Empowered : the service marketing (and even economy) manifesto

I just finished the reading of Empowered, by Josh Bernoff and Ted Schadler, that is in some ways the sequel of Groundswell which was a must read when it was published. To be honest, I have been quite deceived by Groundswell. Of course that’s a lucid, accurate and comprehensive photography of what the web is today and is still worth reading for many execs because there’s still an impressive gap between the usages of the web and how decision makers gets it. But something was missing in the conclusions : businesses must, of course, go on the web and join the groundswell, ok there are identified best practices about than? And so what ? Flirting with internauts is useless if it doesn’t create any kind of value for both the business and the customer.

That’s the new dimension brought by “empowered” : the book goes far beyond the nice discussions on the web to tackle what’s core in business :realigning the whole company with customer satisfaction. Everything starts with one assumption : facing a customer that can talk, compare, and impact the reputation of the company, there’s a need for employees able to fight with the same weapons, to join the customer on his own field. What means : use the same tools as the customer, meet him where he his and take any initiative to meet his expectations. The answer to customer’s needs will result more and for from an individual initiative from an employee, taylored and designed “on demand” that from the general and standardized corporate discours that aims at addressing anything without addressing anyone.

To do so, not only the employee has to want to engage in such a process but also the company must not prevent him from acting this way and, ideally, must provide him with the right tools and policies to achieve a good customer service. Saying that, the issue appears to be about management and IT policied that the book tackles in a pragmatic and lucid way. Some organizations that are comfortable with their good old practices from another century may not be comfortable with that but the arguments are clear and indisputable. That’s not about giving up control and let anybody do anything but facilitating things with a framework that’s secured at both the legal and IT level. Moreover, and that adds to the credibility ot the book, the authors admit that employees may be a danger to themselves and the organization and some risks have to be mitigated. That’s the first fundamental contribution of the book : for once, marketing is not considered as an isolated bubble but as a part of a global chain that involves the whole company and has to be perfectly aligned. The book is full of wise advices, best practices, examples and means to self-evaluate and compare with one’s industry leaders.

Second contribution, that is the logical consequence of the first : the concept of service. Marketing becomes service. Understand : instead of saying “look at how great my product is”, say “How can I help ?”. Of course it applies to people who are already customers to make them stay and spread the word, but it’s also an exemplary attitude towards those who may become customers in the future. In fact some companies already got it. And if I come back to my last dummy case, AirSocial would be a company that empowers its employees, not AirShy. That said, the question of knowing if service is replacing marketing or marketing has to learn service is still open.

Enough reasons to buy a book that, for onces, tackle the customer relationship issue from another standpoint than futile and lovely conversations in isolation.

That said, it makes us wonder about many things. The assumption is that there are HEROs (Highly Empowered and Ressourceful Operatives), or people who want to become HEROs, in organizations, and that they need to be supported by the management, by IT ect.. But it’s obisous than any HERO may need some help from his no-HERO colleagues, those who only want to do their job as they were told to do it, without taking initatives and risk. What to doin this case ? The non written conclusion of “Empower” is that service is not only about customers but that anyone in the company is an internal customer that needs empowered colleagues, and that, in the end, the very notion of collaboration in the workplace may be replaced by service too.

Months ago, John Chambers was talking (among other) about “Everything as a service”. Here we are, and “Empowered” indirectly lays the first brick of the concept of Service Economy. Not the way it’s been thought for decades, but the way it should be.

Get it on the “empowered” micro-site : http://www.forrester.com/empowered

Avoiding risk may be a very risky strategy

Are we we talking about changing the way people work or about the need to interact differently with partners and clients, despite an unanswerable analysis of the context and the proven existence of many tangible opportunities, many prefer  to curl up and adopt a rather conservative and defensive strategy, arguing that it’s less risky to face a know, even difficult, situation, than to explore something new.

An idea came to me when watching a sport talk show a few weeks ago. A well known coach was saying : “let’s stop saying that a team that  plays in an offensive way is taking risks : it’s only trying to create opportunities”. It’s the same in soccer, tennis, basket, poker : teams and players are always split in two categories : those who go forward and are said having risky strategies and those who curl up, play hard on defense and wait for the storm to stop, hoping to make the difference on a counterattack.

