article4

Brand Reputation And Information Effectiveness

Excuses, excuses!

How many times have we suffered as a result of poor quality, lateness or inaccuracy in our business dealings, only to be given the ‘bad information’ excuse: “No-one told me”, “I wasn’t given the right details” and “The database was wrong”. And how often have IT got the blame, when the reality is that ‘information’ is the responsibility of the owners, not the builders who provide its home, doors and windows.

One incorrect entry into a database, no matter how innocent, can create real problems further down the line A skilfully designed interface can help, but it still remains down to the information generator and person at the keyboard to ensure accuracy.

The truth is that IT’s reputation provides an easy scapegoat, and excuses about information inadequacy provide a convenient buffer to accountability. Dealing with the effectiveness of information across the organisation, from a content and language perspective, can significantly increase the organisation’s reputation, from the inside out.

Externally the business becomes known for both efficiency and attentiveness, whilst internally it becomes known as having a ‘can-do, must-do’ culture. One way in which organisations seek to reconcile the internal and internal state is through CRM, which is in itself a great example of information effectiveness (or not) and the search for a common uniting ‘language’.

In pursuit of the CRM holy grail!

Today’s competitive world has placed pressure on most organisations to review how they understand and relate to their customers more effectively. Often the first reaction is to look at technology solutions to deliver the full capability, and there are no shortages of vendors who claim to provide systems that can solve this challenge.

However, there is something fundamentally wrong with this approach. CRM is essentially a people, not a technology problem, and technology on its own cannot manage behaviours. In fact it is a victim to them.

Organisations often do not look closely enough at how people naturally communicate and what drives their interaction, or lack of, before investing in these systems. Little wonder then that effective implementation rarely lives up to expectations.

CRM technology can provide ‘the way’ but it certainly does not provide ‘the will’. In many situations it becomes an icon of internal ridicule, thus damaging reputation even further from all perspectives.

What is your profile?

Don’t get me wrong, I am not saying that technology is not important, in fact, it is essential, but only in context. People across the organisation at all abilities must be able and willing to engage with any CRM solution and when technology comes in ‘IT’ language then it is unlikely to be anything but intimidating for the majority.

I work with organisations from SME’s with 30 employees to multi-national retailers and more recently with the United Nations on a cross-nation initiative. Regardless of size or status the same old stories keep cropping up. Why, because it is all down to people.

Test this out in your business regarding your current CRM package. Draw a cross and at the top axis point write ‘I want to use this’ and at the bottom ‘I do not want to use this’. On the left hand axis point place ‘I can use this’ and on the right hand point put ‘I cannot use this’. Place the individuals in your team in the appropriate quadrants and ask yourself if this is a confidence, disengagement or capability issue.

Profiling in this way will show fascinating results and help you to understand what needs to be achieved before technology can supply an appropriate solution.

If you apply this across the organisation you will discover that different teams and departments tend to populate particular quadrants, which is why there is no such thing as a one size fits all solution.

How many times have we heard the ‘Brits’ being criticised for arrogance, because they behave abroad as if everyone can and should speak English. Why then do we make the same mistake regarding information ‘language’?

Desire & incentive

There are many influences behind what motivates people within organisational life, however, feeling that you are part of a brand where you can make a meaningful contribution and be recognised for it, ranks very highly.

A lack of clarity of purpose and working in silos, too easily leads to situations such as “why should I bother, they won’t use the information I sent” or “I did what they wanted and then heard nothing more”. Worse still, “they just changed it with no consideration for my hard work and opinion”

If your business is built around a CRM commitment, and yet as a tool it is at best misunderstood and at worse divisive, then you are actually damaging what you are trying to protect – your reputation! Given the expense of this kind of exercise, it is no wonder that many of our clients have a ‘rabbit in the headlights’ look when asked about ROI.

Is it your lack of skill?

Have you ever looked at detailed information (report, lists, numbers, etc) and found that is was just an intimidating barrage of visual ‘noise’? What did you do? Switch off, scan desperately to find clues, pretend you understood when you didn’t, or challenge whoever provided it?

Have you been presented with high level information, and thought it lacked relevance or substance Worst of all have you looked at strategic information on which a critical decision is dependent, only to find that you had no trust in the validity of the content? If you can relate to these circumstances, you are not alone. Where does the fault lie, with your ability, with the creator of the information or with the software on which it was produced?

If only I had a pound for every time I’ve sat through this kind of counter-productive debate.

What one department sees as necessary in terms of information, another sees as inadequate and visa versa. Sometimes one is in the wrong, sometimes both are in the wrong and worse still, I have experienced situations where they are both right! If you have a sales and finance department you may well have experienced something similar!

We all have our own way of processing and valuing information. As a result we place greater (or lesser) emphasis on its importance from our own but not necessarily from someone else’s perspective. A good CRM strategy recognises this dilemma and seeks to look at the business from a strategic as well as a tactical perspective along with the capability and confidence issues that drive success. Only when this is done can the right technology solution be agreed.

Confidence and permission

Having the confidence to manage and use information to good effect may seem like a less obvious point, but a legacy of silos and politics within an organisation, can often play a critical role in creating disengagement and mistrust.

Situations where team members have the desire and skill to tackle information issues, but are prevented from doing so because they may do some ‘toe-stepping’, are common. Managing these ‘turf wars’, and their effects on attitude and confidence within a CRM solution, is a daunting task.

The individual departments within the organisation cannot be expected to manage this situation on their own, as their specific ‘purposes’ are often too diverse.

Here are a few thoughts to help you on your way!

- Start by understanding the attitudes and needs of people in the mix - relegate discussion of technology solutions to the end of the exercise

- Understand your organisation’s information profile - this is critical to guide how you implement your CRM program in order to be sure it will deliver a measurable ROI that directly contributes to your brand reputation

- Clarify purpose - understanding how departments contribute, interact and impact others is important to assess and prioritise information and quality needs. Focus on the relevant needs and flow of information in order to get rid of unnecessary ‘information noise’.

- Do not assume there is a happy-family solution. Companies employ MD’s because the other directors require managing, why is information and CRM any different? Someone at a senior level (not necessarily an IT person) should have the same sort of responsibility – link needs and performance for the greater good

- Agree and value a common language - inevitably projects of this nature are led by one or another department. It is critical that when they review and define the information needs (rules & standards) that they do not create a biased solution that only meets their needs. Customer service is more often than not reliant on information shared across departments; your common language needs to make that possible, not be another excuse for not being able to help the customer – “let me transfer you to that department”…aarrgh!.

- Match a system to your requirements, not your requirements to a system - when organisations try to force fit existing solutions into their world, it often creates a lot of resistance as critical needs are often missed, leaving people with no choice but to develop their own micro-systems

- Always measure every decision against benefit to customer and impact upon brand reputation – always ask each head of department to justify requests and decisions on that basis. Metrics need to be very focused, simple and accessible by all levels – ideally presented in a language that everyone can relate to – a company ‘currency’, which may not be financial

- Utilise independent specialists (not software or hardware sellers) to help develop language, standards and governance procedures against the previous criteria

There is no end, only another beginning!

Once you have got through the minefield of addressing the challenge it unfortunately does not stop there. The reality of human nature and change dictates that there is a great chance that information capability will degenerate over time, unless you have ‘the will and the way’ to monitor, measure and constantly improve what is going on.

Ultimately reputation is driven by customer experience, and being effective with your information has a direct bearing on your ability to provide a positive experience, with a brand reputation to match.