Employees - it's not what they do or how they do it that really counts

The saying goes "It's not what you do, it's the way that you do it." I disagree - that's not what is most important.

The saying's incomplete. Actually what's important is who we are when we do it. Hence the saying should be "It's not what you do or the way that you do it, it's really about who you are are when you do it." Because who you are drives how you do it. It's about your identity.

We all have mutliple identities. Every day, I'm a husband, a father, a son, a brother, I'm a businessman, a boss, a leader, a manager, a friend, a coach, an advisor, a sportsman (although I constantly argue with myself about that when I'm struggling through a run!), a confidante and many, many more. I have rules for each, guidelines which I use to assess whether I'm performing well in that role and as a result the way I behave when adopting each identity is subtley different. I have a different identity when I'm working than when I'm a father and my behaviour is different because of who I am at that moment.

I sometimes don't use these identities as effectively as I could. I confuse them or adopt the wrong one in the moment and my behaviour is perhaps then not appropriate to the situation. If I'm focused more on my son identity for example, it might not be entirely helpful if I'm in a business meeting. Or if I'm in boss identity I'm absolutely sure it wouldn't work when I should be in husband role.

Of course we're all an amalgam of all our individual identities and we unconsciously shift between them through each experience during the day, but wouldn't it also be helpful to make the process conscious sometimes? To focus on who we want or need to be at that moment in order to be at our best?

It's also an vital consideration for employers. Whilst working is each employee adopting the identity the employer wants, the one that best achieves success for them? When serving a customer, are they a customer experience deliverer, or wearing the company mask whilst really being father, mother etc.

And fundamentally, are they even clear on the identity their employer wants them to have? Even more fundamentally, is the organisation even clear on the desired identity? If not, how can they possibly expect their people to adopt it?

LinkedIn: http://uk.linkedin.com/in/timhadfield
Twitter: @accordengage
Telephone: 0044 07906650019

How to make decision making easier

In my experience the best ideas are the ones that get a "That's so obvious!  Why didn't I think of that?" response after they've been expressed.  That was exactly what I thought recently after hearing an interview with Sir Martin Sorrell, Chief Executive of WPP, the gobal advertising agency, in which he talked about decision making.

In it he explained that the key to effective decision making is having a plan, against which any and every decision should be considered.  He explained that he makes decisions based on whether they are  in support of and aligned to the plan.  If they are it's a yes,if not a no.  He explained that it means regularly reviewing the plan to make sure it's current and then keeping it front of mind at all times.

That's it, an extraordinarily simple way to help make quick and effective decisions!  I'm going to try it.....

LinkedIn: http://uk.linkedin.com/in/timhadfield
Twitter: @accordengage
Telephone: 0044 07906650019

Why being a 'big' football club probably means taking advantage of fans...

I have just seen a breaking story on the internet about Norwich City Football Club calling the police after a 17 year old fan leaked it's new strip 12 hours before the official launch. 

The student obtained the pictures from the club's official website when it was being updated and then posted the images on Twitter and internet forums.  He didn't hack into the site, the pictures were visible on pages being updated.

Norwich City apparently telephoned him at 04.30am the next morning to ask how he had got the pictures and then telephoned the police.

I don't really see what he's done wrong as the pictures were in the public domain when he obtained them - but it's something else in the coverage that caught my eye.

The club's Chief Executive David McNally was interviewed and explained why the club involved the police:
"We are the guardians of the football club whilst we're here and so we will protect our property.  Our property in the digital age involves our intellectual property, so we won't allow anybody to come in and take it from us." 
I suspect it was done more out of excitement than maliciousness Mr McNally so the action seems a bit disproportionate but actually that's not the point either.  He goes on to defend the club's decision to launch a new shirt after using the current one for just one season:
"Let me tell you, big football clubs change their kit every year.  If we are a big football club then we have to act like a big football club, "he said.  "If we don't, we are at a competitive disadvantage to other big football clubs and the vast majority of supporters perfer the kit to change every year."

That's a poor response to a reasonable question in my view Mr McNally.  It's also symptomatic of the way that those 'big' clubs view their supporters.  A more honest answer might have been: "How dare you suggest it's not the right thing to do!  All big football clubs change their kit every year, and we're on the band-waggon.  It's a great way to squeeze more money out of the punters and if other club's can get away with it then so can we.  We'd be stupid to miss out on the opportunity to fleece them again before the new season starts."

