Sales Talent Management or Beating the Odds for Even greater Sales Success - Oct. 28, 2011

A Learning Session was held on "Sales Talent Management" or "Beating the Odds for Even greater Sales Success" on Oct. 28, 2011.

In yesterday’s learning session, I addressed keys to success for Sales Organizations, and for that matter in any portion within a company.

Overall, Benchmarks help identify "job fit." Harvard had followed 320,000 sales people over a 20 year period and determined that it wasn't education or skills that determined success, but "Job Fit"(Thinking Style[IQ], Behavioral Traits [EQ] and Interests).

Therefore the keys identified in the presentation were:

1)      Benchmark (also called Performance Model or Job Pattern) around top performers, while identifying poor performer’s competencies that are different. This allows you to identify the essential competencies for that position that drive success. These benchmarks need to be position specific, not industry specific. (Do you think your company is exactly the same as another company, even if you are in the same industry with very similar products? The other company(s) are as different as people are. Human DNA is 99.9% the same, it is the 0. 1% that creates the diversity we see each day with the people with whom we interact.)

a.       Ideally you need to use assessments or methodologies that can quickly allow re-benchmarking if new “Top performers” come into the picture and/or as the market needs change.

b.      Have a way to identify Training Needs Analysis (TNA) for those competencies falling outside the benchmarks, in order to help to develop programs for Career Development for individuals and groups.

2)     Use these benchmarks to help screen, interview and validate around these separator competencies in order to identify stronger performers during the recruiting/pre-hire process. The sooner you can bring in new talent around top performer benchmarks, the sooner your organization begins to upgrade. Creating this slight edge, that grows over time, increases sustainability and profitability. It also, most likely, will reduce training costs and speed integration time.

3)      Use these benchmarks for existing positions, in developing career development programs and training needs for their career development plan.

4)      Also, use these benchmarks to identify individuals for succession management plans, coupled with managerial and performance review results. Ideally Performance Reviews are 360 based, and online, to allow complete confidentiality and candidness by those rating the ratee/Manager. Also online, speeds  results, eliminating assembling and analysis time. Most importantly, it helps to maintain objectivity in reviews, and eliminate subjectivity, which increases trust and engagement.

Once these processes are in place, or simultaneously, identify the three ties of Sales Performers in your organization.

Why three Tiers?
 

Because, it has been well established in multiple studies, that in any Sales Organization there are the Top performers, Middling/Average performers and Poor performers. How much are the latter two tiers costing you?

It follows the 80/20 rule, 20% of your sales force is delivering 80% of your sales. (Of course the same also applies to your client mix, 20% of your clients are delivering 80% of your sales and profitability.)

Calculate (via a utility analysis) how much more can be gained if you can develop an Average performer into a Top performer, or a bottom performer to even a middling/average performer. The results can be amazing. If interested, feel free to ask how this can be done.

The slight Edge: In many sports, it is a split second of difference that separates a winner from being second or third. A few years back, there were documentaries on the steps athletes take for these 10^th of a second differences. Swimmers have videos taken showing their stroke techniques in a glass tank versus an ideal stroke. Runners are videoed for motion analysis.  Golfers modify their swings using videos comparing theirs with the ideal (benchmark) swing of efficiency. Business is no different.

If you take these steps not only will your Sales significantly improve, but if implemented throughout the organization, this slight edge gets magnified throughout the corporation! If your competition is doing this, where does it put you? Can you and your company afford not to put into place these kinds of steps and procedures?

The decision is yours and your company’s! Can CEO’s, Senior Managers and companies ignore these in this dynamic global market? It seems highly unlikely that sustained performance can be maintained without these kinds of methods being implemented.

Four Critical Technologies to Consider

A recent article in Harvard Business Review discusses the four technologies that are presently driving business and applications. As Executives and CEOs we need to be cognizant about these and see if they can be incorporated on one level or another within our company's products/services, and be addressed in the Strategic Plan and Research & Development.

The Four Technologies are:

1. Microprocessors
2. Sensors
3. Wireless connectivity
4. Databases

For all companies, databases in particular are applicable across the board. Also, good and valid databases create an asset value for the company. At a minimum, an up-to-date customer database can significantly increase value for the company. Some acquisitions are made just for the customer list and contact information, alone. How up-to-date is your customer database? When was the last time it was validated and non-accurate information purged?

So you may want to give thought to the above technologies, how they can be incorporated or updated within your company, and how they can increase your company's competitive advantage.

