Your network is the second most valuable asset you have

Your network is the second most valuable asset you have

Jan 17, 2018 | Collaboration, Marketing

Networking in this modern age has been digitised, so it is made easier, but is it more effective?

Probably not, when most of the time the so called Networking’ is little more than an opportunity for a sales pitch.

Over my time, the most value that has evolved has come not from those I know well, but from those I know not so well, or at all, but who are in the networks of those in my networks.

When I first left corporate, one morning after another barney with the MD (never a career enhancing move) 23 years ago, the first thing I did the following morning, after processing the fact that I had a young family, with heavy commitments, and suddenly no income, was to write down the name of everyone I knew  with the intention of ringing each of them to let them know I was now looking for a job.

The really surprising fact was that the greatest level of support came from those I did not know well, but with whom I had interacted in some way. They not only offered me the support I had assumed would come from my closest connections, but they were the most valuable source of new connections. With hindsight, it is obvious, those I knew well were less likely to be able to offer valuable new connections, as I already knew them all.

The networks of your networks are of enormous value, if you treat them with respect. The weak ties they deliver are more likely to create the unexpected than those you know well.

Over the years I have discovered a few things about networking, which is the source of 100% of my activity, as it has always been  since the first consulting gig came 22 years ago. This came from a vague acquaintance to whom I had offered some insights in the course of a general conversation I did not remember,  but he did.

It is not about selling, it is about trust.

When an approach is with the objective of selling, most can smell it a mile way, and run for the hills, we hate to be sold to. Networking is about being valuable to others, which builds trust, which eventually leads to a transaction, in a tiny percentage of cases. You always need to give a bit before you can expect to get anything of value back.

Networking is highly personal.

Human beings are social animals, but having said that, we like to be social with others who are ‘like us’. There has to be some human connection before we will allow somebody new into our personal circles. This is where most of the digital platforms fall down. A ‘Like’ on Facebook is utterly meaningless, except to Facebook as a track along which to send more ads. A generic ‘let’s connect’ message on LinkedIn is much less likely to attract a positive response than one that is personalised, and the more personalised the better. After all you are more likely to trust someone who has taken the trouble to do some basic research and sent a personalised note, than a random generic connection request which you know in most  cases will be followed by a sales pitch.

Networker or connector?

Being a networker implies that it is all about you, who you know, and what you can make happen as a result. A better outcome is to be a connector, someone who ‘knows who knows,’ and in this way can add value to two other parties, which will build trust, and the likelihood that both of the connected parties will remember and return the favour, usually in spades.

Networks work as clusters.

Because we are pack animals, who tend to stick together, once we are in a cluster, we can ‘work’ the cluster, but there are always a few who have connections beyond the cluster, the ‘connectors’ referred to above.  Being the connector between these tight clusters is a position of great influence. The more diverse the connections you have access to, the greater the potential for that the one piece that completes the puzzle is likely to be in there somewhere.

And, your most valuable asset: your health of course.

18 ways to make the most of your large investment in trade shows.

18 ways to make the most of your large investment in trade shows.

Jan 9, 2018 | Customers, Management, Marketing

Years ago as GM Marketing of the Dairy Farmers Co-Op, I had a significant chunk of my marketing budgets taken by the involvement Dairy Farmers had in the Sydney Royal Easter Show, and associated conference sessions.  This was an institutional investment, beyond the control of my marketing programs, as a Co-Op, the board was committed to it beyond any debate.  After a couple of years of whingeing, I took it on as a challenge to generate a return from the investment, that I would rather not have made.

In more recent years, I have attended many industry conferences, organised a few, and spoken at several, so have had plenty of opportunity to see what works and what does not.

Following are some of the lessons, the things you should have sorted out before you make the significant commitment to exhibit.

 

Have a clear objective.

Build brand awareness, find new distributors, generate leads, position yourself as the industry expert, whatever it is, without an objective you may as well save your money. Your objective will drive the manner in which the investment is made, the size, type and the way you manage it.

Be strategically consistent.

Ensure the show activities and presence at the show itself is aligned with the rest of your marketing activities and programs. Doing a one-off industry show because everyone else seems to be doing it is a basic error to make. It is almost always harder to say ‘no’ than to just go along with the crowd.