I'm amazed at how most football clubs treat their customers (with the exception of a few isolated cases of clubs where the people running the club are a little more enlightened).  They are taken for granted and seen as opportunities to generate income first and supporters with whom it's worth developing a long term relationship with second.  Developing the long term relationship means taking actions that are in their interests even if it has a short term impact on income, knowing though that the long term benefits are far greater.  But short term thinking rules and it's already impacting the relationship many supporters have with 'their' club.  The problem is that if fans believe they're being taken advantage of their relationship with the club breaks down, it ceases to be 'their' club and the stop going to matches.  In my opinion that's the key thing that's driving lower attendances for many clubs this season.  Lower disposable income might get the blame, but the underlying cause is that they don't feel the same connection with the club.  If they did, most would find the money from somewhere.  I forecast crowds will continue to fall and more clubs will experience financial difficulty.  More will go into administration and some may be liquidated.

So why don't those in positions of power at the clubs see past the short term?  It may be because most people involved in football club management are at clubs for just a few years and then move on somewhere else.  Unlike supporters, who see their relationship as a long term commitment, management thinks short term, expecting they won't be for longer than a few years.  It's not a good business model - and it's one that needs to change if relationships with supporters is to become core to their business strategy.....

LinkedIn: http://uk.linkedin.com/in/timhadfield
Twitter: @accordengage
Telephone: 0044 07906650019

Why flexibility is important in customer experience design

In his book entitled 'Moments of Truth', written in 1986, Jon Carlzon said "Anytime a customer comes into contact with any aspect of a business, however remote, is an opportunity to form an impression." I agree and would go a step farther: Everytime a customer interacts with any aspect of a business, however remote, the experience they have shapes how they feel and as a result the nature of the relationship they have with it.

The importance of customer experiences has been widely recognised for some time. Indeed, there's a thriving customer experience consulting industry focused on helping organisations to improve their customer experience. And yet, most organisations still fail to deliver experiences that deepen the relationship with their customers. Even organisations that claim to be customer focuseds are more often than not organised to maintain their existing ways of working (structures, policies, procedures), often at the expense of the customer experience. Few truly organise themselves around customers and work in a way that is best for them.

The problem is that they don't understand the experience customers are having. They don't understand how customers interact with them, or how customers feel about those interactions and they don't understand the 'moments of truth' which make or break the relationship.

Customer experience mapping can provide that understanding. It enables understanding of how customers interact, how they cross channels, how they feel as a result of their interactions and the moments of truth where a positive experience builds loyalty or where a negative one destroys it.

And understanding is the first stage of the process of change. Awareness of the detail of the current state creates the opportunity to deliberately design positive customer experiences which evoke feelings that enhance the relationship - and consequently improve the bottom line.
The benefits also extend beyond customer experience. Mapping the customer journey highlights where internal processes are unnecessary and provides an opportunity to reduce delivery costs. The clarity of designed customer experiences also provides a focal point to engage employees with and behind. And ultimately because the experiences customer have drive their perception of the organisation, it's about brand creation and delivery.

AND YET.....some organisations who have mapped their customer journeys are still not achieving great results. Why? Because in implementing the experience they've designed they manage out the ability of people involved in the delivery of the service to be flexible, to use their initiative and adapt according to the situation.

To deliver customer experiences which really add value, understand the current experience, design the framework of desired experiences and then allow people to work within it to deliver the experience in the way they see fit. Business has always and will always be primarily about people relationships....

LinkedIn: http://uk.linkedin.com/in/timhadfield
Twitter: @accordengage
Telephone: 0044 07906650019

The Apprentice: UK (Sugar) v US (Trump)

I watch the Apprentice - the UK version with Lord Sugar and when I notice it's on in the TV listings, I also watch the US version with Donald Trump. Three(?) programmes into the new series in the UK and I have to say I'm watching for negative rather than positive reasons.

None of the candidates are covering themselves in glory. Each episode seems to be full of poor judgements, bad mistakes and dubious behaviours. Having said it's increasingly clear that the way the programme is set up is intentionally designed to encourage the candidates to be very competitive and perhaps in those circumstances it's understandable their behaviours become a bit questionnable.

But the focus of my frustration with the programme is not so much with the candidates - it's more with Lord Sugar. He interrupts the candidates, he talks over them, he belittles them and insults them. He gives them little credit for things they do well, and there's little explanation about the things they don't. His leadership style seems to be based exclusively on positional power. It's all about his position on the show and implicitly about his success in business and huge wealth. And he regularly reminds the candidates of all this. Last night his lines included: "This is my boardroom, this is my process, this is my money!" Clearly he's earned the right to use this style. But it's all too one-dimensional.

"Love and respect do not automatically accompany a position of leadership. They must be earned."