Recent Article of Interest:

http://blogs.hbr.org/cs/2011/09/the_four_technologies_you_need.html?cm_sp=most_widget-_-default-_-The%20Four%20Technologies%20You%20Need%20to%20Be%20Working%20With


What do Netflix, Zipcar, Mint.com, Nike+, Amazon, the Nintendo Wii, and the Apple iPhone all have in common? They all take advantage of four technologies that once were scarce and expensive but are now plentiful and cheap.

Mentoring and Coaching - both in Business and in Life

The ability to mentor and coach is critical for excellent leaders (whether they are CEO's or not), or any person for that matter. Whether it is in business or in life, we need to try and help people gain a vision, or gain the ability for self-guidance.  This can be our legacy rather than just how much we grow a business, or how much we have made.

Mentoring and coaching is not about "telling" someone what they can or should do, but helping them to think for themselves to arrive at a decision or conclusion that works for them. The old spiritual saying that goes something like: You can give a person a fish and he will be fed for a day, or you can teach a person to fish, and he will be fed for a lifetime, applies here.

Our efforts can help grow engagement and transparency, help to gain a better idea about succession planning and challenges faced by our employees, and can help to eliminate internal politics, if handled correctly. It is amazing the number of senior executives that have said they leave this activity of mentoring to HR (Human Resources).


As executives, we need to help mentor people to not only replace us, but to be even more prepared for the global challenging markets we are confronted with daily. Being a life coach for others is needed also, given the dynamism ongoing around us and the need for work-life balance.

However, it is a two way street. As we help people, they also need to also help in maintaining the relationship with the mentor or coach through communication and meeting from time to time. Otherwise it feels like one is pulling the load all by oneself.


Putting people in touch with others, recommending training programs, or sending people to conferences, all are methods of helping people grow and become stronger and better people. Many times external perspectives and people can help the other person gain a clearer view of a situation, and many times the mentor/coach also gains some insights in the process.

Hopefully, many people whom we have helped, we were not even aware of helping at the time. How many people have we really helped? This should give us pause to reflect and to reach out.

Related Article:

http://hbr.org/2011/10/the-relationship-you-need-to-get-right/ar/1?cm_sp=most_widget-_-hbr_articles-_-The%20Relationship%20You%20Need%20to%20Get%20Right

Managing Your Time and Energy when on the Job and in your Life

There have been a number of studies in recent years identifying the need to manage our time, but even more importantly, there is now discussion in managing our energy. Many of us have probably noticed that at times we are not as sharp, as we are at others. As one ages, the phenomena becomes more evident and there is a greater need to care for one's self and health.

At times, we have possibly lived on 4 hours of sleep for literally years but "intellectually" and even more "intuitively," we understand that this can only last for a period of time, as it is not healthy on a long term basis. The adage of burning the candle at both ends, probably applies to most of us at one time or another, but we do need to recharge.

So learn and pay attention to your own energy cycles, as this is an essential first step. Are you a morning person, or a night person? But even more importantly, you will probably find certain times of the day, and at night, your productivity increases and at others, it wanes. As you learn about yourself, then you can begin to manage your work around these. Of course, there will be times you will not be able to adapt your schedule or project to work neatly around these times, as meetings are called, or an urgent project needs to be completed, but with diligence you will be able to help maximize your productivity throughout the day.

How can you manage your energy at work? Analyze your work day. You will probably see that there are surges in e-mails at certain times (just look at your e-mail list, there are time stamps), for example, or when you can best reach a client(s) or colleague(s), or there are regular assignments that need to be done. Certain days it is easier to reach people than others. Many studies show that normally Mondays and Fridays are the worst days to reach out to people, as companies have meetings on these two days to start out the week, or there are deadlines for project completion(s). Start to keep track of these surges by analyzing them, either by taking notes, or mentally observing them. You will probably begin to see that patterns do occur, daily, weekly, monthly and even yearly.

As an example, early morning calls to people may catch them before their work day has really started, or the e-mail that you send quickly comes back answered. Or, there are regular, less energy requiring activities that have to been done, so when your energy is lower, maybe this is the best time to tackle these items. Or conversely, for some people, by doing this exercise, it re-energizes them and sets them up for more "mind challenging" activities.

So, managing projects and your work cycles, can lead to heightened productivity, reduced stress and especially lead to sustained, long-term productivity. Obviously, for CEO's and Senior Managers this is even more important as world travel, with its associated jet lag, time changes and eating challenges all affect us.

