The Values Conversation

Posted on November 30, 2011 by Ralph Dandrea — No Comments ↓

The values conversation is the second of three critical conversations for supervisors to have with team members and prospective hires. At ITX, we are implementing these conversations across the board, with all of our team members, in order to align them with our company’s goals, and to keep them aligned.

The commitment conversation gets us clear about each team member’s level of commitment to the company. One of the things we ask is for our team members to be committed to our values. This second conversation provides a more solid understanding of exactly what that means.

Why We Need the Values Conversation

With the commitment conversation, we got clear about what we expected from team members and what they could expect from us. This pact underway, we are ready to enter the next phase of building our relationship. The essence of this conversation is to provide an understanding of the organization’s values in order to produce alignment.

Whereas the commitment conversation is about clarity, the values conversation is about alignment.

The key benefits of the values conversation:

1.   It creates an unchanging foundation for the organization’s culture that team members can rely upon, as well as a common view of who we are as a company.

2.   It creates workability. Since each organization will have values that directly correspond to what makes it successful, aligning team members with those values increases productivity and efficacy. Overall behavior and decision-making are guided by consistent principles.

3.   It is a clear measuring stick of alignment. Asking someone about his values tells us nothing. In most organizations, it is fairly easy for a team member to skate by with a very low level of adherence to the organization’s values. However, by implementing the values conversation, we can set a high bar and assess alignment.

4.   It allows team members to live into, rather than subscribe to, values. Subscribing to values doesn’t produce alignment; living into them does. People can say they subscribe to a value, but that doesn’t compel them to do anything. It’s a much greater assertion to be able to say that we live into a value. In our organization, we expect a higher level of commitment, and we pass that onto our clients. We don’t try to sell ourselves by saying, “We’re ITX, and these are our values.” Instead, all of our team members embody those values and live into them.

What the Values Conversation Looks Like

Like the commitment conversation, this is a one-on-one discussion between the team member and the supervisor, and it needs to be an authentic conversation. The supervisor can’t just read from a piece of paper and say, “Oh, by the way, this is what you have to believe in, in order to work here.” These conversations are much more vital than that.

When supervisors first sit down with team members to have the values conversation, they explain its three key benefits as outlined in the previous section. It is important that supervisors convey the usefulness of the discussion before moving on. In fact, the effectiveness with which they do so will have great impact on the team members’ enthusiasm for the process and, ultimately, enrollment into the organization’s value system.

Next, supervisors get to the substance of the conversation: talking about the organization’s values. They break out the key words of the mission statement and define them as they apply to the organization. Four pieces of information are supplied for each word: its definition, its origin, why it’s important to the organization and, most important, the impact that value has on workability for the company.

For example, one of ITX’s values is integrity. If we ask someone to subscribe to integrity without explaining what it means to us, we’re begging for an empty promise to a vague idea. Sitting down with our team members and having a genuine discussion about it facilitates alignment in a way that would otherwise be impossible. People often use the word ‘integrity’ as a synonym for honesty, but our definition goes beyond that. At ITX, we believe that integrity is honoring our word by doing what we say we will do, and taking responsibility for cleaning up the mess when we don’t. Knowing that we make this distinction, a new team member will do infinitely better within, and for, our organization.

So, for ITX ’s value of integrity, our definition is that we honor our word and clean up the mess when we don’t. Its origin stemmed from our view that information technology has historically been a low- integrity business. Technical people tend to focus on technical things over relationships, and what we did was make relationships the most important part of ITX, even though we’re highly technical. For us, integrity has created great workability in all areas of the business.

Our other values are elegance, innovation, mastery, and success. Everyone’s definitions of those values is initially going to be different. If we don’t explain what we mean by those terms, they can’t produce alignment. Like the childhood game Operator, the variations distort the intended meaning if we don’t have the values conversation with everyone. How can we expect anything unique to be created if we force our team members to rely upon others’ definitions of elegant and innovative things? To be sure we are working toward a shared vision, we need to use inspired, but precise, language that aligns us to create our own definition. Then, once we ascertain that a team member’s definition of a value is in line with ours, we have to teach how to live it in our organization. We need to explain how to put the concept to use.

