Did We Answer the Question?
I’ve often encountered cases where an organisation didn’t actually answer my question.
This most often happens where either the question is complex (involving several parts), or where several questions are asked at the same time.
In both cases, where is the problem? We could say that the person asking the question needs to ensure that it is as well put as possible (the art of communication). Alternatively, one could put the onus on the organisation to make sure that they understand the question (“good customer service”) or that (in the case of several questions at once) they ensure that they’ve responded to all questions or parts of the question.
My personal view is that, if a customer comes to me with a question about my organisation, its products or services, it’s up to me to ensure that I understand the whole question before responding. In the long term, this saves more time, although when faced with an upset customer, the understandable temptation is to provide an answer as quickly as possible to bring the matter (and irritation) to a swift end.
The best course of action I’ve found is to take notes (whether face-to-face or on the phone) and repeat back the issues noted to ensure I’ve understood them all. Even if the customer is angry, the fact that one is listening can start to calm them down. When they see that we’ve understood the issue or issues involved, we can then proceed to resolve them as painlessly (for the customer) as possible.
If the question comes in by email/letter, we still have to make sure we understand it and then respond to each part.
So the process is:
- Listen to the question being asked
- Note down relevant issues/facts
- Repeat back to customer
- Advise action that will be taken and by when
- Ask if this meets the customer's needs/answered their question
I’ve spent more than half my life delivering change in different world markets from the most developed to “emerging” economies. With a wealth of international experience in international financial services around the world running different operations and lending businesses, I started my own Consultancy to provide solutions for improving performance, productivity and risk management. I work with individuals, small businesses, charities, quoted companies and academic institutions across the world. An international speaker, trainer, author and fund-raiser, I can be contacted by email. My website provides a full picture of my portfolio of services. For strategic questions that you should be asking yourself, follow me at @wkm610.
Labels: Customer Care, Productivity
Risk, Reward and...?
Many business leaders will be familiar with the term “risk/reward” that describes the approach to taking risks if the rewards are justified. This two-dimensional view has served well for some time, but at times I wonder if there are other aspects to consider.
To keep things simple, we’ll use “High”, “Medium” and “Low” to describe a risk. These are subjective descriptions but suffice for our purposes. In the same way, rewards will also be classified as “High”, “Medium” and “Low”.
We now have a situation where, traditionally, if the risk of taking an action was high, but so were the rewards, management would consider it (especially if they could reduce the potential risk somehow). Conversely, if risk was low and rewards were high, the action would be taken. In between lie all other permutations.
Into this equation, we now need to add two more elements: cost and consequences. The cost is the cost in terms of time, resources and money of undertaking an action. Generally, these are inter-related in that, the less time available, the more the cost in terms of money and resources to complete the action will be.
Consequences are the results (short-, medium- and long-term) of undertaking an action (or not undertaking it). A simple example might be: the consequence of not installing self-service checkout counters will be a loss of business. This could be said to be part of the risk of doing something, although it is more aptly described as consequences.
The risk of installing self-service checkout counters could be low as we know that the equipment is available, can be installed with minimal disruption to the business, employees and customers at acceptable cost, operates efficiently, has low maintenance costs and will last a set number of years at defined rates of use. Absent staff available to man checkout counters, this looks like a “good bet”.
If the costs of operating (say) three self-service checkout counters over a given period are lower than those of recruiting, training and employing the people to do the work, then the next step is clear.
There are other consequences to installing self-service checkouts, of course, such as:
- The machines go wrong and need a member of staff to stand by to troubleshoot;
- Certain customer groups may be scared of using them and prefer traditional “face-to-face” interaction with a cashier;
- The equipment relies on back-office computers for details of price, quantity, special offers.
All of these can be overcome but must be factored into the “cost/consequences” of the equation. If, for example, the installation is poorly done (risk), customers may lose faith in the equipment and simply refuse to use it.
Appreciating the interrelationship between risk, reward, cost and consequences helps us make better decisions for the business, our people, our customers and our community.
How do we in our organisation weigh cost/risk/rewards/consequences? Everyone has their own approach.
I’ve spent more than half my life delivering change in different world markets from the most developed to “emerging” economies. With a wealth of international experience in international financial services around the world running different operations and lending businesses, I started my own Consultancy to provide solutions for improving performance, productivity and risk management. I work with individuals, small businesses, charities, quoted companies and academic institutions across the world. An international speaker, trainer, author and fund-raiser, I can be contacted by email. My website provides a full picture of my portfolio of services. For strategic questions that you should be asking yourself, follow me at @wkm610.
Labels: Financial, Productivity, Strategy
The "Emotional Bank Account"
One of the most interesting concepts that was introduced to me earlier on in my career was that of the “emotional bank account”.
The emotional bank account is another person’s feelings towards you or the organisation for which you work. That person could be your child, your partner, your friends. You get the drift?
Just as with a real bank account, you can make withdrawals and place deposits in the emotional bank account. The difference is that the value of emotional deposits tends to be perceived as far less than the value of emotional withdrawals.