The same can apply to your personal life. This has become critically important as we are globally connected, 24/7 with access to e-mail, texting, social media, television, print media, all coupled with mobile connectivity via computers, smart phones and now iPads and iReaders (Kindle, Nook).

Finally, plan some downtime, possibly away from these technological devices. Some peace and quiet to collect your thoughts, reflect on life and what goals you are fulfilling, and those that need to be initiated, can be wonderfully reinvigorating.

Good health is critical, and managing your energy and time can be major contributors to a long, enriching and productive life.

Related articles:
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/24/jobs/24pre.html?_r=1&scp=1&sq=The+Personal+Energy+Crisis&st=nyt

http://www.hf.faa.gov/docs/508/docs/cami/00_10.pdf

A recent article by Wharton about Steve Jobs

In a recent article entitled: "Life after Steve Jobs: What to Expect from the Next Generation at Apple" it discusses the challenges to Apple after Steve Jobs' passing. It explains the culture at Apple being a "high risk endeavor" as it is more controlling than it's competitors, which requires Apple's products to be "truly superior." While Apple and Pixar have been consistently successful in this approach, the question now is, can they continue to do this over the long term, or will the culture need to undergo some changes?


Therefore, the risks are much higher for Apple than for say, for Microsoft, Google or even Facebook. The question is what happens now that the "one person Visionary" has passed, and it will now become an amalgam of a team Vision?


Innovation will need to continue to be a key to success or else the strategy and team may need to change. Senior Management will definitely have it's challenges. Only time will play it's cards out....but the World will anxiously await to see the next products from the crucible of Apple and Pixar. Wouldn't we like to be a fly on the wall during the upcoming Strategic and Succession Planning sessions? What do you think will be the in the companies' futures, both shorter term and long term? The game will be an interesting one, to say the least.


Link to the article:
http://knowledge.wharton.upenn.edu/article.cfm?articleid=2859

Social Media in Asia - A dynamic and growing force - Challenges and Pitfalls

I found a recent article interesting as it provides data and usage of social media that I have not seen before, specifically about Asia. Those of us in business need to be aware of the dynamic growth and the need to develop policies and strategies around it, to increase customer awareness and penetration for our products and services. However, at the same time there are pitfalls and challenges that are confronted by our employees in the use of this wonderful medium.

A friend of mine, Sonnie Santos (http://wsph.biz/), in a recent seminar that I attended on HR 2.0 vs. 2011, highlighted the need for a social media policy in our company handbooks, and also the training needed to make employees aware of their responsibilities to the company. It highlighted awareness of how comments made by employees, can quickly go viral and can have positive, but even more dangerously, negative effects on the company and possibly that individual.

Many of us have started using social media for our personal use, but over time, some have begun using it on behalf of the company. Once this threshold has been passed, what you post is a direct reflection on and about the company. So, we need to make employees aware of these changes and the possible liabilities.

More recently, companies are doing background checks on candidate applicants via social media. There are numerous articles about how information gained via these sites, nixed/stopped the hiring of candidates that might have otherwise been qualified.

Below is the statistical data that may be of interest. The came from an article who's link can be found at the end of this posting.

"The rise of social media

...Already 58 percent of Asia Pacific’s population of 3.9 billion is online – with Australia and South Korea leading at 80-percent penetration rate; and Japan, Singapore, and Hong Kong rounding up the Region’s top five.
ASEAN member-states have also been experiencing spectacular Internet growth rates and reasonable Internet penetration rates. But the real story is the rise of mobile phones in the ASEAN region. Many analysts are predicting that with the increasing widespread use of smart phones, most of ASEAN’s citizens would eventually use mobile devices as the primary tool to access the Internet. The full ASEAN story is seen in this table below.

