Feb 10, 2010 | Change, Leadership, Management
Engaging a consultant usually means you have a problem that is deemed to require outside expertise.
This begs the question, “why would you engage someone who knows less about your business and its problems than you, to assist solving a problem?
The answer is simple, because the consultant knows less than you about the specifics, he/she is not constrained by the automatic assumptions that frame the way someone internal considers a problem, and is therefore able to ask questions free of the constraints of process, practice, and culture that develop in any organization. They are able to distinguish the wood from the trees because they do not wear the organization blinkers that internal people automatically assume.
Notice the emphasis on asking questions rather than giving answers?
A consultant who comes in and gives you answers should be shown the door, as he has just jumped to a conclusion on flimsy data. However, one who comes in and asks the difficult questions, ones that require a profound rethiknk of the status quo, is to be treasured. Such questions come from a breadth of experience in similar situations, and can lead to a solution that suits your organization by assisting you to come to the conclusions yourself through a process of helping you identify the impediments to the required outcome.
No consultant can know as much abnout your business as you, they just see it through different eyes, and from a less contrained perspective.
Feb 9, 2010 | Change, Management, OE, Operations, Sales
For a long time as a consultant, who has done a fair but of sales training in a B2B environment, I have fallen back on a foundation proposition made up of three parts.
When planning a sales strategy to sell a product that is not a cheap disposable commodity (like paper clips)to a customer, you can only really do three things:
- Assist the customer increase his sales
- Assist the customer reduce his costs
- Assist the customer increase the productivity of his assets.
If the product you are selling does not address at least one of these three parameters, why would someone buy from you?
Recently, undertaking an improvement exercise for a manufacturing client, it became clear the same three questions can be applied to any improvement process, not just sales.
If any activity, policy, assumption, or behavioral norm does not contribute to at least one of these three outcomes for your organization why are you still doing it? “How does that contribute to…..?” becomes a very powerful question.
Feb 7, 2010 | Branding, Management, Marketing
During the brand development process, to the extend that is it deliberate, most conversations are about the activities that supposedly drive the objective measures of success, sales, margins, market share, household penetration, and so on.
However, during qualitative research, brands take on human qualities, they are described using personal pronouns, they are young, old, male, female, a farmer, or a merchant banker, funny, quirky, reliable, and so on, but these responses are usually pushed aside, and minimised in order to give the spreadsheets some air.
Sitting in on many market and brand development conversations over the years, it is surprising how often we forget the human dimension, and the difference it makes to our activities, and priorities when we actively set out to describe the brand in human terms, and give the humanity of the brand a central place in our considerations.
Feb 2, 2010 | Leadership, Management
Engaged in a recent discussion about the nature of leadership, I fell back on the old chestnut that managers manage things, but leaders decide what to manage, which got me through until a “smartie” asked “what about entrepreneurs”?
Took a while, and a bit of filling, but it came to me that entrepreneurs recognise, leverage and manage opportunity.
Apart from being an acceptable answer on the day, when I thought about it later, I still liked it.
Jan 28, 2010 | Change, Management, OE, Operations
Scientific method calls for experimentation where you vary one variable at a time, observe the effect, making further changes only after consideration of the cause and effect relationships in the first experiment are understood.
Unfortunately, this is the opposite approach unwittingly adopted by many improvement initiatives, where there is a brainstorming session to identify “improvement opportunities” which are listed, prioritised, and implemented.
In the event of any improvement happening, we cannot tell which of the changed variables drove it, indeed, you may have good ideas in the mix whose positive impact is masked by the poor ideas and their outcomes.
One at a time takes more time, but not only offers the certainty of a positive outcome, it also educates you on the reasons why improvement has occurred, which can only benefit the ongoing process.
Jan 18, 2010 | Leadership, Management, Marketing
Customers remember the best and the worst.
When you absolutely “nail” it, they remember, and when you absolutely “stuff” it, they also remember, but guess which one they remember when you do both.
The parable of the bungled baggage, and variations of it is a story often used to illustrate the point, a small or seemingly unrelated factor can undo all the good work that goes into a customer interaction, so watch for the small things, and focus manically on what Jan Carlzon calls on the “Moments of Truth” those times when there is a direct contact between your front line of customer service, and your customer, after all, without customers, there is not much else.