This means that we need to work far harder at making emotional deposits. To coin a phrase, “Trust lost is difficult to regain”. It doesn’t take much to lose someone’s trust me they a child your partner a friend or a customer.
This may seem very harsh, but the flipside is that, if you gain someone’s trust and work hard to maintain it, they are likely to be a lot more forgiving. It is only when we continually betray that trust or make more emotional withdrawals than deposits that our reputation as a person, employee or business suffers. One has only to look at certain individuals or organisations to see the truth in this.
It's a hard fact of life, but we have little choice other than to keep our promises and do as we say we will if we are to be trusted, well thought of and recommended by others. It doesn’t take much to make an emotional withdrawal and it’s often what we might describe as “the little things”:
- Breaking a promise
- Not calling back when we say we will
- Not turning up on time for a meeting
More often than not it’s the “accumulation of little things” that is enough to break someone’s trust in us.
How often do we catch ourselves thinking “I could’ve done better” or “I shouldn’t have done/said that”?
If we as leaders are not constantly checking the levels of our deposits versus our withdrawals, the results are only too obvious.
I’ve spent more than half my life delivering change in different world markets from the most developed to “emerging” economies. With a wealth of international experience in international financial services around the world running different operations and lending businesses, I started my own Consultancy to provide solutions for improving performance, productivity and risk management. I work with individuals, small businesses, charities, quoted companies and academic institutions across the world. An international speaker, trainer, author and fund-raiser, I can be contacted by email. My website provides a full picture of my portfolio of services. For strategic questions that you should be asking yourself, follow me at @wkm610.
Labels: Career, Customer Care, Leadership, Selling, Strategy, Teamwork
Rent vs Buy
I’m always interested when I look at the costs of renting versus buying something. Sometimes one makes more sense than the other.
Let’s take a simple example. We can buy a house with a mortgage and pay, say, $1,000 per month mortgage instalments. Alternatively, we might rent a house for $1,000 a month. In each case, depending on the terms of our contracts, both mortgage and rental costs may increase periodically. The difference is that buying a house on mortgage allows you to own a property which, if it appreciates in value, can be sold for a profit. Renting, on the other hand is a “sunk cost“: money paid out in rent cannot be recovered.
The advantage of renting, however, is that we may not be liable for maintaining the building as we would be if we owned the property. Just as rental costs can go up when demand for rentals is high, they can go down when the market is low.
The above is a problem for many (or at least those who can afford to buy a house). A more recent example of where ownership might deliver more value than renting lies in the price I recently saw for renting the latest “Jurassic World" film on iTunes. For a one-time cost of £15.99, I can watch the film once (with as many people as I like) in the comfort of my own home. Compare this with the price of cinema tickets and drinks/snacks in the UK for a family of four or even for a couple, and this is worth it.
Alternatively, I could wait a few months and the film would be available to purchase on iTunes (for £13.99 if past behaviour is anything to go by). I could then buy for a reduced price and watch it as many times as I wanted. Wait a year or so, and I could probably buy it at a much-reduced price as the iTunes Store tends to drop prices after a year or so.
In this case the cost of ownership reduces every time I watch the film. In the case of buying a property on mortgage, one might say that the incremental cost decreases the longer one lives in the property. Hopefully, one happy day, the mortgage will be paid off and the property will be mine to keep. Any capital appreciation on sale is mine to do with as I please. If I wish, I could also remortgage it and use the finance raised for other purposes.
Another example might be deciding to lease a piece of equipment for my business, rather than buying it outright. Leasing means ownership of that equipment remains with somebody else, as do the costs of maintaining and replacing it if it proves defective. There might also be tax benefits to me to lease the equipment, rather than own it.
Renting/leasing versus buying offers advantages and disadvantages. For equipment, it may be better to rent or lease it, as ownership remains with the person renting it to you, and therefore so do the costs of maintaining it. The rental agreement may also allow for you to replace the equipment after a certain period of use or if it breaks down. All this at no extra charge. The risk remains with the party renting it to you.
In some cases, outright ownership, and therefore control, of the item or property in question may make more sense.
As business owners, we are often faced with whether we should buy or rent/lease A property or equipment. Sometimes there are even tax advantages to doing one over the other.
What is best depends on the circumstances: how much can you afford is it better to own or lease the item or property concerned, is there a tax advantage in either owning or leasing? If you own, at one point, if any, do maintenance costs start to outweigh the benefits of owning that item?
I’ve spent more than half my life delivering change in different world markets from the most developed to “emerging” economies. With a wealth of international experience in international financial services around the world running different operations and lending businesses, I started my own Consultancy to provide solutions for improving performance, productivity and risk management. I work with individuals, small businesses, charities, quoted companies and academic institutions across the world. An international speaker, trainer, author and fund-raiser, I can be contacted by email. My website provides a full picture of my portfolio of services. For strategic questions that you should be asking yourself, follow me at @wkm610.
Labels: Financial, Productivity