                                                Growth Rate               Internet Penetration           Mobile Penetration

                                                (2000-2010)                                                                                       

Indonesia                                  1,400%                                12%                                           60%    
Malaysia                                      357%                                60%                                          105%  
Philippines                                1,385%                                 30%                                           85%     Singapore                                     206%                                77%                                         150%   
Thailand                                        660%                                27%                                         120%   
Vietnam                                    12,035%                                32%                                        105%   
Filipinos should take particular note that Vietnam has surpassed the Philippines not only in Internet growth rates but also in Internet and mobile phone diffusion.
Social networking appears to be the preferred social media activity in Asia Pacific. It is followed by video sharing. In fact, it is only in China and Japan where video sharing surpassed social networks. Blogs are also used in the region but it is only in Japan where it trumps social networks.
... The Philippines and India have 25.3 and 29.4 million FB users, respectively – clearly an indication of the Philippines’ leadership in social media usage considering that we are one-tenth the population of India.
With respect to the Philippines, 30.3 percent of the 98 million population are internet users. The top five social network sites are: Facebook (FB), Yahoo, Blogspot, Bing and Sulit. Compared to Facebook’s 150 million page views (or even Twitter’s 50 million page views), mainstream media’s page views remain paltry: Inquirer and The Philippine STAR were neck and neck at 12 million viewers; CNET at 7.4 million; GMA News Online at 6.7 million and ABS-CBN News at 6.2 million. The Philippines has the largest percentage of FB users among Internet users in Asia, at 91 percent. We have moved from being the SMS capital to the FB capital of the world.
Why focus on social media? First of all, social media represents user-generated content. Filipinos (or Japanese or Malaysians) in FB are not just consumers of information but also producers of information. As a consequence, social media contributes to the decline of English as the dominant language of the Internet...

...The same UN Report ranked 192 countries in e-Government development. As usual, South Korea ranked number 1 followed by USA, Canada, United Kingdom and Australia. Among Southeast Asian countries, the rankings are as follows:
                                                                                SEA Rank                         Global Rank          
Singapore                                                                       1                                                 11                
Malaysia                                                                         2                                                 32                
Brunei Darussalam                                                          3                                                 68                
Thailand                                                                         4                                                 76                
Philippines                                                                      5                                                 78                
Vietnam                                                                          6                                                 90                
Indonesia                                                                       7                                                109                
Cambodia                                                                      8                                                140                
Myanmar                                                                       9                                                141                
Laos                                                                             10                                               151                

...Whether it is smart phones, social media, e-governance or other ICT innovations, we must take cognizance of the fact that 21st century technology must be exploited to its fullest potential. The private sector understands this. Sadly, our government has failed to understand the imperatives of the digital age and its attendant outcome towards economic growth and development. The Digital Age is our future and the future is now."

http://www.philstar.com/Article.aspx?publicationSubCategoryId=66&articleId=722781

Innovation in the 21st Century - Modifications of existing concepts and visioning

In the earlier blog below (http://executiveandhrguidance.blogspot.com/2011/10/innovation-and-visioning-in-20th-and.html ), Steve Jobs modified existing products by implementing newer technology or refining visions. Even as early as 2007 Bill Gates discussed the concept of the iPad in an interview with him and Steve Jobs. Steve Jobs even shows his visioning of the future in the same interview.

The Tablet already existed but hadn't really taken off as expected. Apple refined the idea and now the iPad is in the history books. You might be interested in hearing a portion of the interview by clicking on the link below.

http://gizmodo.com/5541969/bill-gates-told-steve-jobs-about-the-ipad-in-2007

Innovation and Visioning in the 20th and 21st Century

In the earlier blog posting, below( http://executiveandhrguidance.blogspot.com/2011/10/innovation-in-21st-century-and-steve.html ), Steve Jobs was described as a visionary and futurist. He took ideas and morphed them, using newer technology, slimmer packaging, modernizing the appearance of an item, and/or recognizing there was a need (recognized or hidden) which could be addressed. Through his charisma and communication he could open new markets or grow existing markets at a much faster pace than had happened earlier.

In the 1950's NASA started designing the Mercury, Gemini and Apollo Space programs around concepts that did not exist at the time. NASA helped to fuel innovation and new products by committing to a need in the near or foreseeable future by agreeing to purchase those items once they were developed within established time-frames.

The US Air Force did the same thing when they started conceptualizing the C-5A Galaxy(Lockheed).  In this specific case, they identified the need to airlift large, heavy payloads long distances for what was called the Heavy Logistics Systems project. This aircraft was very sophisticated. It had multiple computer systems with backups, in case of inflight failure.

For example, at the time, if there was an error light, it would rank the probability of what was causing the error, the nearest location to land, the nearest place for obtaining a replacement part, and estimated downtime. Practically unheard of at that time, in the late 1960's.

Many of the advancements were never used because of  fear of a possible crash and  few simulators that could train pilots on it's use. The C-5 could land with cross-winds by heading into the wind, with the landing gear/wheels pointed in a different direction going down a runway.

