If it matters enough to challenge, then there's hope

I saw the new (at least I think it's new) Hiscox Insurance advert on TV this week.  I really, really like it - it just strikes a chord for me.  If you haven't seen it and would like to it's here:
Hiscox TV advert

"Institutions have let us down and today it seems a persons word has lost it's worth.  Yet if the fading of these values disturbs us, then surely they must still matter.  We still admire honesty and fairness, whatever you choose to call it, honour is still at the heart of how most of us try to live our lives."

These words, contained in the advert, and the sentiment they convey resonates deeply with me.  I particularly like the word 'honour'.  It's not a word you hear often nowadays unfortunately - I wonder if it's perhaps considered a bit old-fashioned?

Continuing the theme .....on Tuesday I read an article in the Telegraph which suggested that in the UK the cult of personality has run rampant and that it's time to return to more old-fashioned values.  You can find it here if you're interested:
Telegraph article

The article states:

"Character, and specifically its neglect, is the number one issue of our age. A society that is not grounded in deep values, that doesn’t know who its heroes are and that lacks a commitment to the common good, is one that is failing. Such we have become."

The writer goes on to say that we need to replace the cult of personality with a new age of character. We need a world where people are judged not by how they promote themselves or how the media present them, but by what they do.  I agree!

It further reports that Tuesday saw the launch of the Jubilee Centre of Character and Values at the University of Birmingham.  The aim of the centre is to promote and strengthen “character” within schools, families, communities and companies.  The character strengths it will advocate are self-restraint, hard work, resilience, optimism, courage, generosity, modesty, empathy, kindness and good manners.  More somewhat old-fashioned values. 

I'd like to add honour to the list.  Honour: personal integrity; allegiance to moral principles.

I'd also like to add respect, in the sense of having esteem for and a sense of worth toward others.  Also faith, as in trust of a person or thing, albeit that trust clearly has to be earned.  And definitely responsibility, for our actions and behaviours.

I believe that most of these values aren't considered as important now as they once were.  Their importance has faded.  And yet I also believe that most people are also disturbed by that and so they must still matter. We notice when they're absent or in short supply and it matters because their absence damages our experience as a customer.  And we're all customers, subject to the decisions, actions and behaviours of organisations we interact with. 

But most of us are also involved in the delivery of products and or services to customers as employees or business owners.  Strange then that there seems to be a discrepancy between what we want as a customer and what we're prepared to provide as a supplier. 

If these values really are important to us as individuals, if they really do matter, then the experience as a recipient or supplier should broadly be the same because we hold them dear all of the time.  If they matter enough for us to challenge their absence (in ourselves and in others and whether we're the recipient or the supplier) then there's hope....

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

5 Steps to making the employee experience through change as 'good as it can be'

In my blog on 26th March I commented on one of the main reasons that change fails - that when change is planned, the people elements are usually the last to be considered and have the least robust plans.  I also wrote that the solution is not putting the people elements last. It's putting them right at the top of the agenda.  Prioritising the people experience through change, results in the desired benefits being realised and sustained more effectively.

But in practice how does a company do that?

The basis of the process is Plan, Do, Review, but with a non-traditional slant, deliberately putting consideration of the people elements at the heart of each stage, designing it in.  There are five key steps to embed this in change activity:

