That essential second value proposition

That essential second value proposition

At the heart of every successful business is a promise made by a business to its customers and potential customers:  Value  can be created for them by commercial engagement.

I have never done any sort of strategic or marketing program where the definition of the Customer Value Proposition is not front and centre.

Often this is expressed as an ‘Elevator Pitch’, a summarised articulation of how that value can be created, usually by highlighting a problem or circumstance that will be addressed by using the products being offered. The logic is that you have 30 seconds, no more,  to make an impression, and given that people are more interested in themselves that you, the way to get their attention is to direct that 30 seconds to telling them how you will make their lives better.

It is a really effective strategy, road tested and tuned over many years.

Why is it then  that we so often fail to do the same thing for our stakeholders, particularly our employees?

Logically, if we can articulate why we make their lives better by working there, beyond the need to put food on their table,  and a roof over the kids heads, the result will be a more motivated and engaged workforce.

The second value proposition therefore is the one we make to our employees.

In most foyers these days there is some sort of mission statement, or statement of ‘business purpose,’ values, or some such fluffy words that could apply to just about every business around.

Who does not want to work for a business that respects customers, shows integrity, and transparency in the way it deals with employees?

Would it not be better to craft a genuine second value proposition aimed at stakeholders? In most cases, it will be very similar to those used on prospective customers, the desired outcome is the same: engagement and motivation.

Therefore the best way to create an engaged employee group is to repeat your customer value proposition to them, over and over, so it is clearly understood. Then you ensure that the tools are in place to enable every employee to contribute to the propositions delivery, and most importantly, live it every day, in every decision made, and every action taken.

Cartoon credit: Hugh Mcleod at Gapingvoid.com

E.&O.E. Very thoughtful reader Craig Armour http://www.kcarmour.com.au/ pointed out the error in the last paragraph. How much better it would be to have the employees sufficiently engaged that they could repeat the CVP back to you. Absolutely right.

 

The substantial value of ignorance

The substantial value of ignorance

Being seen as an expert is sometimes a problem, as everyone expects you to have all the answers.

Nobody has all the answers, and they are usually uncovered only by the judicious  use of questions.

As an outsider to businesses I work with, I come in with some level of anticipated expertise, otherwise why would I have been  hired? It is sometimes initially a bit disconcerting for employees and other stakeholders to be quizzed by a so called expert, called in to do a commercial diagnosis. However, the analogy to a doctor doing a diagnosis usually works to turn that around.

Asking questions does two things:

  • It leads to answers that will be essential to the diagnosis, and always leads to other questions you may not have considered that uncover the deeper realities rather than the superficial perception.
  • It acknowledges the value of the specific expertise of those being questioned. Everyone likes to be seen as an expert, or at least having some specialised knowledge valuable to someone else.

Many years ago I came across what Guru Peter Drucker called his ‘5 questions’ critical to diagnosing performance.

  1. What is your mission?
  2. Who is your customer?
  3. What does your customer value?
  4. What are your results?
  5. What are your plans?

I use these 5 questions all the time as a foundation of any diagnosis I do. Not always in order,  rarely asked the same way twice, but getting at the answers is the core task of the commercial diagnostician.

It goes to another of Drucker’s pithy statements , ‘The key value of a consultant was not to have the  right answers, but to ask the right questions’

Most of those I work with are smart enough to recognise when you are on to something, and then help you figure out the right solution for them, in their circumstances.

No consultant will ever know as much about the detail of a business as those who work inside it every day. It therefore makes little sense to assume as an outsider that you do. However, what an outsider does have is a wider view of the context of the business, an unencumbered sense of what is important and what is not, the location and nature of sacred cows, unstated behaviour drivers, and the informal networks at play among every group of humans.

Being an outsider allows you to ask seemingly innocent questions that challenge the status quo, and the conventional wisdoms that exist.

These are the ones that lead to the breakthrough thinking that enables change.

 

 

 

Culture: ‘People like us do things like this’

Culture: ‘People like us do things like this’

 

So said Seth Godin in a segment of a Q&A session.

Articulating culture is really hard, my go-to definition to date has always been ‘The way we do it around here‘ from Michael Porter.

This articulation ‘People like us do things like this‘ adds to it, by widening the circle to which it applies.

If there is  not a shared set of beliefs and behavioral norms that describe how and why you do the things you do, in any organisation or institution, chances are the outcomes will be suboptimal.

I recommend you watch this, (it is only 7 minutes) and while the answer is to a question from a politician on how to win, it has far wider implications for us all.

Then think about the behaviour you want, and the means by which you can measure progress towards it to build a sustaining culture.

What is the number 1 job of the CEO?

What is the number 1 job of the CEO?

 

Most would answer  ‘Financial outcomes‘ , Share price‘ or perhaps ‘Customer satisfaction‘ to that question.