Looking into the future and holding visioning exercises, helps organizations to remain flexible, with a view to change, while anticipating possible challenges and competitors, many which come sooner than expected. These exercises help to build teams while also coming up with new ideas or concepts that might not have been contemplated by the company, otherwise. They also contribute to the strategic plan and in many cases succession planning needs.

In spite of some saying that things change too fast to really plan, because the plan is outdated before it is written, they overlook the benefits in building more dynamic, cooperative, and communicative organizations while improving morale, engagement and the strong possibilities of identifying innovative or improved processes or products/services.

Shouldn't your organization contemplate visioning sessions? If not, why not?

Innovation in the 21st Century and Steve Jobs

Everyone has blogged and posted about Steve Jobs and his life these past few days, as well as highlight his contribution to everyday life through innovation and technology, so I won't be that much different except to possibly add some slightly different slants.

The most common phase it seems, is in describing what he did: "he knew what people wanted before they themselves knew it," or words to that effect. Another way to look at this, is that he recognized technology and components that existed, and was able to refine and redeploy technology in fulfillment of people's needs (expressed and unrealized). (More on this topic in future blog postings.)

After all, in more recent years, the music player pre-existed the iPod, smart phones existed and were in use for 20 years before the launch of the iPhone, and tablet PC's were marketed for many years before the iPad. But he added the pizzazz, as some call it the "sizzle" to the steak, the manifestation of dreams and a vision on how to use them more effectively. He was a master communicator and futurist.

When the Apple Computer was first introduced, we would ask questions in stores as to what could be done with it and how could it be used. These were questions that persisted for many years after that, especially as to why many would want their own personal computer for home use. Frankly, it didn't do much for improving our lives at home at that time because of the lack of programs.

In business, computers allowed the quick computations of complex items and spreadsheets that we had to use in planning and budgeting(as a simple example), so it helped to eliminate the drudgery of recalculating the numbers down and over, and especially if a manager wanted to change a single number or numbers to see the effect, or to "finalize" the budget. Of course, it never seemed to reach this final stage of setting something in stone. There was always one more tweak, or then there were monthly or bi-weekly forecasts against budget, or against re-forecast or the projection. You get the idea.

Jobs' reluctance to open up the source code so that more programs could be written to appeal to larger audiences and uses, restricted the growth of Apple products compared to the MS DOS/PC system, and it's acceptance and use in business. As a result, the Apple Computer never reached more than about 5% market share, it seems. (Presently the new OS systems has about 10% market share.) This caused the early departure of Steve Jobs from Apple, which is referred to in the Commencement speech he made in 2005 at Stanford. The link is below.

There is no question that he was a visionary, a change manager, and an extremely effective leader, because you can't grow businesses to the size he did in the period of time he did, multiple times, without being an excellent leader. We will probably see projects that he initiated over the next several years that are in the incubation phase right now. The question will be sustainability of the company over the long term. Only time will tell.

It is a great loss to American Business, in particular, and to those of us who use these products and appreciate what he has contributed to global societies and employment, as well as enjoyment. However, he realized that we all pass, and others will fill these voids.

The only question is how much larger a contribution could he have made had he been receptive to opening up the source codes and allowing greater access and development around the Apple products? We will never know, but it is a question that begs to be asked!

If you haven't watched the Commencement Address, you should. Just click on the link below.

Steve Jobs' 2005 Stanford Commencement Address June 12, 2005: 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UF8uR6Z6KLc

15+ minutes in length ; "stay hungry, stay foolish"
Drawing from some of the most pivotal points in his life, Steve Jobs, chief executive officer and co-founder of Apple Computer and of Pixar Animation Studios, urged graduates to pursue their dreams and see the opportunities in life's setbacks -- including death itself -- at the university's 114th Commencement on June 12, 2005.

The Difference in building great teams is usually Mind-Set - Siemens

The article below is so well written and the questions and answers are so pertinent, that there is little to add.
In summary: 
Building great teams is driven by mindset, trust within the team, leadership of multi-cultural teams by evolving from the present position in moving the business forward, and benchmarking via assessments, are keys that are driving Siemens forward. The dialog and experiences below, are similar in many ways to my own and the comments dovetail with mine also. So rather than paraphrase and elaborate on the concepts, I leave it to you, to draw your own conclusions and gain knowledge from this interesting article.

