Mar 31, 2014 | Uncategorized
When you have nothing else to offer, price is what people use to make a judgement about which alternative to buy.
Yours or someone else’s alternative?
However, most people also recognise that you get what you pay for, and that what you pay for is not always just more widgets in the box. Sometimes the widgets last longer, fit better, are not the same as everyone else has, are the first seen, the box just looks better, and sometimes it is a bit of all of these, and many more factors that may influence the purchase.
Every person will have a different definition of what constitutes value in any given set of circumstances. Purchase of a box of paper clips has a different set of circumstances driving it than the purchase of a new car, but the process is the same.
Last week I watched a lady in one of those supermarket type office supplies places make a choice of a box of coloured paper clips over the standard ones, paying a substantially higher price for her choice. Same number of clips, same size and shape box, just a more colourful design on the box, and of course, the coloured clips.
Well you say, it may be just a couple of dollars, so it does not matter much, which is true, but when I chatted to her at the checkout and asked why she chose the coloured clips, she did not say they were only a dollar or two more, she said she “just liked them better”
Surely our job as marketers is to find those little things that lead our customers to say those magic words “I just like it better”, and give them what they like.
Price is so often used as an excuse for a lack of imagination that it makes me cry.
Mar 28, 2014 | Communication, Marketing, Social Media
Hunt around in Google, and there are thousands of posts out there giving you lists of things to do to have a successful blog. A few Are pretty good, but most a just lists of the blindingly obvious, hoping that the headline “Top 20 tips for success” and their ilk attract attention.
My contribution to the pile is a really simple list of three:
- Know who you are talking to well enough to, well, talk to them. It is after all just a conversation.
- Be original, relevant, interesting, and engaging, by reading widely, building on the ideas, looking for angles and unexpected applications, and offering connections to your readers.
- Do not forget rules 1 and 2.
Pretty simple, but like most seemingly simple things, there is much to distract from the simplicity that needs to be distilled out, hard choices need to be made, and focus found.
Never easy, but rewarding.
Mar 25, 2014 | Customers, Leadership, Sales, Small business
Many years ago, pre-digital, I gave time to a sales rep who rang up and promised to bring in some samples of brand new products from Europe that had changed the dynamics of the market segments they were in. I presumed that all contained the stuff he sold, but the pitch was persuasive.
The upshot was that he brought in some examples that were at best mundane, that I had seen before, were not innovative in any way, and that I was not interested in hearing about. Then I had to be rude to get rid of him and his lying pitch, but was further subjected to a stream calls, letters, offers, and promises from him and his superiors that “spoke ” to me as if I was a red hot prospect, desperate to throw myself at their shitty product.
He wasted my time, misled me, and then continued to irritate by trying to waste more of my time and presumed a relationship that did not exist, and that I would not have, and I have never forgotten the lesson.
Don’t waste peoples time!
The older I get, the more intolerant I seem to get when someone consumes that most valuable of all our resources, time, and I was pretty “bolshie” 25 years ago when this happened.
Whilst today everything moves so much faster than before, our time is if anything more valuable, but the presumption of those who want our attention seems to be that we all have plenty to share and usually waste.
One of the most effective sales people I have ever seen made appointments for 10 minutes each. He promised not to take more than the 10, and to deliver something of value while he was there, and he always did. No coffee, no chat about last nights football, straight to the point in 10 minutes or less, and any more time spent was entirely at the discretion of the appointee, he was always ready to leave, having delivered his pitch.
He valued peoples time and attention, so he got more of it.
Are you asking your people to waste not just their time, but that of those with whom they are paid to interact?
Mar 21, 2014 | Governance, Leadership, Strategy
Simon Sinek
For 35 years as a corporate manager and consultant I have been an advocate of, amongst other things, personal accountability, marketing ROI, extensive use of data in decision-making but without eliminating the wisdom of individuals who have “been there, done that”, socialising businesses with various digital platforms, turning your supply chains around so they become demand chains, and much more.
