Angus great article. What you describe is putting the soul back into an organisation. Good leaders inspire us and I know that most people get satisfaction from a sense of belonging and being part of something bigger than them.
Todd I hope you are wrong about the next generation of business leaders.
I tend to believe that the 'manipulators' will get their come-uppance as customers demand a more genuine experience and expect a higher standard of ethics. They don't like being manipulated. Also the more far sighted leaders realise how important their people really are. And if you add in to the mix the need to collaborate more and more, then hopefully it will be a richer work experience for people.
As for the oldies. I found it encouraging that ASDA is purposely choosing retired people rather than wet-behind-the-ears-students for its checkouts, as they have more interest in people.
Maybe when firms get a better handle on capturing and managing their collective wisdom, they will also realise how valuable actual experience is.
Finally, if firms get better at reading the runes of customers needs, they will be less likely to miss the boat and revert to another round of cuts. Right now, I'd feel very unsure if I was working in a product centric company. Sooner or later they will miss the boat.
I agree Saul. the article on 21st century role of marketing and the CMO includes a simple blueprint for joining up the dots.
I've also witnessed the damage done when not understanding the needs of customers. This is one big reason businesses come and go and very nearly destroyed IBM back in 1992
I think that is part of the problem Graham - a piecemeal approach without the guidance of clever fellows like yourself is where mistakes are often made.
I agree Graham that what normally passes for CRM is a triumvirate of sales marketing and service, but that is a perception driven by software applications not CRM strategy.
CEM is an important aspect of the fuller integrated x&inter-enterprise CRM strategy which seeks to generate profitable growth by serving customers in every way better than competitors.
To promote a distinction might be trendy but is I think dangerous., It encourages management to have a butterfly mentality flitting from one fad to another. I suspect this is partially because people want to distance themselves from the CRM [***]-ups every pundit has banged on about in recent years. I for one think the patient is curable if management will finally get off the pot and apply itself to the task with some rigour.
Same thing happened in marketing which we will be looking at next week.
To my mind CRM has always been about growing a business profitably by getting much better at providing selected customers with what they want and need. Those who take a one-eyed view of customers i.e.'let me extract the most value from them' will ultimately destroy shareholder value as customers leave in their droves.
It's a Zen thing - if you want to get rich on the back of customers, then your first priority must be to deliver superior value = greater benefit from value propositions and the customer experience in an atmosphere of care and trust, that competitors cannot provide.
Aiming at financial targets and leaving the rest up to the 'good will' of employees and partners is bound to fail in the long run.
So CEM + Value propositions + attitudes + insight+ processes + integrated supply network+criss organisational and inter enterprise collaboration are all part of the same thing - CRM.
thanks Graham, trust you to point out something I've missed! However in principle I agree the risk element should be considered. Prof Adrian Payne gave me an example of this yesterday. In practice, though I suspect it is a bridge to far. Most firms struggle with assessing the value of an individual customer.Accountants can't do it, so it's tough, and then there is a confidence issue with the results.
As for the customer in all this, I tend to agree with Vladimir, CEM is merely a convenient label for a very important aspect of CRM - generating superior value.
To my mind the point of portfolio analysis is to identify the customers you want to add superior value to so that you can make more money.
What's wrong with that? It's business!
When I ran 2 workshops along with colleagues Robin Gleaves and Jan Kitshoff last Summer sponsored by NorthWest Development Agency,
of the 30 MDs not one had a customer strategy in place, and several wished they'd had this workshop first before spending any money on systems. One in particular had bought Goldmine the year before which wsa being used to send out mailshots to find new customers. On reflection the MD said, his goal was to improve profitability and add greater value to his existing client base. Little of the information he needed could be captured, as the system had not been set up for retention and development purposes and was not integrated into his production systems where most of his client info was maintained.
It is easy to have a pop at the customer, but often the reseller has little idea what the CRM system is supposed to support, and advice is often limited to the salesman's comfort zone = contact managment or salesforce automation.
SME's are especially vulnerable and need far greater care and advice from the software vendors, to help them buy wisely and think things through more thoroughly. Software vendors I believe, have a duty of care to customers and must make good advice more readily available - perhaps shipped with licence?
Thank you Mei Lin Fung, i'm glad I'm not too off beam!
I'm sure many of our members would be very interested in any article you and Dr Baumin Lee have written on the subject. Let's connect.
Ian, funnily enough i've had a similar thought too. It seems to me that many have tried to distance themselves (quite naturally) from the crude attempts by the software industry to make CRM = sales force automation or software.
Fortunately as Stuart Lauchlan's 'great debate' suggests, even they recognise the importance of people in the mix! I feel unusually optimistic!
Ajay, what is the potential spend of this customer? Not all customers are worth having.
Majority of firms will have some customers which are unprofitable and frankly time wasters. If this is one of those, then treat them courteously as you have been doing, but maybe increase your price to reflect the extra trouble.
If they don't like it they will sap your competitor's resources rather than your own.
Before making any decision, though, try to find out their potential worth - not just a single transaction, but lifetime value. Sometimes 'unreasonable' customers can be a great source of innovation, as they won't put up with standards that everyone esle lives with.