Here is the link and I have posted most of the article below should you have trouble accessing it, for any reason. I hope that you will find it as interesting, as I have.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/31/business/siemens-ceo-on-building-trust-and-teamwork.html?scp=1&sq=The%20Trust%20that%20makes%20a%20team%20click&st=cse


Q. Do you remember the first time you were in a leadership position?
A. I was captain of the volleyball team in high school and then in college.
Q. And did that role come pretty naturally to you?
A. Yes. It came naturally because, at the end of the day, it’s about fostering the best performance from the people on the team. It’s less a question of how you train and your physical conditioning. The difference between a good team and a great team is usually mind-set. When you watch great games in sports, you see there’s a moment, all of a sudden, when the team clicks. It’s something that’s always caught my attention — why and how that happens with teams.
Q. And how do you make those moments happen?
A. When you’re in business, I think the underlying principle is trust. How do you establish within a team a blind trust so that each person plays for the other? Business is about lining up a leadership team or a group of people and you rally them behind a cause or a certain direction. But the underlying strength is the trust within the team — so that you actually are no longer just playing individually at your best, but you’re also trying to understand what you can do to make the team better. And for me a defining moment in this regard was when I arrived for the first time in the United States, and had my first leadership role running a whole company.
Q. Tell me more about that.
A. It was an agricultural group, and I had the responsibility to lead a team that stretched from Mexico to Canada. There were three different entities but one leadership team. So all of a sudden I find myself in cultural situations where I start to recognize that even though two people are speaking English, there’s a distinct cultural difference. So the challenge was how to lead a diverse team, and this was always one of my interests.
My forefathers are from Italy, my parents are Austrian, my wife is Spanish, two of our children are American and the third is Spanish, so I have the United Nations at home. You have to adapt to a diverse environment and appreciate the diversity.
My career has allowed me to hone this skill. I’ve worked in Asia. I’ve worked in Europe. I’ve worked in the U.S. When you start to run a global business you must appreciate the different environments you’re operating in and then try to combine them. When I arrived at Siemens, the global leadership team was mostly Germans with a certain cultural background, with a certain experience. Now we have a much more diverse team. The last thing you want as a leader is to have clones of yourself.
Q. Any other lessons learned from starting so many new jobs as you’ve moved around?
A. The most important thing is, when you arrive somewhere new, that you come in without a preset agenda. I didn’t join Siemens with a leadership team in mind. I’m just the 12th C.E.O. in the history of the company, which was founded in 1847. So the culture of the company was actually formed over a long period of time, through longevity of leadership. So for me the important thing was to come in and say Siemens doesn’t need a revolution. We will go for an evolution but with speed, speed, speed.
And I said I need 100 days. Obviously the first expectations are: What are the first decisions? What will he do? I said I need 100 days because I want to talk to as many people as possible, and go around the world so that I really understand what is on people’s minds, what the issues are. I went from China to India to Japan to Brazil to the U.S. Slowly but surely the agenda was formed, and then you move forward, and you work closely with your leadership team and all the changes that we have initiated.
And then I went through a complete assessment program for the top 100 positions. We benchmarked everybody against outside candidates, and it was a totally open process. You have to think about how you develop an agenda together with your team, and how you build trust. And one element of building trust is transparency.
Q. You did this benchmarking assessment, but certainly chemistry with you is part of it, too.
A. Absolutely. This was very important. At the end of the day, there must be chemistry, there must be a sense that this is the team that I want to create, with people who believe in its totality. Because you can have a great team of superstars, but it’s by no means certain that they will actually be a great team.
Q. How do you hire for key leadership positions in your organization?
A. The most important thing is to look for diversity in your career path. I will look for passion, because I think that’s a very important element.
Q. And how do you get at that?

A. How do you describe your successes, and what is important to you as a leader? I would try to understand your values, your learning experiences, why you have done what you’ve done. Our company does business in 190 countries, so you need to have diversity of experience. I put a lot of value on this. And have you demonstrated team impact, or do you want to talk about yourself? Because at the end of the day this is what really makes a difference — you will be put into a situation where you have to convince people, you have to build trust, and you have to rally people around you. So you must be able to foster very solid and robust discussions to understand what the options are, the reasons for different decisions, and you must be able to draw this out of the team.