Market your presence in the show.

Use the investment in the show as a reason to contact all your networks, inviting them to the stand, to the functions you have organised, or to the sessions of the conference that you think may be of interest and value to them. Trade shows are really just very expensive and expansive networking opportunities, so the greater the awareness amongst current and potential customers that you will be there, available ready to talk, and even ‘do a deal’ the better.

Follow up, follow up, follow up.

Persistence pays off, although you do need to have a ‘tyre-kicker’ identifier in place, as you can spend a lot of time following up people with little real intent of a commercial relationship and transaction. Similarly, following up your competitors neighbour, or committed customer is just a waste of your resources. However, this is no different to the normal situation,  every business needs some sort of lead scoring system. It is just that at a trade show, the numbers can become overwhelming very quickly, and it is easy to lose focus and waste resources.

Automate the contact collection process.

Most conferences these days have entrance tags that enable direct input of a visitors details in your CRM/lead management systems. Use them, it makes little sense having people copying out business cards after the day has finished, or getting visitors to fill in a form. Simple automation improves productivity enormously, freeing you up to engage with visitors without interruption.  Trade shows are great opportunities to build your contact data base, and as the old saying goes,’the money is in the list’.

Relationships are crucial.

Trade shows are wonderful opportunities to strengthen existing relationships and forge new ones. It is a huge networking opportunity, all those interested people coming to you, rather than you having to trawl through LinkedIn one by one, spend advertising funds. The opportunity to forge relationships with a wider group than you would normally interact with, particularly with businesses with complementary services to yours can be gold.

Learn about the innovations in your and complementary areas.

Exhibitors typically show off their latest and greatest, so it is a great opportunity to see what is evolving in areas that may impact you, and that you might be able to pass on to your customers, building on your position as a trusted advisor, rather than just a supplier.

Learn about the problems current & potential customers have.

It is casual, ‘non-salesy’ conversations that often uncover the problems that are the sources of value you can add,  and opportunities to be followed up. Have as many of these conversations as possible, always seeking to understand the problems others have, rather than flogging the features of whatever it is you sell.

Ensure the elevator pitch is clear, and delivered by all in the same way.

Having a clear, well tested elevator pitch is crucial at all times, but never more important than at a trade show, when it  will need to be delivered many times, and by different people manning your stand. Not only do you want to grab the attention of those to whom you can add value, and the elevator pitch is a terrific filtering device, you want those who hear it to remember the salient points so they can relate it to others in their networks. Trade shows are meeting places, and nobody attends without meeting up with someone they have not seen for a while, ex colleagues, customers, old friends, and having them able to recite your pitch acts as a strong referral.

In addition, ensure that your elevator pitch is reflected in the exhibitor listings, so the scanner who may be your ideal customer can see clearly the value you deliver. Flick though any exhibitor listing, and you remain in the dark about what half of them actually do, and very few make the listing sufficiently compelling so  that you file it away as a ‘must visit’ stand.

Collateral material.

Ensure the collateral material, be it analogue or digital is in order, and created thoughtfully, and differentiates you from your competition, rather than putting some generic stuff together as a last minute rush.

Provide a next step for everyone who engages towards a relationship.

Successful B2B selling is a process, rarely a once-off interaction. It makes sense therefore to be very clear about the next step towards a transaction that may arise during the show, from more detailed information available on the stand, to follow up visits, availability of engineering resources, referrals to existing customers who will support your claims, and many others.

Make your stand compelling.

It does not have to be the biggest, or most lavish,  but it has to stand out, and particularly be attractive to  your ideal customers. Having a clear definition of your value proposition and ideal customer profile, then spending a few dollars on designing the stand to be particularly attractive to that group will pay big dividends.

Leverage your relationships

Sharing your relationships with other exhibitors, is a powerful strategy to position yourself as an expert. Take opportunities to speak at the conference sessions, which further positions you as an expert, and make sure you do a lot of preparation to make the presentation a good one

Keep metrics of follow up and conversion success.

Understanding the dynamics of your conversion funnel is vital at all times, but never more than when you are following up a large number of potential leads generated in a short time, where the opportunity to waste time on tyre-kickers is geometrically increased. A significant change in your numbers may be an indication that your lead scoring systems are in need of review.

