Posts filed under 'Uncategorized'
I’d like to thank you for making 2009 a successful and productive year for Revenue IQ. As the weekly blog for facility service contractors, it’s the only sales posting (I know of) that’s not for beginners. You, dear reader, are interested in post graduate education in sales and marketing.
And with those flattering words, here are the best posts of this year. These are the “best” because:
a) They received the most page visits as tracked by Google Analytics
b) They generated the most reader feedback (via email, hoping to get you to comment online in 2010)
c) I felt they were the best out of what I’d written
The Best of Revenue IQ in 2009
These are grouped for easy navigation but aren’t in any ranked order. Enjoy, and please let me know of any topics you’d like explored in 2010.
Selling, Proposals & Presentations
Customers & Buying
Marketing
Happy Holidays and a healthy and prosperous 2010
~~~~~~~~~~~
Chris Arlen
President, Revenue-IQ
December 22nd, 2009
The Green movement is no longer new. Almost everyone has heard about it, yet not everyone would be considered green. Knowing and doing are quite separate matters.
I wrote the following article, published in Ecozome, August 2007, about the rate at which we become green. Some of us are there, others en-route, and some not even started. Read on.
What’s preventing everyone from buying only environmentally-friendly products, recycling, and driving hybrids? What stops us from using the green choices already available? Simple answer: human nature.
We are inundated with information and make more decisions in one day than our parents made in a month. We know we should do things differently. However, quantitatively speaking, most of us haven’t, or aren’t, doing as much as we can.
In becoming greener, society faces two challenges. First, there are hundreds if not thousands of ways to be green. The volume of options can inhibit taking action on a few. “Which ones are important?”, “Which ones should be sacrificed for?” Secondly, green options are voluntary. With few enforceable laws, green is still a choice and until public consensus reaches a tipping point, political mechanisms will remain slow to make green mandatory.
To better understand these challenges, we can take a lesson from the Technology Adoption Lifecycle which illustrates how society adopts new innovations.
First developed in 1957 at Iowa State College, the Technology Adoption Lifecycle was later expanded by Everett Rogers in his 1962 book Diffusion of Innovations. This research showed that innovations embed themselves into society over time, via specific groups: innovators who introduce the idea; early adopters who first embrace the idea; early and late majority who represent the mass commitment to an idea; and laggards, who are the last to adopt.
Altering the Technology Adoption Lifecycle into a Green Adoption Lifecycle can provide insight into the greening of society.
In the Green Adoption Lifecycle, Innovators make up 2.5% of society today. Innovators have been green for a long time and are wholly active right now. They strive to make as little impact on the planet as possible. They don’t care about raised eyebrows as they grow their own food or make their own clothes. They’ve been riding bicycles and using public transit forever. They’ve been the necessary forerunners for the next category: the early adopters.
Early adopters make up 13.5% of our population. If you’re reading this, you might be an early adopter. You may already drive a hybrid. You definitely recycle something: glass, plastic, aluminum, paper, etc. You’ve been thinking about replacing all your light bulbs with compact fluorescent lights for greater energy efficiency—or already have. You’re most likely a popular, educated leader at work or in your community. As an early adopter, you’re the beacon the early majority category looks to for leadership.
The early majority and the late majority make up 34%, respectively. Early majority is the green movement’s tipping point in terms of adoption. They’re a large number who can make an immediate difference. They’re informal leaders at work and in their community and want to be held in high regard by their friends and neighbors. They care deeply about what others think about them. Although they’ve been aware of environmental issues, they want to be sure the green activities they choose will work. They’re not about to risk their reputations by doing anything ineffectual. The second year General Motors produces an affordable, hydrogen-powered pickup truck; the early majority will buy it.
The late majority will take some time to go green, and only after enough of the early majority has worked out the kinks in the green learning curve. The late majority represents another large population, but they’re risk averse and skeptical of change. They’ll wait for a simplistic, unified green program certified by the EPA and stamped with the Good Housekeeping Seal of Approval before they’ll change their behaviors.
Laggards, the last 16%, will wait until green is no longer voluntary. They’ll hold out until incandescent light bulbs are no longer available or garbage services refuse to pick up trash that hasn’t recycled glass. Even then, a number will have to be fined or arrested for non-compliance before finally adopting green choices.
A Green Adoption Lifecycle can help align green expectations with human nature. By recognizing our differences in how we accept change, we can make those changes come about.
How fast are you greening?
~~~~~~
Chris Arlen
President, Service Performance
Technorati: green, ecozome, innovators, early adopters, early majority, late majority, laggards
December 4th, 2008
A client of mine recently signed up for Salesforce.com. Actually, a number of clients are using it already, or are considering it.
