Comments on: What Does Your Face Look Like?

By: Michael Stammer

Michael Stammer — Mon, 19 Feb 2007 13:44:09 +0000

This post and comments has my head virtually spinning with the examples of appropriate and non-appropriate “faces” I’ve encountered over the years. A recent encounter was with local promoter who was trying to position his daughter as a leader in his personal and business development company – everything about her appearance undermined the image: nose piercing, toe rings, hair just a bit too “hip”, and so on. No one ever took her seriously. This contributed to the company’s eventual failure.
I am working with a company now that just hired a new front desk person for their operation. After a series of disastrous hirings I convinced them to formally assess the JOB first instead of the the candidates, i.e., what would the position tell them about what was needed to be good at it. I was not surprised by the confused input we got from various people throughout the company about what the job required. Because of this input and the ensuring frank conversations we were able to create a profile of what was really needed and rather quickly found the right person for the position.

By: Nedra Weinreich

Nedra Weinreich — Fri, 16 Feb 2007 19:01:01 +0000

Jon,
Your story about the manager with all the piercings brings me to another point that I think is relevant here, which is that employee dress codes for those who interact with customers can be very important. The company certainly would have been justified in having a policy that piercings must be taken out and tattoos covered while on the job. Employees have the right to “express themselves” on their own time, but when they are representing the company they need to dress the part.
When the employee’s appearance is something they do not necessarily have control over (e.g., race, body type, age), that should not be a cause for exclusion, but the employer should have the right to dictate the company “uniform” (excluding items worn because of religious obligation).

By: Jon Foster

Jon Foster — Fri, 16 Feb 2007 16:33:28 +0000

Very good observations here.
Employees are any company’s number one asset. If your company does not believe this,
time for you to find a new place to hang your hat.
My previous company had an engineering manager (early 30’s) who wore earrings and a pierced tongue. I had to swallow all that “diversity” crap (he is married with kids, btw…) knowing that this “manager” was interacting with our customer base. Engineers are some of the most conservative folks you could ever meet, not to mention the C-level folks he would interact with. I always thought that the company’s lack of critical success, was due in part because of the “face” he projected to our clients.
Thank you all for the affirmation

By: Daniel Monday

Daniel Monday — Thu, 15 Feb 2007 23:39:41 +0000

It’s funny, I specifically recall having an IHOP waitress in her 20s, even with some piercings, at one of the restaurants in Fayetteville, NC. Then again, it’s Fayetteville…
And regardless, the pancakes and sausage were still amazingly good. Goes to show that even the “image” of a brand can’t tarnish the underlying product if it’s as great as it should be!

By: Ann Handley

Ann Handley — Thu, 15 Feb 2007 00:33:23 +0000

I think you are on to something there, Jeff… now that I think of it, I don’t think I’ve ever had a waitress there under 50. At the same time, I’ve never had a Starbucks barista over 30, either. Coincidence? By design? Or by association?

By: Jeff Herz

Jeff Herz — Wed, 14 Feb 2007 23:19:58 +0000

Nedra,
I have to believe this is intentional move by IHOP, since the two in my area both have a similar type of waitress.
Your point of making sure who you hire actually represents your brand more than most people realize. Too often you do see the kids with the piercing and tatoos, and that is not the image they want to project, but figure they are cheaper. Too bad for them

By: Nedra Weinreich

Nedra Weinreich — Wed, 14 Feb 2007 17:08:33 +0000

You’re all right about the importance of the hiring process in finding the people who represent your brand well. For many service-related businesses, the people ARE the company.
Elaine, you make a very good point. If someone has all the right skills, attitude and personality, they should absolutely not be excluded from being hired because of how they look. But I think that often those things come in packages. A person with a certain set of attributes will probably “dress the part” and look like they fit in with a particular community. I’m definitely not advocating hiring someone based on their physical attributes.
And free pancakes? Hooray!

By: Kermitfan

Kermitfan — Wed, 14 Feb 2007 16:21:23 +0000

I always like it when I find branding in the details — like the creature comforts of the blue a-frame of the IHOP buildings but also in the “face” of the employees. There’s nothing better than a consistently good experience from beginning to end — and employees are key in making that happen, that’s for sure!
Want to experience IHOP first-hand? You may want to join them on National Pancake Day (Feb. 20th) for a free short stack. More information is available here: http://www.ihop.com/tellafriend.php

By: Elaine Fogel

Elaine Fogel — Wed, 14 Feb 2007 14:59:28 +0000

Hi, Nedra. Love your post and I agree with most of what you say. I do believe the brand is reinforced by front-line staff.
I do want to caution those, however, who, in their attempts to match the staff with the brand, hire based on age, gender, race, etc. In our zeal to have staff “look” the part, we can’t discriminate overweight, middle-aged, body-pierced individuals or people with disabilities. I’m afraid that Corporate America’s efforts to tie in the brand experience may “unofficially” eliminate many of these workers from access to good jobs.

By: Paul Barsch

Paul Barsch — Wed, 14 Feb 2007 14:15:26 +0000

Hiring the right people is probably the most critical business function related to success. Even the best hiring managers only get it right half the time.
Now, please pass the syrup would ya?