On the other hand, in the US version of the programme it seems to me that whilst Donald Trump sometimes uses positional power he much more often uses personal power. Whilst positional power comes from external factors, personal power comes from within, it's the ability a leader has to influence others through their confidence, assurance and charisma. In my opinion it's more constructive - and a style I'd rather use and follow. And it's also why I make the US Apprentice more watchable than the UK version.......

Which do you prefer?

LinkedIn: http://uk.linkedin.com/in/timhadfield
Twitter: @accordengage
Telephone: 0044 07906650019

Trust and Mistrust

The bloodshed and killing in Syria goes on unabated. Yesterday the news was full of stories casting doubt on whether the peace plan will be respected and hostilities suspended. And as the deadline for the withdrawal of government troops and weaponry from population centres approaches, the government and the opposition forces continue to trade demands with neither side apparently able or willing to take a committed step towards peace. I'm not making a politicial statement here and I'm not apportioning blame - that just appears to be the reality.

Later in the day yesterday I was reading a book entitled 'One Foot Out The Door' by Dr. Judith Bardwick. In it she writes about trust and I came across the following statement:

"Trust may be the single most important condition underlying every kind of relationship and behind every achievement."


My initial thoughts when I read it were about Syria - about the complete absence of trust between the opposing political forces. I then began to think about trust in business and in people's personal lives. Trust is surely the key ingredient of positive relationships. With trust boundaries can be bridged, relationships can be built, issues can be resolved. If there's no trust there's mistrust - there's no neutral, it's one or the other. Trust is constructive, mistrust is destructive. Where there is mistrust, disagreements are magnified, relationships destroyed and viewpoints polarised. Without trust there's no effectiveness in relationships. With trust comes cooperation, without it just conflict, and suspicion of others' actions and motives.

If organisations don't trust their people the focus is on controlling them, on checking what they're doing, on monitoring their output. Rules and regulations are tools to ensure adherence. Disagreement is seen as insurrection. But in environments like this whilst employees might obey the rules, they don't innovate, create and cooperate. They comply, doing just enough to get by. And the power of collective effort to deliver objectives, to achieve success, to accomplish the vision is subdued.

So how is trust created? Trust is a feeling that develops as a result of experience. It's a feeling that develops from experiencing TRUTH. That's it. Truth is people always, always saying what they mean and behaving in a way that's consistent with their words. In business it's about the way leaders behave. And without it leaders have no followers. Leaders earn trust through their actions and as the saying goes "it's hard won and easily lost".

It seems inevitable that it will be a long and hard road back to trust in Syria.....

LinkedIn: http://uk.linkedin.com/in/timhadfield
Twitter: @accordengage
Telephone: 0044 07906650019

The danger of acceptance

I watched my football team play over the weekend. It wasn't pretty! They lost heavily and were perhaps fortunate that it wasn't even worse. They surrendered meekly, with no real fight or passion. There was a resigned look of acceptance on the faces of the players as they conceded goals. Actually that's a continuation of a recent trend as results have been poor and confidence amongst the players seems to have evaporated. Interestingly, there seems to have been an opposite reaction amongst supporters. With each passing defeat levels of frustration and anger grow and and that was certainly evident over the weekend as the unrest amongst fans grew with each tackle missed, run not made, pass misplaced and goal conceded. Losing has become a habit.

Strange as it might seem I don't think the results are the 'be all and end all' for supporters, we all seem to recognise that we're a small club battling against other clubs with far greater resources. But an attitude of belligerence, working hard and upsetting the odds, has created a togetherness with supporters and relative success for 'our' club. But right now it's gone, the players seem to have lost touch with the values on which previous success has been built and there's almost a tacit acceptance of defeat on the pitch. And so the mood in the stands worsens, and unfortunately I think the frustration amongst spectators is now being transmitted to the players and affecting their performances still further. There's a worrying downward spiral.

I think part of the problem on the pitch is a lack of leadership, there's no-one who refuses to accept what's happening, refuses to accept failure, demands more of others, demands change and drives improvement.

This isn't a football blog so I'll leave my frustrations there, but I think there are some reminders about business success or failure and lessons for leaders. :

• Success, failure or indeed mediocrity become a habit
• The performance of people involved in the task is affected by a lack of confidence amongst those on the periphery of it
• When teams forget what's made them successful in the past and operate in a different way, difficulties often follow
• One of the key roles of a leader is to refuse to accept the current situation and instead to constantly seek progress and improvement
• Leadership is even more important when things aren't going well - as the saying goes "when the going gets tough, the tough get going"

I just hope a leader emerges at my club!

LinkedIn: http://uk.linkedin.com/in/timhadfield
Twitter: @accordengage
Telephone: 0044 07906650019