Measure the ROI of the show,

Apply the measures over a long period to allow sales conversion and retention to be a part of the equation. Sales is a process, and depending on your product, can have long gestation periods, so ensure to accommodate the average gestation in your calculations.

Plan everything,

Leaving organisation of the detail to the last moment will not work. Spend time up front planning, not just your presence, but who else is going, decide who you want to connect with.  Too many times I have seen last minute printing errors, poor editing leaving spelling and contact detail errors, wasteful premiums, redundant material, and obvious absences from stands, just because nobody thought it important enough to do the detailed planning, and allocate responsibility to get the job done in plenty of time. Sensible planning also increases the productivity of your investment, as last minute rush jobs always cost more, and are never as good as when real consideration is applied. Be prudent, but be prepared to spend that bit extra to leverage the investment already made.

Be early for everything.

Often that is when the best casual conversations happen, when there is few pressures of time and other people.

Have a senior management presence.

Often I have seen stands at trade shows manned by bored sales people who would rather be elsewhere, or casual staff who know very little, and have no authority to do anything. Success comes from commitment, and the presence of senior management is a sign of commitment, to everyone. Besides, most bosses spend way too much time closeted in their offices and meetings, when they need to get ‘out of the building’ and talk to real people, those who do not see things as they do, and who have no institutional pressure to agree.

The costs of trade shows are significant, not just the stand, and material, but in the costs of planning, manning, travel and accommodation, and following up. The investment can be easily wasted, or alternatively, it can just as easily be turned into a marketing goldmine with a little thought and planning.

Photo credit: Joe Flood via Flikr

7 Mental models for business planning

7 Mental models for business planning

Dec 18, 2017 | Governance, Leadership, Management, Strategy

Business planning, when you think about it is a  bit of an oxymoron.

The only thing you know for sure about your plan is that it will be wrong.

George Patton said ‘Without a plan, you are just a tourist’ and even that great social philosopher Mike Tyson weighed in with ‘everybody has a plan until they get hit in the face’.

However we persist in writing what is usually a document full of crap that is not looked at again, until next year.

Here I am going to offer you an alternative to the formatted, templated, disciplined plan, so beloved of accountants, banks, and education institutions. I am going to suggest you use ‘Mental Models’ to ask the right questions, gather information, generate insights, create strategies that are meaningful, implementable and measurable.

Albert Einstein used mental models to develop his theories of relativity and quantum physics.

If employing mental models is good enough for Albert to articulate a picture of uncertainty, ambiguity, and then hypothesise about its hidden drivers, it should  be good enough for us.

Mental Models are frameworks that can be used to simplify problems, to ensure that the right questions have been asked, and the explanations that evolve from those questions hold when subjected to detailed scrutiny and testing.

Mental models frame things.

As a kid I loved cricket. I would walk to school early, and play for a couple of hours before ‘the bell’. As I came up to the oval attached to the school, when someone was batting, I could see the stroke, then a second or two later, hear the bat hit the ball. Clearly there was something at work here I did not understand. Dad explained it by telling me that sound travelled at 740 mph, while light, which enabled me to see the stroke travelled at 186,000 miles per second. This meant the sight was instantaneous, the sound was not.

Hearing the bat hit the ball a second or so after seeing it hit the ball created a mental model that made the understanding of the effect of the differing speeds of light and sound absolutely clear. Had I been a mathematical kid, I could have measured the speed of sound by measuring how far I was from the batting crease, divided by the time it took for the sound to reach me. This is exactly what Albert did to come up with E=MC2, although a little more complicated.

Einstein used simple mental models to come up with his theories of relativity, then worked his way through the maths to test and ultimately validate the theories mathematically. It is only now that some of the stuff he hypothesised about is becoming confirmed, as the measurement of the effects he hypothesised are becoming available.

The origins of the business plan was to attract funds. If someone was going to lend you money it is reasonable that you told them where you would be spending it, what the risks were, and the means by which you were going to repay the debt.

Banks, which are usually the first port of call when seeking funding are not particularly interested in your success, they are interested in the asset backing you have, so that when you go broke, they can sell up and get their money back. They would prefer you did not go broke, just because that complicates their lives, but they ensure they are covered if you do.

