Archive for the ‘commentary’ Category

CEOs of established companies often yearn for that “start-up spirit.” And why not? They imagine an infusion of innovation carrying them into new uncontested markets where they can name their own margins and growth is inevitable.

Here’s why not. Start-ups are not innovative. Think about it. Most start-ups are one-hit wonders. It goes like this: someone has an innovative idea; they start a company; then they struggle — just like big companies — to come up with another idea. The innovation almost always precedes the start-up.

It’s ironic. Entrepreneurs are trumpeted as wellsprings of innovation. But they are successful because of their unwavering, almost myopic stubbornness — a kind of tunnel vision where all they see is their one product’s success.

Some say Larry Page is taking over at Google to get back that start-up edge. He may recapture the culture, but that won’t make another AdWords.

Two lessons here: CEOs of established companies need a systematic process for innovation, and so do start-ups.

Competition is the creation of buyers. It is The Truman Show of the marketplace. The buyers are the show’s producers; your company is Jim Carey’s Truman.

Truman’s fans adore him. His producers and sponsors need him. Everything depends on Truman believing that his fabricated world is real.

It’s easy for Truman to comply because in his TV world actions seem to have real consequences. Same for sellers. Effective prospecting leads to presentations. Thoughtful presentations lead to full-scale proposal pitches. Nailing the pitch often leads to a win.

As with Truman’s daily travails, the euphoria of success and the anguish of failure effectively mask the truth: Your company’s real potential has been subordinated to someone else’s plotline — a handful of functional criteria that were written long before you and the other actors showed up.

If you’re tired of their fabricated reality, you can break out. You just have to be willing to walk off the set. Life outside the show’s construct is risky, as Truman’s self-serving producer warned. But it’s also more rewarding.

The Oprah Winfrey Network is nearing its second month anniversary. The Huffington Post reports OWN’s rapidly growing viewership has already surpassed that of the network it’s replacing.

I’m not about to guess whether OWN will be successful or not, but here is why it should be: According to Christina Norman, the network’s CEO, “It is not a network built around a person. It’s a network built around a person’s world view.”

A “world view” establishes the beliefs, the values, and the appropriate behaviors of its people. In other words, it defines their culture.

Norman is telling us that OWN is not just a network; it is a culture in and of itself. It doesn’t serve a demographic audience; it leads people who feel in some way leaderless. It’s viewers don’t simply tune in to watch; they tune in to learn what they ought to watch.

So how can you stop serving your customers and start leading them? Figure that out, and your brand will have not just loyal fans, but a long-term competitive advantage that is impossible to copy.

If you’re not doing a Voice Of The Customer (VOC) project, you should. Just be careful how you use what you learn.

Don Draper said it back in 1964, "A new idea is something they don’t know yet. So of course it’s not going to come up as an option." — Mad Men, Season 4, Episode 4

Using VOC to benchmark how well you are meeting expectations is a fine practice — for operations. However, using VOC as input for designing new products or services is the beginning of the end.

Why? In VOC, customer wants and needs are defined in terms of satisfaction with current alternatives. When customers tell you what’s good, what’s bad, or even what’s missing from your product or service, their answers are bounded by their alternatives. You can ask “blue sky” or “magic wand” questions all day long, but if it doesn’t exist, customers can’t want it.

It’s natural to want to listen to what customers ask for and give it to them. It seems predictable. And because of its origins in QFD, it’s defensible. Just don’t expect it to produce anything innovative.

Instead, recognize VOC as a potentially commoditizing force. By the time your new product or service is launched, it will look even more like your competitor’s. After all, they are listening to the voice of the customer too.

Lately I’ve noticed an overabundance of smiling, sincere, over-the-top customer service. At the bank, big box stores, utilities, government offices — organizations are starting to re-learn that a huge part of their customer experience depends on the social skills of service reps.

It’s all well and good, and I applaud their efforts, but these companies might do well to remember that transformative experiences don’t happen in a vacuum of affable customer support; Killer brands happen when people’s actions intersect in equal balance with well-honed systems, brand and products.

Consider this:

Last winter I signed up with AT&T U-verse. As an incentive to join, they offered a hefty rebate, in the form of a gift card. It’s been over seven months now, and I still haven’t received the full rebate.

• Despite numerous calls to customer service reps who are very polite and sincerely express their desire to fix my problem
• Despite an average call time of over fifteen minutes, much of it spent on hold while the service rep deals with the rebate center on my behalf
• Despite, every time, assurances that the issue’s been resolved and my card will arrive in four to six weeks
• Despite being informed AT&T might send me a follow-up survey to rate my experience (though I’ve been specifically told its purpose is to gauge how well the rep handled my call, NOT whether my issue was resolved)

It’s painfully obvious that AT&T’s rebate system isn’t giving its reps the proper access, power or authority to get this job done. And so, regardless of its intentions, AT&T appears more interested in displaying a “we’re-here-for-you” service rep ethic than actually delivering the service.

By contrast…

There’s a story about a Nordstrom shopper who, while visiting from out-of-town, realizes he’s about to be late for his plane. Recognizing the negative impact this might have on the customer’s experience, the Nordstrom sales rep personally drives him to the airport, saving the day and enhancing the customer relationship.

While this might seem over the top, it actually makes perfect business sense; the rep trades a couple hours of his time for the value of a life-time Nordstrom customer. And it’s only possible because Nordstrom’s systems actually enable the sales rep to take this action on behalf of its brand.

I’m not saying a near-commodity like AT&T has to live up to this extreme level of service. I’ll just be glad when its systems finally catch up to its customer service intentions.

PS – Feel free to tweet and retweet this post to your heart’s content. If I ever do get resolution, maybe I’ll share the rebate with you…or maybe I’ll just send you a survey to rate your experience.

We were all so excited when the Russian market opened up.  Then after a few containers of Levis and Marlboros set sail, it seems like the party was over.

The Chinese people will soon be buying a lot of stuff.  I’m just worried it won’t be American stuff.  Much of what they need they can make themselves, for less. Some would say, if we are becoming a service economy, we don’t need to make anything anymore.

I would argue, if we want play in a global economy anchored by China, we need to make something — specifically, the one thing we know how to make better than anyone in the world — brands. But not American brands. We need to make Chinese brands. Things Chinese people want to buy because they represent being Chinese.

That means understanding the needs and motivations of people unlike ourselves — which doesn’t come naturally to most Americans.  But it does to American marketers.

Felix Hoenikker, the world-famous scientist in Kurt Vonnegut’s “Cat’s Cradle,” shirks his duties as “father of the atom bomb” because of…turtles.

You see, Felix had a tank of pet turtles in his laboratory, and he just couldn’t tear himself away from them. Playing with turtles was such a big draw for his attention that the Manhattan Project staff removed them from the lab so he could focus on work.

Applying that metaphor to the real world, let’s examine some of the turtles in today’s marketing tank: Facebook, LinkedIn, Twitter, YouTube, blogging.

I’m not proposing these things are not valid work. It’s just that, in a 3.0 world, the foundations of a business relationship system lay elsewhere, and are more important than ever…

• Understanding the company value proposition  —before blogging about it
• Attending to customer service — before setting up a Twitter channel for it
• Making products truly great — before setting up FaceBook fan pages for them

It’s worth remembering that turtles can be dangerous; if you’re not careful, you might get bitten.

Now, if you’ll excuse me, I’ve got to get back to Mafia Wars…