Showing posts with label customer. Show all posts
Showing posts with label customer. Show all posts

Thursday, October 29, 2009

Compensation & Recognition

Many things can be said about how people behave, but recognition and compensation make many people do the right thing. So, the fundamental question is how we distill the right collaborative behaviors through the use of compensation and recognition. In the area of compensation, we obviously refer to variable financial compensation in one way form or shape. This is often called bonuses, and frankly these days that word does not have a very good press. Measuring people on collaboration, as referred to in the previous entry, and combine the achievement of appropriate goals with rewards help distill behaviors. However, there are a couple elements to keep in mind:

  • First the objective needs to be achievable and the person needs to have the feeling he/she can influence the objective
  • Second, the reward needs to be significant enough it gives the person the impression he/she is valued. Never forget that in many countries reward is taxed, resulting in the beneficiary absolutely not receiving what you pay.IMG_7887

Most people are in great need of recognition. According to Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs, once people have addressed their physiological and safety needs, they are looking for a belonging and esteem. Recognition helps them feel part of a group and being respected. In today’s environment where most people in business have their physiological and safety needs covered, belonging to a group, being respected and growing their self-esteem covers their needs, and prepares them to unleash their creativity, their problem solving capabilities and all those other elements that maximizes their value for the business.

Recognizing somebody is often easy. But I am so astonished it is regularly overlooked by managers. Saying to somebody “Job well done”, pointing out the value he/she added, congratulating her/him in front of people should be a natural to management. It is a major aspect of leadership, one that helps getting the best out of people and increases their loyalty to the company and to management.

Compensation complements this as it is a more tangible way to recognize. It complements recognition, and should, in my mind, be kept for great achievements. It should not become a given. In my mind, the current bonus discussion demonstrates that compensation needs to be managed very carefully, or things are getting out of hand. The team and collaboration aspects should always be included. I remember my frustration when selling projects that the sales person received a lot of recognition and a big bonus, while myself, the project manager, and my team, who really had established the credibility in front of the customer, barely received a thank you.  That does not foster collaboration.

So, in a nutshell my rules are simple, recognize and say thank you, reward when truly remarkable, but always look at the core team as one, not a bunch of competing individuals.

Tuesday, September 8, 2009

Organizational structures often hinder collaboration

Large enterprises often have complex organizational structures based around business units and product lines. Customers on the other hand are looking at them as one organization and are astonished of the difficulty they have to collaborate amongst business units. The first of the 5 key elements I highlighted in my previous post is the organizational structure. The revenue generating entities are typically supported by shared service centers such as finance, human resources, marketing, IT and others. Each BU (business unit) has its own budget and is supposed to manage its own environment.

Many companies use an allocator key to spread the costs of the shared services over the business units. And here starts the debate. What key is used? For example, HR costs are often shared by headcount and this makes sense. But in my company, IT costs also got allocated by headcount, arguing that the more people were working in a department, the higher the IT costs. This worked well till some BU’s started to outsource production, using important IT resources to track operations with partners. They increased IT, but their headcount reduced, resulting in lower allocations. This obviously does not improve collaboration between the BU’s as some feel they end-up paying for others.

IMG_5353Shared services are required to ensure consistent operations across the organization at the lowest cost, but ensuring a fair mechanism is used to ventilate the costs of these services across the whole organization is critical to foster collaboration not just between a shared service and a BU, but also between BU’s. In our organization , we have moved away from allocations all together. We rather request BU’s to deliver a given “contribution margin”. The BU now has under its responsibility the management of the costs it controls, while corporate manages all shared services costs and funds those from the accumulated contribution margins. It eliminates the allocation debate, but replaces it with a debate about why one division’s contribution margin should be higher than another.

Another area of friction between BU’s is related to the place of the sales force. As pointed out earlier, customers expect sales teams to represent the whole company. So, should the sales force be a shared service, or should there be sales teams in each BU? Frankly, there is no right answer here. If a central sales force is used, debates about the cost of that sales force and the lack of representation of a particular BU in front of the customer, will be at the center of the debate. On the other hand, if each BU has its own sales force, the representation of the integrated portfolio of the company is lacking. If you are an IT company for example, despite the fact the customer wants his business problem to be resolved, it is difficult to explain the hardware BU the customer is not interested in blade servers for example. He will buy them if the sales person can demonstrate they resolve his problem. They are a consequence, not a selling argument. But frankly, this is heresy for hardware BU people.

There are many other examples where the organizational structure hinders collaboration. This is actually a never ending story and continuous adaption is required to address this. Strong leadership at the top will guide the organization through this. But we will come back to that element in a later post. Have you had experiences like the ones described hear? Share them, we can all learn from it.

Thursday, September 4, 2008

Can you beat up your customer

In the last couple entries, I spoke about the cultural differences between the Dutch and the Belgians, let me stay on that topic as it allows me to illustrate even more why we cannot take things for granted.

Several years ago, I was asked by one of our sales people to join him in a sales call to his Dutch customer. This was actually my first sales call in the Netherlands and I accepted it immediately. I thought it might be interesting, it actually was, way beyond my expectations, but for completely different reasons.

After the check-in at reception, we were guided to our clients office and sat down in front of him. My colleague introduced me, up till then, nothing unusual. But he turned back to his client and told him in non uncertain terms, he was completely pissed of with him because he had not placed the order he had promised and as such, my colleague had missed his forecast. Obviously, the client did not take that and the discussion heated up quite heavily. I was sitting on my chair completely frozen and asked myself how soon we would be thrown out. I could not understand why he was risking the whole relationship for what turned out being a small delay due to someCRW_0380 administrative issues. The bashing lasted for about one hour. When they finally came to an agreement and the customer apologized (believe me or not), he turned back to me, and as it was already late afternoon, told me, "look I want to hear what you have to tell me, why don't we go and take a drink in a nearby bar. This will allow us to talk more freely." And yes, the customer even paid for the drinks.

The Dutch have this great capability to completely separate business and private life. It is not because you have an issue on the business side, that this will affect your personal relationship. This is actually a great asset, but that got me shivering before understanding what it was all about. Never take things for granted, make sure you get briefed on how business is done in a country prior to go to the first customer meeting. I can tell you out of personal experience. Do you also have such stories to tell?