Many of the 1,100 odd StrategyAudit posts to date have as the core idea the notion of “doing” something rather than just accepting the status quo.
It is only in the last few years that I have come to realise that while the advocacy was based on good solid reasoning coming from domain experience, technical expertise, and common sense, it is not enough by itself.
I have spent lots of time articulating various cases for change considering the “WIFM” (What’s in it for me) question explaining why the proposal was in not only the best interests of the individual, but of the organisation, but fell short of connecting into the reasons the organisation exists, why it deserves the commitment of the individual. Lots about commercial survival, innovation being the only sustainable competitive advantage, the commercial and personal value of simplicity and transparency, but little, as I said, about the big “Why” question.
Now, in a homogenised, connected, and integrating world, little is more important than articulating the ‘Why” . Spend the time to watch Simon Sinek’s seminal presentation, your competitors almost certainly have.
Mar 17, 2014 | Communication, Governance, Management
Trust is a word that keeps on coming up, everywhere.
Increasingly in a complicated world we are looking for those we can trust, to do business with, to have as friends, or just to share a cup of coffee.
I have just completed a project of chain re-engineering that did not deliver all the hoped for outcomes, but during the debrief process, the word “trust” and its foundations that in this case proved to be a bit fragile, loomed large. Similarly, a friend of mine is selling her house, retiring to the south coast, and she appointed an agent from a small number in her local area, and as it happens, one of the unsuccessful bidders was also a friend of mine, someone who I would get to sell my house, when the time is right, because I trust her.
Got me thinking about the components of trust.
It seems there are four headline components, which is good for me as a consultant, as I can conjure up a quadrant and deliver it as a deep intellectual exercise. However, the reality is that it is common sense, just like most consultants quadrants, but common sense that paints a picture, that delivers a perspective, and makes you think.
- Engagement. You do not trust those with whom you have no experience, who have not earned that trust. You may think they are trustworthy, but would you confide your pin number to them?, there is a difference. Engagement of the type that generates trust happens over time, is a two way process shared equally by both parties, and is devoid of ambiguity and hidden agendas.
- Integrity. It becomes clear over time that the positive behaviour that builds trust is not just for the benefit of the chosen few, but is based on a “personal code” of some sort that extends to those not closely engaged. The individual or enterprise concerned consistently puts the interests of those with whom it interacts above its own short term interests, and it acts the same way to everybody, irrespective of their status. They “walk the talk,” always.
- Operational excellence. This sounds business-like, but is just as applicable to individuals. Summed up it simply means that they never over-promise and under-deliver, what you get is what you saw and at least what you expected, but usually is more than you could have reasonably hoped for.
- Fit for purpose. The product or service is the right one for the purpose for which it has been delivered, and there has been an effort to ensure that the purpose has been defined sufficiently by both parties to ensure that the product was the right one for the circumstances.
Back to my chain exercise. When I look at it dispassionately, the parties had insufficient opportunity and incentive to build the trust in each other that was necessary. Individually, they trusted me, as I knew them all, spent considerable time articulating the process, and have a history with several, but they did not know each other well enough to offer the real trust we were looking for.
And to my two friends who did not do business. The house seller went with an alternative that offered an up front incentive, it seemed to reduce the cost of selling. When the process is over, her house of 30 years which is the only substantial asset she owns has been sold, I suspect she will wonder if the agent delivered her a buyer that just made his life easy, a cut price, quick and easy sale that delivered him an easy commission, in return for the added costs he incurred up front, all wrapped up in the clichés of the real estate agent. Had she trusted my agent friend, it is quite possible that she would have delivered them a buyer, just the right buyer who wanted the house because of what it was, not because the price was great, the cash benefit of which would have been to dwarf the up front saving that was made.
During the research for this post I put “trust” into several dictionaries, and the options for a definition are many and varied, according to the context. No wonder we have difficulty.