However, when you think about it, they would all be wrong.

Each of the three is an outcome, a result of other things happening, so the right answer should be directed to those things that generate the positive outcome that is being celebrated.

As a group, those things to which the CEO’s attention should be directed are all about an engaged, motivated and well led work force.

Years ago it used to  be called ‘internal marketing’, but the reality is that a term like that just scratched the surface. It is all about the leadership that creates an environment where everyone pulls together (what a terrible cliché) heading in a common direction, that are working creatively and in a focussed and determined manner towards a common purpose. In a word, ‘Culture‘.

When that climate is created, surprise, surprise, the results follow, as night follows day.

Therefore the number 1 job of the CEO should be to create that environment.

There are other extremely important items on every CEO’s agenda, but get the number 1 right, and the rest will be a lot easier. I guess in most circles the characteristic required to generate this environment would be referred to as that hard to define ‘Leadership

 

Cartoon credit: Scott Adams stares again with Dilbert 

 

 

The ‘Change Quadrant’

The ‘Change Quadrant’

‘Death and taxes are the only certainties in life’. Perhaps this used to be true, but no longer, there is now a third certainty:

Change.

Like it or not, it is happening around you right now.

Those charged with the responsibility of running enterprises, managers and Directors, have to be able to lead change, taking all stakeholders with them.

Clearly not all are capable of changing themselves, let alone leading anyone else.

It seems to me that people react to the prospect and fact of change in one of 4 differing ways.

Change avoiders.

There are those who are rooted in the past. Whatever the status quo may be,  it is not as good as it has been in the past, so they are positively motivated to ensure that you do not move further away from this past nirvana they see

Only when there is no choice. These people will not welcome change, they want nothing to be different, and will only change at the end of a pointed stick, and often then only when it is too late, the train has left the station, then they complain about missing it.

Change followers.

There are those who want to be led, they are open to change , as long as somebody else does it for them, and ensures their life is easy. Generally they are happy to tag along and take the benefits of change, and make the contributions to the change so long as they are assisted to it.

Change troublemakers.

This is what they are seen as, but these are often the ones who actually make it happen, the ones who treat the risks and challenges of change as a personal opportunity to make a mark.

Change embracers.

This group seeks change all the time as some sort of stimulant, sometimes as an antidote to everything else that is annoying them in their lives. They are often counter productive as they forget that change does need to be allowed to evolve, and bed itself down, or it fails to take hold.

 

These four groups fall neatly into a quadrant, and you do need elements of all four in a change project,  as when well managed, all have something to offer. In assembling a team to develop and implement change, a careful selection of the ‘change profile’ of all potential members should be considered in order to get the blend that best matches the sorts of outcomes you anticipate, and the nature of  the task. Knowing yourself, which group you fall into is a pretty important first step.

Cartoon credit: Hugh McLeod at gapingvoid.com 

The ethical underpinning of strategy & marketing is being eroded.

The ethical underpinning of strategy & marketing is being eroded.

 

Marketing is about adding value, finding innovative ways to solve problems.  Sometimes marketers set out to ‘solve’ problems that around the BBQ would be termed a ‘1st world’ problem.

‘Which dog manicurist’ rates in my mind as such a problem, the subject of a conversation I was unfortunately involved in at a local dog park a few weeks ago.

However, sometimes extremes are pushed.

An extreme example perhaps, but the fiasco surrounding breastfeeding at the recent World Health Organisation meeting in Geneva convened in the belief that there was a consensus informed by science to be ratified, shines a light on the ethical challenges we face.

For some, mostly our wives and mothers,  it is a highly emotional question, to breastfeed or not, substituting formula for the real thing. It seems that the 1st world is returning to breastfeeding as the developing world turns to formula, believing it is a sign of maturity, sophistication, something to which they aspire.

To me the answer to breastfeed or not is blindingly obvious.

We evolved as mammals, breastmilk evolved with us, and is therefore uniquely suited to the nurture and development of a baby. The high jacking of breastfeeding by those flogging formula for profit is to my mind an unethical, indeed immoral act of marketing strategy.

Formula is terrific for those who for one reason or another, cannot feed. Back in the day the baby would have either died, or been passed on to  someone who could, a ‘wet-nurse’ for nourishment.

The sight of the WHO being managed by those with an agenda favouring formula for profit over the natural product appals me.

Where has our moral compass been hidden?

Locally, the marketing for profit before ethics brigade have taken over in the financial services industry, insurance, urban development, and a host of other sectors, and we are all the poorer for it.

Bit by bit the fabric of our communities is being ripped apart, the evolutionary power of Dunbar’s number thrown against the wall of technology as the power to communicate and collaborate erodes what made us human in the first place.

Somewhere, somehow we have to find the tipping point, and start to recognise that all that is new is not necessarily good.