Salesforce.com is a Customer Relationship Management (CRM) solution. It calls itself a Saas (Software as a service, typically pronounced ’sass’).
However, software is not a service.
Signing up for it doesn’t make anything happen.
Until the user uses it. And that means users have to first know what they’re supposed to be doing. The business process part of it. The part that enables one human to interact with another. Whether it’s a salesperson with a prospect, or a support tech with a customer.
And that’s what got me thinking.
After 21 years of working with facility services, it’s abundantly clear that software isn’t a service. It’s a tool. A powerful one, but just a tool all the same. It lacks the liveliness of engagement.
Why does it matter that Software isn’t a Service?
Calling software a service determines how a company thinks about services in general. And that influences how services are purchased or managed.
And if you’re an outsourced service provider, that can be a huge problem.
Your customer’s expectations may default to those of software, which may include some variation of:
- Utilizing its full capabilities – how many service employees would be considered Power-users in delivery?
- 99.99999997% quality – an unrealistic expectation for services
- Robotic levels of consistency – wishful thinking from a human delivery system
- Absolutely 100% defect free – which is possible in a perfect world, but not ours
When customers have service expectations associated with software, trouble is close at hand.
The Nature of Service is….
#1 Intangible
You can’t see it when it’s delivered. It’s just there.
#2 Heterogeneous
It varies each time it’s delivered. It physically can’t be deliverd exactly the same way from one instance to the next. Time itself makes that impossible. Aren’t you a second older now than you were a second ago?
#3 Produced in front of the customer
It’s not a product that’s manufactured in a plant, QC’d to perfection, and then shipped to the customer. It all happens right there, in front of them. Customers get to see service production 1,000s of times a day.
Service can be defined as…
An interaction between humans for the exchange of value. It’s the interaction that counts, as far as services are concerned.
Software tools help manage information, improve communication connections, and create informational objects. Great uses of tools.
But customers seek the human connection. That’s the service part. Even if going through email or Live Chat.
Think email and Live Chat make a case for software as a service? As an online support service?
Think again. They’re tools that can be part of a support service, but are tools only. By themselves they don’t accomplish anything.
But when support techs respond, then service takes place. And that’s the valued interaction – cool tools or not.
Calling Saas as I see ‘em
If service providers believe Saas and strive to make their services more like software, they’re doomed to fail.
And they’re missing out on the truly valued customer opportunity that services present: that of making a connection between one human to another.
That’s the part technology can never replace, even as software becomes more sophisticated and intelligent.
Recognize what service truly is and rejoice in it. And make that your competitive advantage. You’re human after all, and that’s really what other humans want to connect with.
How do you think about services?
~~~~~~
Chris Arlen
President, Service Performance
Technorati: CRM, Saas, Salesforce.com, Software as a service
November 11th, 2008
Our recent monthly Revenue-IQ article, Time to Change the RFP Game?, struck home with a number of service contractors and customers.
Both sides of service contracts recognized the Request for Proposal (RFP) process is broken. It brings pain, frustration, and lesser value – for customers and contractors.
Contractors definitely felt RFP pain. One contractor mentioned they’d just participated in an online auction and wouldn’t be repeating that train wreck again.
Another contractor noted the additional work customers would have to take on in a Scenario-based RFP and he wasn’t sure they would.
It’s clear a better RFP process is welcomed. The comments above (and more noodling) have prompted today’s post. Here are a few more points about Scenario-based RFPs to consider:
- RFIs (Request for Information) Are More Than An Exercise
- Evaluating Contractors’ Proposed Solutions
- Where’s Pricing in Scenario-based RFPs?
- Piloting a Scenario-based RFP
RFIs Are More Than An Exercise
The RFI becomes a required part of Scenario-based RFPs. RFIs weed out unqualified contractors, and end up with a short-list of approved ones. This makes it much easier for customers to select the best value from qualified contractors.
The effort customers will put into RFIs will be made up from easier and more effective Scenario-based RFPs.
Evaluating Contractors’ Proposed Solutions
RFP evaluations would change. The focus would shift to selecting the best value.
Customers wouldn’t have to determine if the contractors were qualified to deliver the solution. Only contractors who’ve been RFI approved are allowed to propose solutions.
Scenario-based RFPS would require customers’ business owners to:
#1 Determine the practicality of the proposed solutions.
#2 Judge how great an impact the solutions have on the customer’s business results.
#3 Assess contractors pricing relative to #1 & #2 above
#4 Select the contractor with the best value for the spend
Where’s Pricing in Scenario-based RFPs?