Banks are not your friends, they sell a commodity: money, and like any sales organisation, will sell as much of it as they can within their risk parameters and any regulatory restrictions, by solving your cash shortage for you.

Therefore the standard P&L, and balance sheet projections, with a few discounted cash flow scenarios were enough. All accounting and management education was oriented towards this model, so it became widely used and abused, but if you are going into a serious business planning exercise for your business, in this homogenising and increasingly volatile world, it should not be enough for you.

Do  not think about business planning as a linear incremental process, with a known set of tasks to be done, which is what all  the templates assume. Rather, it should be the application of a series of mental models to the circumstances of the business, each looking at the business from a different perspective.

It is like looking at a display in a museum. Looking from the front only, you get one view, but go behind, under, above, and you can get a 3D view of the display. Often very different, and ensures that you capture the whole picture of the business.

To continue the museum exhibit metaphor, is the exhibit in a room of its own, is it in a quiet corner with other pieces of no distinct value, or is it in a room full of similar and complementary exhibits. Each will influence the way in which you see the exhibit.

Out of interest, I googled ‘Business plan template’ and got 9.4  million responses in .45 seconds.

Must be important????

Problem is when you look at  them, they are all pretty much the same. The words change, the graphics change, but they are essentially a fill in the form and bingo, a business plan.

Might be OK for a bank, but as a document that determines the allocation of your scarce resources to achieve an outcome, it is next to useless.

A template is the easy way.

The hard way is really hard, but is worth the effort,

However, you must have the right ingredients, or the cake will not work.

It is all about the questions you ask, and what you do with the resulting information, intelligence, and instinct.

So, take Alberts advice, which is also the advice of Charlie Munger,  Warren Buffets offsider who knows a thing or two about being successful, and who uses Mental Models extensively.

Following are some of the more common ‘Mental Models’ to apply.

Each has its strengths, but none is the silver bullet that those who write books about them claim them to be.

The trick is to be familiar with them so you can run through the models and pick the ones that apply to any given situation.

 

Most are familiar with SWOT.

We spend time dreaming up items, then filling in boxes, rarely with any useful numbers, rarely anything new, and everything is equally weighted.

Most times, there is as much debate about whether something is a strength or an opportunity, a weakness or a threat, as there is about the strategic impact of the item itself. Many do not recognise the distinction of strengths and weaknesses as being internal to the business and opportunities and threats as being external, and that they are all relative. For example, a strength is really only a strength when it has two distinguishing features: It is something that you do that your competitors cannot do, or chooses not to do, and that it is of value to customers.

SWOT has limitations in fast moving and technically evolving industries, and typically, there is insufficient time given to the consideration of the options that may emerge that offer some degree of differentiation.

In its generic form, a SWOT also fails to weight the factors it identifies, so I do that as well in a different table.

Because SWOT is well known, it often gets a run in the projects I do, almost always in parallel with another that better explains the problems, and offers another perspective. It is a good start to the process because it acts as a catalyst for the more difficult questions, and identification of the cause and effect chains, and eventually to the use of other models that drive a deeper analysis.

.

Many will be familiar with the 5 forces that shape industry competition first articulated by Michael Porter 30 years ago, and still is a great way to examine the nature of the industry in which you compete.

Bargaining power of suppliers

Bargaining power of buyers

Threat of new entrants

Threat of substitution

The sum of these forces adds up to the state of current competition in any market.

A thorough examination of the forces really surfaces most if not all of  the issues that have to be faced.

When you think hard about it, everything can be broken into one or a mix of the forces.

As with SWOT, it suffers a bit in a fast evolving environment, as the searching questions about the future are often missed, but it is extremely useful.

For example, if you are a supplier to supermarkets, this is a great tool to use, as it captures the drivers of the competitive environment, but if you have an idea for a new piece of software, the outcomes of the analysis will be a little less certain because of the more ambiguous competitive environment.

 

Roger Martin is an academic and widely experienced commercial consultant, who wrote a book a short time ago called ‘Playing to win’ with AG Lafley, who was the CEO of Procter and Gamble.

This sequential process he outlines is a very good framework indeed, forcing difficult choices to be made at each stage before moving on, while encouraging necessary adjustments via the feedback loops.

