Sep 19, 2010 | Customers, Marketing, Sales
Watching The Gruen Transfer a couple of weeks ago, one of the panelists quoted one of the oldest adages in marketing, ‘Sell the problem” as if it was a revelation. Fact is, addressing the problem is often forgotten as marketers become so entranced by the features of their products they forget to define the reason somebody would buy it.
People do not buy solutions to problems until they see the solution as costing less than managing the ongoing costs and inconvenience the problem generates, it therefore follows that the best way to sell is to develop the understanding of the relative size of the problem to which you have the solution.
This is the basis of “SPIN” selling, (Situation, Problem, Implication, Need pay-off) which is still the best sales book ever written, outlining a selling process that focuses on what a sale delivers to the buyer, and the best way to get there.
Sep 16, 2010 | Alliance management, Collaboration, Communication
Social networks have boomed, tools to enable the networks abound, MySpace, twitter, face book et al being the most well known, but many more fail than succeed, and they do so based on the degree of mutuality that exists.
Bear with me here.
Imagine 2 people who have $10 to distribute between them, one has the power to divide the money any way he likes, the other has just one thing, the right to accept or veto the deal for them both.
Rational economics would suggest that the holder of the veto would accept any deal that has him better off beyond the inconvenience of saying yes or no, say 2 cents, as both parties will be better off with a yes. However, experiments consistently demonstrate that the second person will veto any offer he sees as unfair, resulting in both parties losing, and this “fairness” point kicks in around a 70/30 split.
This implies there is a deep willingness to punish unfairness, even at personal cost, and that there is a strong emotional dimension to decision making, something very hard for economists to take account of in their models.
This emotional dimension underpinning behavior has profound implications for the way we should be thinking about the development of networks, irrespective of weather they are social, commercial or political ones.
Social networking works because there is an unspoken deal in place, which promises mutuality, Wikipedia being a shining example, there appears to be no control and there isn’t, control is exercised by the “wiki community” by virtue of their ability to remove any incorrect, irrelevant, or corruptive content, the access to the edit key which is easier to exercise than the effort required to post something, keeps things on track. Wikipedia in its earliest incarnation was a failure, as it left control with a small group of expert editors and contributors, with nothing left for the community which then failed to show up, as the “mutuality deal” was not in place.
Much of my work is with farmer groups, and the greatest challenge in the formative stages of getting a group “over the line” is the notion of mutuality, and how the group coalesces around a source of that mutuality, then finds ways to self regulate, if it is to be successful.
Sep 15, 2010 | OE, Operations, Small business
Focusing attention holistically on a whole process, end to end, and the productivity of the process will improve, improving the outcome.
When you focus just on the outcome, all you get is the opportunity to improve the efficiency of the existing process, but it will have no sustainable impact on the productivity of the process itself, and inevitably when you just focus on efficiency of one part, over time the whole process will at the very best, remain at the stable level, because as you make efficiency improvements in one spot, in another, something has gone wrong to reduce the efficiency of that point in the process.
If you want to improve, focus on the whole process, not pieces of it.
Sep 14, 2010 | Change, Management, Operations
In any environment, those on the front lines see ways to complete a task easier, faster, cheaper, better, simply because they are doing it all the time, it is just that we usually do not listen enough when the front line employees they try to tell us, and once bitten twice shy.
Labor costs are typically seen as an expense, something to be trimmed and managed, rather than as an investment that can be optimised and leveraged.
All the fancy computer programs, training, and supervision in the world will not even begin to replace the value of an engaged employee who has some control over his environment, and recognition for making it more effective.
What is it like in your factory?
Sep 13, 2010 | Collaboration, Communication, Leadership
It occurred to me that during the recent election campaign, and subsequent “Phony Government” that both sides over-used the term “Social Capital“, as well as mis-using it. Whilst it was not one of the hollow slogans of the campaign, it got a pretty fair run as each side tried to give their “policies” substance.
Social capital is created when a person contributes without any expectation of reward, it is just the right thing to do for the group, and for that sense of well being that individuals feel but do not often articulate. This giving creates a sense of mutual obligation, which is the glue that holds social groups together.
The same dynamic is at work in collaborative systems, if you put in, the sense of obligation is created, and others join the effort. Commercial collaboration has at its heart making a bob, but the social aspects of the collaboration process are ignored or under-estimated at the peril of the collaborative project.
For a number of years I have looked after the grass courts at my local tennis club. It takes some time, it is entirely voluntary, and I do it simply because I enjoy playing the game on grass, the costs of professional maintenance are way beyond the capacity of a small club to fund, and once the grass is replaced or let go to become a cow paddock, it will never come back, and few would want that to happen. In this case, perhaps the mutual bit comes in when other club members are still prepared to play with me in my tennis dotage, which is sometimes a bit closer than I would like.