Pricing would only be calculated into the evaluation AFTER assessing contractors’ solutions. Pricing could follow the typical weighting and rating evaluation exercise.
Yes, it’s the real world, so pricing will likely have a higher weighting than other evaluation categories. But in the Scenario-based RFP, pricing is the LAST variable for consideration, not the first.
Hypothetical Example
Imagine a customer’s decision makers sitting around the conference room table. They’re discussing the most compelling solution proposed. It’s obvious which one it is, they’re all in agreement.
And that contractor’s pricing is in the middle of the pack, say 3rd lowest out of 5 contractors.
Those customers would have to decide whether they
a) Select the most compelling solution as is – but get the most value, or
b) Negotiate with that contractor for lower pricing – possibly jeopardizing best value, or
c) Select a lower priced contractor
In any case, customers will be making decisions with their eyes wide open.
They’ll be able to clearly justify their decision. It’ll be based on expected contributions to business results. This justification, should it ever be needed, will be concrete if communicated higher up the food chain. This is rock solid CYA.
Piloting a Scenario-based RFP
As with any new initiative, it’s best to test it away from the spotlight. You’ll want elbow room to maneuver and course correct if needed.
An ideal customer candidate might be a small service contract. One with a progressive customer business owner and a handful of willing contractors.
The primary purpose of the pilot program is to learn how to make the process better. After completing the pilot Scenario-based RFP hold a formal post-mortem and figure out:
i) What worked?
ii) What didn’t work?
iii) What could be better next time?
Including the customer’s business owner, procurement and selected contractor will provide the insight to improve the next Scenario-based RFP.
That’s Not All
Obviously there’s more to be developed for Scenario-based RFPs before they’re viable. But in the absence of better RFP alternatives, it may be worth pursuing.
~~~~~~
Chris Arlen
President, Service Performance
Technorati: best contractor value, RFI, RFP
November 5th, 2008
♦ Open heart surgery
♦ Unfreezing the global credit market
♦ Contracting / bidding on a multi-million dollar service
There’s an arc of experience to things. No one is born fully knowing the intricacies of any area of life.
It’s about learning. And through learning comes awareness of grey areas. Subtleties that make a ton of difference.
I once read the true test of intelligence is to hold two conflicting ideas in one’s head while seeing both as true.
Experience in life and business has a lot of that going on. As one learns.
However, those without experience still work alongside the experienced.
Obviously beginners are not to be ridiculed or disdained. The experienced have a responsibility to coach, mentor, teach. And recognize the struggle beginners have trying to hold those 2 conflicting thoughts.
But when it comes to the list above, and millions of other areas, beginners will participate – and if you’re on the receiving end you really hope they’d get some help.
Beginners will bid on that million dollar service contract.
And beginners will put out a Request for Proposal for that million dollar bid.
With access to the experienced, beginners can better shape the impact they’re going to have on others’ business. Hopefully moving it closer to their intended outcomes. But only if they’re open to conflicting ideas that may both be true. And only if the experienced recognize their place in the learning food chain.
How are you leveraging experience for beginners in your organization?
~~~~~~
Chris Arlen
President, Service Performance
Technorati: service contracts, contracting
October 21st, 2008
This past week several senior level clients, in different organizations, shared their frustrations about their inability to get initiatives launched.
The executives above them didn’t buy off on them. And these were smart, big win ideas. Ones that could produce significant results. But the executives who could pull the trigger, wouldn’t.
The answer to my client contacts’ problems seemed clear.
Maybe because it’s a very engaging election year, but what’s apparent is “how” the message is presented matters. As much as “what” the content is.
Consider these examples:
- Bernanke & Paulson’s proposal to Congress for buying bad mortgages (a 3-page document for $700 billion when a sub-prime loan takes 8-10 times as many pages)
- A husband explaining to his wife why he hadn’t done something she’d asked (but using the voice he reserves for the cashier at the DMV window)
These 2 examples point out that even if “what” you have to say is correct, right and true, it doesn’t matter a hill of beans. If the recipient can’t hear it, forget it.
And although this may seem elementary, it’s not.
It’s very political high up any organization. And success at the top is directly proportionate to one’s ability to shape and guide the message so that it’s received appropriately. Rather than spat out like sour wine.
This means considering how the message is framed and presented requires as much work as the content.
Yes, in the adult world there’s a constant checking if artfully crafting the “how” manipulates the meaning of the “what”. But consider the alternative. Focusing solely on saying exactly what one truthfully thinks leaves you with a room full of great ideas atrophying in the dust.
How skillful are you with messaging’s “How”?