One of the factors I really like about this model is that it creates a flow, from the macro to the micro, and forces you to make choices all the way. One of the key factors I look for when doing a StrategyAudit for a client is the manner and degree of ‘flow’ that exists in the business.

It is the flow of information, flow of product through a production process, and flow of the planning execution and revision of activities that take place.

 

The Balanced Scorecard goes back to the mid 90’s, and offers an integrated set of ‘perspectives’ through which to observe, measure and plan the business.

You agree the vision and strategy, then determine the measures of that strategy against the 4 perspectives, and map the interrelationships.

Balanced scorecard analysis can become very complex, particularly as you set out to  cascade it through an organisation.

However, It makes absolute sense to look at, and measure the strategies agreed upon from the perspectives of those perspectives impacted by choices made.

The financial performance of the business.

The customers perspective of how the business meets their needs, now and into the future.

The necessary business processes required to deliver value over the long term as well as immediately.

How the business will learn and grow.

It is still widely used, mostly by large organisations with centralised strategic planning functions.

 

A business plan on one page.

Halleluiah.

This methodology evolved quite recently out of the ‘Lean Start-up’ movement, first articulated in a book called, surprisingly, ‘Business Model Canvas’. The thinking underpinning this tool is still evolving, and it is still oriented towards tech start-ups, but I really like it for any business as a way to quickly ensure the right questions are being asked, and is to my mind a must use model.

It is designed to be iterative, and its strength is that it is both iterative, and stackable, in that where there are two major customer groups, or product groups in a business you can do two, or even more canvases, and they will all be stackable.

It forces choices to be made, and is iterative in that as you progress, and learn more, you often need to go back and review and balance the choices made earlier.

Generally I do this in a rough order.

  • Problem to be solved
  • Customer segments
  • Value proposition
  • Revenue streams
  • Key activities
  • Cost structures
  • Channels
  • key resources

 

There are many others:

  • Ansoff matrix,
  • BCG matrix, dogs, stars, that most of us are aware of.
  • Options games
  • Blue ocean strategy
  • Scenario planning
  • Jobs to be done
  • A3

The real point is that there are many ways to plan, but there is no easy way, no silver bullet, and you must get amongst it or fail.

The old cliché: failing to plan is planning to fail is unfortunately correct.

There is no school for fortune telling, unless you join the circus. All these purport to be able to at least remove some of the uncertainty of dealing with the future, but they are all tools, and the value of a tool rests with the skill of whoever is wielding them.

To my mind, using a bunch of them, each with slightly different perspectives offers the best opportunity to remove more of the uncertainty.

However, if I go back to Albert, E=MC2 does predict that time travel is possible.

Much of what he projected is coming true, a bit like Arthur C Clarke, Jules Verne, and others. Perhaps this is Alberts time to become a strategy guru?

 

I think it is only right to finish where I started, with Albert.

His theories of relativity, that famous formula we all know, but have no idea what it means, explains the workings of the universe. Perhaps it can also give us an insight into the value we can add to an enterprise, which is after all, what we are setting out to do by planning.

In my view, the internet has changed everything about the business models that will be successful in the future. Therefore we have to find a way to recognise the power of digital access and the compounding that is possible by leveraging networks in our planning processes and mental models.

I like e=mc2 because it explicitly compounds the value of networks.

E is the enterprise value, not the stock market valuation, which is only a financial calculation, but the value that is created by the enterprise, which has many forms. Value can be time, services, transparency, design, everyone sees value as being different, and is subject to the context in  which it is seen. Apple is the most valuable company on the planet, which has absolutely nothing to do with the fact that they outsource the manufacture and assembly of what has become generic electronic gizmos. The value of Apple is elsewhere than the functionality of the devices.

M is the mass of the enterprise.  This is the sum of the physical assets and processes of the business, the stuff that enables the work to be done.

C is the Capital of the enterprise.  It includes financial capital, but the greater part is in the capital contributed  by  the people who populate the place, and this comes in many forms, Intellectual capital, what is between peoples ears, and the relational capital they bring, and the cultural capital, the way in which there is collaboration and alignment of activity towards the creation of value by the enterprise. This is squared, simply because of the geometric nature of relationships, and the network effect, the more you have, the greater the sum of the value that can be created

 

What is the most common question in marketing?