1. Articulate the desired outcomes and business benefits of the change.
   Project Managers always stress the importance of scoping a project carefully, of understanding excatly what it aims to achieve.  And of course that's true, if the destination is unclear then it's not very likely you'll get there!  And as an American journalist called Chuck Palahniuk said: "If you don't know what you want, you end up with a lot you don't."  This step is no different to any project.  It's really important to understand the desired outcomes and benefits of the change.
2. Articulate the employee outcomes required to deliver the desired business outcomes.What most projects don't do, but what is absolutely critical is to think about and articulate how employees will need to be different following the change.  If the business benefits are to be realised what will they need to do differently?  What actions should they take, how should they behave, what will the business need them to feel?  Being clear on these requirements is key.  Most change requires people to do something differently so how can the change be effective unless there's clarity on what it is?
3. Articulate the employee experience through the change i.e. what will they say?When the required people changes are clear, the next stage is to understand what the experience should be through the change for those involved in it or impacted by it - so that the necessary conditions are in place to produce those people changes.  During this stage being very specific is valuable.  What things should those involved in or impacted by the change be saying at each stage of the project?
4. Embed the employee experience in project design and management.Steps 2 and 3 generate awareness and understanding - which can then be used to drive the design of the project and this ensures that people are at the heart of the project.  It means that rather than designing actions that target business outcomes in isolation a joined up holistic approach can be taken.  It focuses on the people experience necessary to produce the people changes because the people will ultimately deliver the business benefits.
5. Gather feedback through the change and consciously improve the experience.Gathering feedback specifically on the people experience is very important.  Are the actions taken stimulating the sorts of comments produced in step 3?  And if not, what needs to be done differently?  And if they are, how could it be improved anyway?

Get these things right and the success of the project and achievement of the desired outcomes and benefits will be better.  I've seen it time and time again.

And the approach produces indirect benefits too.  Because the employee experience is better, engagement of those involved in the change (even if the outcome is negative for them personally) is better, as is the perception of others that the change is being done in the right way.  That's the reason I call this the 'Good as it can be' process.  There can't always be a positive outcome for people following change, but change can always be designed to be as good as it can be for people.  For example, and this is certainly topical right now, when undertaking an organisational restructure resulting in redundancies, every organisation wants those who are displaced to leave feeling they've been treated considerately through the process.  And that those who remain retain commitment to the organisation because of how they saw colleagues treated. 

Designing the people elements in isn't difficult, and is beneficial.

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

Customer charges and the 'fairness' test

I booked a family holiday over the weekend.  My preference actually was to wait a while longer before booking but after lengthy discussions with my wife we decided to book and give ourselves some certainty.  I wish we'd waited a little longer because yesterday evening my wife found a couple of online reports suggesting that the food at the hotel we'd booked wasn't good and indeed, there'd been an outbreak of food poisoning as recently as last month.  So, you've guessed it, we decided that we should change the booking to another (more expensive) hotel instead.

I intitially tried to change the booking online but some of the instructions were a little confusing so I rang the Thomson holidays call centre this morning.  They politely informed me that the charge for the amendment would be £50 per person, or £300 in total.  They also reminded me that their terms and conditions on their website made the amendment charges clear.

They do and I should have been certain that I was happy with the original hotel before confirming the booking.  I accept my error - and admitted it to the Thomson agent.  But that's not really my point here.  During the telephone conversation I asked them to explain why the amount is so high - after all it can't possibly cost them £300 to change a booking can it?  Indeed, it's still £300 if I do it myself online - in which case presumably it's all done without human intervention at their end.  Their explanation for the charge is:

1. It's clearly stated in the terms and conditions
   At this point I reiterated that I accept that but that I'd like to know how they calculate (and justify) the charge.
2. Fees like this are factored in to the cost of running their call centre.
   Really, how?

I did ask them to consider reducing the charge and they explained that it wouldn't be fair to do that for just one customer.  They then put it another way, "it's only fair that we charge all of our customers the same fees.  My suggestion that they may be profiteering at the expense of every customer who wants or needs to change a booking fell on deaf ears.

I've since been thinking about why I'm so cross about this.  I don't believe it's because there is a charge, it's actually because the charge appears to be unfair.  The amount doesn't seem to bear any relation to the cost of undertaking the amendment.  And this has set off two trains of thought for me.  Firstly, how prevalent are punitive charges like these?  Have they become greater and more common during the economic downturn as short term thinking drives behaviour to apply charges to maximise profit?  And secondly, do the companies that charge them assess how their application affects repeat bookings and customer loyalty i.e. is this a sound business decision?  Do customers come back and book in future years despite the charges or is it (as I believe) a poor long term decision because a customer is lost for good?  I know for example that I won't book a Thomson holiday again.

What are your experiences of what appear to be unfair charges and did they impact the relationship with the organisation?

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