directly with the customer.
Posted by: Heather Dougherty | 08.08.06
One of my favorite books is "The Alchemist" by Paulo Coelho, a small book with the big idea that once you commit to a true path, the universe opens opportunities to help you succeed. (Stay with me here, I promise I'm not going off point...) Lately I've been reading, talking with colleagues, and making presentations about brand management, particularly internal branding issues. And true enough, it seems every day I come across a new source of information and inspiration on the subject. Great post and comments, thank you everyone!
Posted by: Susan Cergol | 08.09.06
thoughtful:)
Posted by: thinkingnotsinking | 08.10.06
What a great article.
You have certainly hit the nail on the head.
The problem is stopping this information also ending up in the report that get read and then ignored!
Looking forward to the next part!
Posted by: Oli Rhys | 08.10.06
It seems to make sense to create a better relationship with the customers and yet more and more businesses seem to be working in the opposite way. What would it take for business leaders to see the value of gaining customer loyalty through good customer service?
Posted by: Ellen Weber | 08.10.06