What is the most common question in marketing?

Nov 27, 2017 | Branding, Strategy

How do we build  this brand?

This question leads to all sorts of strategies and tactics that are all aimed at engaging consumers in some way, to get them to prefer the brand and sometimes even buy  and recommend to their friends.

Marketers cannot decide what the term ‘brand’ means. I just googled ‘What is a brand’ and got 290 million responses.  This post by Heidi Cohen lists 30 definitions from very reputable sources, several of them with ‘gurus’ status. All are correct,(at least in my mind) in some way, but they are all different.  None of them reflect the reality that a brand is an outcome in peoples minds, not a thing. Fundamental to most of this thinking is that It is assumed that the word ‘Brand’ is a verb: To brand.

Wrong.

A brand is an outcome of a huge range of activities that impact, usually unnoticed by consumers and potential consumers, that together mix up and deliver an outcome for the individual that when all amalgamated result in what we conveniently call a ‘brand’.

If you are setting out to build a brand, have a clear view of the outcome  you want, but then align the activities so they all contribute in some  small way, incrementally, to the achievement, to the  journey towards what a customer will call a brand.

These observations by marketing professor Mark Ritson on the repositioning of Burberry is exactly on the money.  The new branding guru assumes that the Burberry brand is a thing, and asset albeit intangible that is separate to everything around it, and able to be ‘managed’ as you would a piece of machinery.

Wrong again.

Burberry like every other brand is an outcome of a host of activities that impact on the way customers, and non-customers see the brand, and describe it in the terms Clayton Christianson refers to it in the context of  the Job to be done.

Brand building is a strategic exercise, taking resources, wisdom, and the power to make long term decisions that stick. It is not a task to be undertaken by the junior brand manager, their job is to execute tactically and contribute data, ideas, and competitive intelligence, not play games with the biggest asset most companies own.

Harley Davidson is one of the best known, most deeply seated brands around. While there have been some hiccups along the way, Harley has been utterly consistent in its promise to riders since the beginning. The promise and its delivery continues to evolve, but in a way that recognises that its huge value is the primary asset of the business.

 

8 drivers of empathy that deliver sales success.

8 drivers of empathy that deliver sales success.

Nov 15, 2017 | Change, Sales

Selling is not for everyone, it is a hard gig that requires that you are able to understand and deal with rejection. All the most successful sales people recognise that the process is not about them, but is all about the prospect.

Even the most likely prospect who will buy, may not be ready to buy right now, so timing and follow up are key components of success. However, the best indicator of success at sales has always been the ability to build empathy, and employ subtle persuasion, by whatever means you can, on top of a solid sales foundation. When the planets align, empathy can lead to engagement that sometimes leads to the transaction.

Having the ability to put yourself in the shoes of your prospect and see things through their eyes is the route to empathy.  It is a skill not many have naturally, but can be learnt.

When you are the prospect, the subject of someone else’s efforts to herd you towards that sales transaction, consider the things you might expect from the sales hopeful:

  • They treat your time with great respect
  • They recognise that the risks of change outweigh the maintenance of the status quo by a large amount therefore there must be some compelling reason to make a switch.
  • They assume that your expertise is valuable, and that you have no obligation to answer question after question aimed at understanding your business. They do their homework before bothering you.
  • They understand that there is a buying process in place in your organisation, and that it will be followed in almost all circumstances.
  • They understand that the purchase decision for anything new, or that requires change will go through a number of tests and barriers. It is their job to supply you with all the information and arguments you might need in their absence, to carry the decision internally. Obtaining buy in from others in the organisation for a change, is a challenging task, and even if you are well on board with the change, you will probably need their help to bring others in the organisation, sometimes more removed from the consequences of the decision, and sometimes directly impacted, to the same conclusion.
  • They understand that your actions will be driven by your best interests, in all its forms, not theirs
  • They understand your purchase patterns, as well as the process, and do not set out to disrupt them, rather work with them, which usually means the process takes longer than they would like on the odd occasion you decide to make the change.
  • They understand that the incumbent supplier is unlikely to just stand around and let their business be taken by an alternative supplier, so they are ready for the debate.

 

If they did all these things, would you be persuaded?

When you need help with any of this stuff, let me know.

Illustration credit; shchambers.com