~~~~~~
Chris Arlen
President, Service Performance
Technorati: communicating, implementing initiatives
October 15th, 2008
If I could ask the wisest person on the planet 2 questions about support services I’d ask:
#1 Why do support services exist?
#2 How can you tell if a support service fulfills it’s purpose?
Hold on, hold on. Before you click off this page or delete this email, stick with me a minute.
These questions aren’t as innocuous as they appear. The payoff from them is potentially very big.
Get them right and you’ll know exactly how much to budget and spend for your organization. You’ll also know who and what resources can help you get there. And you’ll know exactly if you are getting there.
Go down the wrong rabbit hole, and your stuck in a permanent fog at night without a light.
So, back to the questions and their answers.
#1 Why do support services exist?
Theoretically, a support service is there to support an organization’s employees who are working on the real stuff. The core competencies of the organization. Right?
You (the support service) are there solely to help your “core peers” (I just made that up).
When you do your job well, core peers aren’t distracted. They’re free to focus on their work. Which makes them better able to do what they do. And that, in theory, leads to the organization’s success.
That’s the reason support services exist. To remove distractions so peers can focus on their work.
#2 How can you tell if a support service fulfills it’s purpose?
Here’s the tricky part.
The answer to this question may not be what’s typically given by support services. The typical answer contains Key Performance Indicators (KPIs), Service Level Agreements (SLAs), performance to industry benchmarks, etc.
However, these metrics show a service’s performance relative to itself or alternative providers. But not relative to removing distractions from core peers.
A more appropriate answer to the question may be:
Since support services enable core peers to focus on their work,…
…the measure of success is the degree to which core peers are free from distractions.
Or put another way…the degree to which support services remove distractions from core peers.
This just hasn’t been the way most support services define or measure their success.
There is one metric that deserves a special comment: customer satisfaction.
It’s the one metric that comes closest to determining a support service’s success. However, it fails. It fails because customer satisfaction doesn’t ask about distractions to core peers. It asks about happiness with the service.
And core peers are familar with these types of questions. They’ll tell you whether they’re happy or not. But their happiness isn’t why a support service exists.
Right? It’s about removing distractions so peers can focus on their work.
How do you know if your support service is successful?
~~~~~~
Chris Arlen
President, Service Performance
Technorati: contract services, contract performance, KPIs, SLAs
October 6th, 2008
In an overly simplistic world, say back in high school, if you bought a service you’d sit back and expect it to be done – without any input on your part. Like a massage, or being served dinner in a restaurant.
But that’s expecting the service provider to be pretty good at mind reading. Or that the service is so simplistic it can, should, and is only ever delivered in one way, and one way alone. And those services are very few.
You may want your salad after your main course, which is common in some parts of the world. Or, you may have pinched a nerve in the right side of your lower back that requires special attention.
When engaging a service, both sides have responsibilities to each other. The explicit ones are stated in service specifications and contract terms.
But contracts and specs don’t capture everything. Many buyer/provider expectations and wants are left out. Yet these implied responsibilities may have as much impact on the service engagement as the stated ones. They ultimately drive the value both the buyer and provider get out of the service engagement.
Buyers of Services
Buyers are responsible to their organizations to get the most from their spend. And that comes with greater engagement with their service provider.
5 IMPLIED BUYER RESPONSIBILITIES
Here are a few responsibilities that buyers may not see in service specs or contract language, but when carried out will go a long way to maximizing service ROI:
#1 Participate religiously in all performance review meetings
#2 Select only key performance metrics (KPIs, SLAs, etc.) – it’s the vital few, not the useful many that count
#3 Keep your service provider aware of your organization’s goals, strategic initiatives & challenges
#4 Define quality expectations explicitly in ways that both buyer & provider can jointly confirm
#5 Define communication protocols & escalations for service deviations – these are the one-off changes because the situation demanded
Providers of Services
Providers are responsible to their organizations to maximize the value of their relationship with buyers. Yes, that means profits. But it should also mean:
* More referrals
* Longer contracts
* Greater account stability
* Better understanding of that particular vertical market
6 IMPLIED PROVIDER RESPONSIBILITIES
Here are a few that providers can benefit from by delivering to buyers:
#1 Being proactive in everything
#2 Bringing innovations in technology, products, processes
#3 Continuously seeking & sharing cost reductions – this should improve profitability
#4 Communicating obstacles, problems & recommended solutions
#5 Candor in admitting failures & honestly correcting them
#6 Respecting & working appropriately within buyers’ culture
How are you dealing with implied service responsibilities?
~~~~~~
Chris Arlen
President, Service Performance
Technorati: contract services, service contractors, service performance
September 25th, 2008