Q. What about the culture you’re trying to create?
A. When you talk about leadership culture, I very much try to implement an execution culture. Think about how the world is changing — I think the speed of change has massively accelerated versus what it was 10 years ago, 20 years ago, in all aspects. So there’s speed of change, and the world is also far more connected, and this has a massive impact in terms of how you lead. You can no longer rely on hierarchical structures.
For me it’s very important to have an execution culture in place because it’s not about the brilliance of strategy. In rare instances, a company will do something totally different and build a completely new class of products. Otherwise you are really in a broad-based competitive environment, and therefore you must have an execution culture. And you have to recognize as a leader that you also make mistakes. I’m always telling people, “Look, I make a mistake every day, but hopefully I’m not making the same mistake twice.” If you think that you’re not making mistakes then you are not making the tough decisions that you should make as a leader.
Q. What else can you tell me about your leadership style?
A. I’m never satisfied. The biggest threat for anything and anybody is complacency. As soon as you believe that you are on top of the game, you probably have lost it. I’m also down to earth and I’m very straight. I have no tolerance whatsoever for politics. Zero.
Q. And how do you convey that to people?
A. People have to recognize that when I criticize or I’m not satisfied that I’m never thinking about the person. I’m purely thinking about the content. As soon as somebody says it in an apparently more critical way, there’s the perception that it has more immediate career consequences. I think we just try to make ourselves better. Now if I have to have the same discussion a second time, then we would have a different discussion.
But I think you create this culture where we are together, and together we are going to make ourselves better, we are not satisfied, and we are straight about it. So you celebrate successes, you rally the teams, but at the same time you say, how can we make ourselves better in every little single step that we are taking?

Is the customer always right? Different views or perspectives

Recently I saw a recent article by Malu Dy Buncio, the link to the article is at the end of this posting. In her opening paragraph she said: "...Obviously the customer is ‘always right’ because the decision to hand over their hard earned money for your product or service lies with the customer." But she went on to state that at times a client may not be a good fit for the supplier.

This is definitely my experience also, and at times, I have even given contact information or alternative suppliers to the client.

It is always hard, especially for a sales person or even a company, to let an existing client go to another supplier. But there are times it may be best for both parties, and at times there may be a good strategy in doing this.

This does not mean though that you should not try to meet their needs and/or their expectations, initially. It is important though that we do not allow the client to think that they are right, if they are not, but this needs to be communicated with finesse and honestly, and sincerity.

A case in point: We were selling industrial flooring systems to the global pharmaceutical industry, which were for the most part epoxy based. The advantages are that they are essentially seamless, easy to clean, chemically resistant, and many times stronger than concrete and resistant to impacts and heavy forklift traffic, to mention a few of the advantages. However, they are not always that tolerant of flexing, "suspended" flooring. At that time they could crack and peel off.

After a full review of the physical area and conditions, it was clear that our product would not perform adequately and most likely would fail in a relatively short period of time, leading to dissatisfaction by the client. This would not be beneficial for our company's image and reputation.

Therefore, we recommended that they go to suppliers of polyurethane systems which product we did not have at the time. The customer was shocked that we would not sell them a system that they felt would meet their needs. We explained why ours was not the correct system in this specific case, and whom they might contact. However, we also explained in detail all the other instances where our system was superior.

In the end, the customer was happy that we were honest with them, and we got their business in all of their other plants that did not have "suspended slab" construction. They were pleased, and we were rewarded with regular ongoing business. In fact, they would call us when they had a need, as we were not always aware of new or "rehab" requirements that they had ongoing. What could be a better Win-Win?

Another instance, where there may be a strategic reason not to supply a client, is one where certain customers either are highly demanding and consume vast amounts of time and effort, and yet the requirement is very small, or, they are poor payers. Many times this kind of client fills both descriptions.  If you "give" or allow your competition to take those clients, over the long run, your competition may have to go out of business as their costs of doing business may be much higher than yours.

Another situation, is, there are companies that intentionally do not want "zero" defects. Why, you might ask? Because having a positive customer experience is more memorable and makes a bigger impact and is communicated within the industry, than not having any experience at all. A specific manufacturer purposefully had a 1-3% defect rate. However, they increased their customer service department and gave them more leeway to handle complaints. The end result, was that the customers who complained about the "necessary" product, received excellent customer service and satisfaction, and the industry being supplied, heard these rave reviews, and many changed their suppliers to this great customer satisfaction manufacturer!

Thank you to Malu Dy Buncio and her article link below:

http://mansmith.net/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=298%3Ais-the-customer-always-right&catid=40%3Aservice-and-execution&Itemid=44