My answers
Angus great article. What you describe is putting the soul back into an organisation. Good leaders inspire us and I know that most people get satisfaction from a sense of belonging and being part of something bigger than them.
I hope it takes off!
Todd I hope you are wrong about the next generation of business leaders.
I tend to believe that the 'manipulators' will get their come-uppance as customers demand a more genuine experience and expect a higher standard of ethics. They don't like being manipulated. Also the more far sighted leaders realise how important their people really are. And if you add in to the mix the need to collaborate more and more, then hopefully it will be a richer work experience for people.
As for the oldies. I found it encouraging that ASDA is purposely choosing retired people rather than wet-behind-the-ears-students for its checkouts, as they have more interest in people.
Maybe when firms get a better handle on capturing and managing their collective wisdom, they will also realise how valuable actual experience is.
Finally, if firms get better at reading the runes of customers needs, they will be less likely to miss the boat and revert to another round of cuts. Right now, I'd feel very unsure if I was working in a product centric company. Sooner or later they will miss the boat.
I agree Saul. the article on 21st century role of marketing and the CMO includes a simple blueprint for joining up the dots.
I've also witnessed the damage done when not understanding the needs of customers. This is one big reason businesses come and go and very nearly destroyed IBM back in 1992
I think that is part of the problem Graham - a piecemeal approach without the guidance of clever fellows like yourself is where mistakes are often made.
I agree Graham that what normally passes for CRM is a triumvirate of sales marketing and service, but that is a perception driven by software applications not CRM strategy.
CEM is an important aspect of the fuller integrated x&inter-enterprise CRM strategy which seeks to generate profitable growth by serving customers in every way better than competitors.
To promote a distinction might be trendy but is I think dangerous., It encourages management to have a butterfly mentality flitting from one fad to another. I suspect this is partially because people want to distance themselves from the CRM [***]-ups every pundit has banged on about in recent years. I for one think the patient is curable if management will finally get off the pot and apply itself to the task with some rigour.
Same thing happened in marketing which we will be looking at next week.
To my mind CRM has always been about growing a business profitably by getting much better at providing selected customers with what they want and need. Those who take a one-eyed view of customers i.e.'let me extract the most value from them' will ultimately destroy shareholder value as customers leave in their droves.
It's a Zen thing - if you want to get rich on the back of customers, then your first priority must be to deliver superior value = greater benefit from value propositions and the customer experience in an atmosphere of care and trust, that competitors cannot provide.
Aiming at financial targets and leaving the rest up to the 'good will' of employees and partners is bound to fail in the long run.
So CEM + Value propositions + attitudes + insight+ processes + integrated supply network+criss organisational and inter enterprise collaboration are all part of the same thing - CRM.
thanks Graham, trust you to point out something I've missed! However in principle I agree the risk element should be considered. Prof Adrian Payne gave me an example of this yesterday. In practice, though I suspect it is a bridge to far. Most firms struggle with assessing the value of an individual customer.Accountants can't do it, so it's tough, and then there is a confidence issue with the results.
As for the customer in all this, I tend to agree with Vladimir, CEM is merely a convenient label for a very important aspect of CRM - generating superior value.
To my mind the point of portfolio analysis is to identify the customers you want to add superior value to so that you can make more money.
What's wrong with that? It's business!
When I ran 2 workshops along with colleagues Robin Gleaves and Jan Kitshoff last Summer sponsored by NorthWest Development Agency,
of the 30 MDs not one had a customer strategy in place, and several wished they'd had this workshop first before spending any money on systems. One in particular had bought Goldmine the year before which wsa being used to send out mailshots to find new customers. On reflection the MD said, his goal was to improve profitability and add greater value to his existing client base. Little of the information he needed could be captured, as the system had not been set up for retention and development purposes and was not integrated into his production systems where most of his client info was maintained.
It is easy to have a pop at the customer, but often the reseller has little idea what the CRM system is supposed to support, and advice is often limited to the salesman's comfort zone = contact managment or salesforce automation.
SME's are especially vulnerable and need far greater care and advice from the software vendors, to help them buy wisely and think things through more thoroughly. Software vendors I believe, have a duty of care to customers and must make good advice more readily available - perhaps shipped with licence?
Thank you Mei Lin Fung, i'm glad I'm not too off beam!
I'm sure many of our members would be very interested in any article you and Dr Baumin Lee have written on the subject. Let's connect.
Ian, funnily enough i've had a similar thought too. It seems to me that many have tried to distance themselves (quite naturally) from the crude attempts by the software industry to make CRM = sales force automation or software.
Fortunately as Stuart Lauchlan's 'great debate' suggests, even they recognise the importance of people in the mix! I feel unusually optimistic!
Ajay, what is the potential spend of this customer? Not all customers are worth having.
Majority of firms will have some customers which are unprofitable and frankly time wasters. If this is one of those, then treat them courteously as you have been doing, but maybe increase your price to reflect the extra trouble.
If they don't like it they will sap your competitor's resources rather than your own.
Before making any decision, though, try to find out their potential worth - not just a single transaction, but lifetime value. Sometimes 'unreasonable' customers can be a great source of innovation, as they won't put up with standards that everyone esle lives with.
In any event good luck!
warmest regards
Jeremy