Experience shows us that both can be winning strategies.

I find the analogy with enterprises relevant. Chosing a defensive strategy means being able to take blows, having to put up with competitor’s strategy, hoping better times will come. And sometimes that works. But the comparison does not fully apply. Sometimes, the walls crack and a the player or team in question is swept away. In the sport context it’s only a lost game, and a new competition will start a few days or weeks later, and everything will restart from scratch. In the word of business, the consequences of being swept away may last a very long time,

We can draw the following conclusion : chosing a defensive strategy, refusing the fight, let competitors take the initiative in a world where the score is not regularly set to zero, when everything does not restart from scratch every new week or year does not pay. Businesses are on an endless run where they can’t say “tomorrow will be another day”, if a competitor takes any advantage and is ahead today, both businesses won’t be on the same starting line tomorrow.

The recent Nestlé Case is meaningful. Now, wait to see if Nestlé, as Dell did in a similar situation years ago, will take advantage from the situation to change its approach, its strategy and adopt a more open one. As a matter of fact I’m sure than they’ve learned that the risk was not where they thought it was.

Playing in an offensive and open way is not a risk but an opportunity after all. Having to resist and put up with what others decide is, in the other hand, a real risk.

Do organizations have anything to learn from Foursquare ?

Every year (if not every half-year) a new service becomes the main topic of conversation on the web. The buzz comes, of course, at a so early stage that’s it’s impossible to guess at this time how perenial the success will be and if the service will be able to find a sustainable business model, but this does not prevent experts to imagine it as a pillar of new usages on the intranet that will, at last, make enterprise 2.0 mainstream in the workplace.

In these early months of 2010 the pretended “next big thing” is called Foursquare and many things have already been writen here and  there about its future brilliant success in the workplace. Let me also mention Gowalla, that’s more recent but has many interesting features and Whrrl that is not “officially” working in France at this time.

So, is it one more craze or the future next big thing ?

What’s that ?

To keep it simple, let’s say these services allow you to “localize” where you are to tell your network “I’m there” or tells any of your contact going something “x… whas here and he even let a tip/recommandation about the place”. You can tell me that it may quickuly become boring and even pointless. That’s why some funny things have been added to keep the interest up.

The person with the most “check-ins” in a given place becomes the “mayor” of this place. This is an honorific title but some businesses already try to make things to pay more attention to the customer who owns the mayorship of their place. People may also win “badges” when they accomplish things like cumulating x check-ins, x airports, 3 Apple Stores….there is no limit to what can be invented to create new badges…

Everything is, of course, opt-in : one share only what he wants with whom he wants.

What benefits for users ? ?

Here things get more complicated. It stimulates a kind of funny competition within one’s network, most of all when these people do a little bit more than home-transportation-work every day. It’s always funny to go to a new place and to know that a friend of yours was theis months before and let a message about things to do, to see, specials if it’s a retaurant….

Now let’s be honnest and pragmatic. Except this funny competition side (I sometimes like these kind of pointless games), the vague feeling of being closer to other since we can know who is where, who’s around…I can’t find any tangible benefit at this time. Maybe I once appreciated a “since you are there, xxxx recommands such restaurant that’s one block away” but nothing more. Humm..I was forgetting one point : when I’m at a conference abroad it’s always useful to know who is where, attending such track in such room, is at the airport, is at such restaurant to be able to micro-organize all together without spending our time calling each other on the phone.

I’m afraid that’s all.

We used to live very well without that in the past. Let’s also admit we can say the same about mobile phone…

Let’s admit that it does not look that a business killer-app. But is there a part of this new paradigm that may bring any benefit in a business context ?

[Read more...]

Toyota : a good example of SOO that reduces business risk

First a quick summary of the Service Oriented Organization concept (SOO) : it’s about giving employees the ability (ie tools and organization model) that allows them to bridge the gap between task they have been assignedJ and thoses that are actually required by their day to day job, assuming that organization reached such an optimum in verticality that deviations, that are more and more frequents) can’t be solved verticaly but by adhoc.

A good example comes from Toyota and its integrated suppliers system. This ecosystem is so optimized that expertises, skills, are often unique. What would happen if a factory, manufacturing a piece used on every vehicle, burn ?

[Read more...]