The supervisor must fold actual examples into the discussion that highlight how the implementation of those values benefits the organization as a whole. For instance, we might explain that a team member who is often on time often doesn’t waste other people’s time, and that puts the team member in integrity. If the team member is late once in a rare while, well, that happens, but to be in integrity at ITX, even then any mess that was caused has to be cleaned up immediately. It starts with a sincere apology. Then, if there was any kind of negative impact because of the delay, the team member must take responsibility for that mess.

The team member must be given time to ask questions. If this is a new hire, the team member’s queries and the supervisor’s attentive feedback will lay the groundwork for good communication, the cornerstone of a great relationship. Too often, we rush through team members’ first days of work, which is unfortunate, because that’s when we have the most impact on their outlook.

The conversation must be concluded by talking about the role of authenticity. It bears repeating that authenticity is crucial. The supervisor must tell the team member that it makes all the difference in the world in terms of how well someone is living into the values. If team members are being inauthentic about the values, then they are lying to themselves, the organization, and our clients. It’s very easy for someone to fall into this trap, because people don’t want to be seen as not following the values that they say they espouse. Ironically, the more authentic we can be about the times when we have been inauthentic, the more integrity we have. If we fess up when we make a mistake, we’ll earn others’ trust. It’s as simple as saying something like, “You know what? I was out of integrity. I said I was going to have it done, and I didn’t do it. What can I do to clean up the mess?”

When someone breaks an appointment with you, for example, don’t you get really annoyed if it’s accompanied by a big song and dance…every time? We not only stop believing that these people will ever be reliable about keeping their appointments, but then we start thinking of them as liars, as well. If a client thinks this about someone in your organization, do you think that client will believe you when you say the company espouses integrity? Authenticity means skipping the drama and being professional.

If we make a mistake or fail someone, we must not try to talk that individual into believing that we still have integrity, or that our failure was somehow justified; we have to show that we still have integrity by living into it, admitting our failure, and cleaning up the mess.

Values must be coupled with authenticity in order for us to be truly living into them.

Some Words of Caution

People cannot possibly be aligned with what we want if we simply toss pretty words at them without explaining what they mean to us. It doesn’t take long to make this abundantly clear and to leave no room for misinterpretation. But there are a few things of which we need to be aware. During this discussion, we must be mindful of distinguishing workability from judgment. It is crucial to convey that we are not using the values to judge. We have simply determined that these values work for us. At ITX, we believe that our value of integrity creates more workability. It’s not about whether integrity is good or bad; it’s just extremely useful in making our organization successful.

Putting the Values Conversation to Work

Now that we’ve gone over the system for implementing the values conversation, let’s wrap up the few remaining points so that it can be put to work immediately.

Since the hiring process has already exposed team members to our values, this conversation won’t be the first time that they are hearing about them. It will simply serve to deepen the alignment, since by this point, we will already be confident that the individuals are a fit for our values. If there are any huge surprises by the time we get to the values conversation, we need to look at our hiring process!

Also, if you haven’t yet thought about values as they relate to your organization, it is worth taking the time to thoughtfully consider which ones make it successful.

Values must be selected based on what creates the alignment that will make your organization successful.

Timing is everything. Have the values conversation as soon as you can after someone has committed to your company, during the first week of training, if possible. Instead of the supervisor walking a new hire around the office, making introductions, and talking at the team member as fast as possible, this authentic conversation will serve as a highly professional, inspiring entrée into the organization. Supervisors will probably find themselves in a longer conversation than they are used to with new team members because it will go so well. People get really excited when they see that the organization they just joined is all about values. It gives them a tremendous amount of personal satisfaction that they have been selected because they meet those values. They will also know that they will be supported in their new work environment, because every person there has also been chosen for the same reasons. What could make someone feel more like part of a great team?

We can employ the tool of the values conversation, or we can follow the lead of most companies and just give people a document that they’ll glance at and throw in a drawer. Then everyone can walk around telling each other stories about how they’re living the company’s values, using buzz words from the corporate literature in an effort to impress. Personally, if I want someone to commit to something I believe in, I know I have an infinitely better shot in a face-to-face discussion. There’s nothing like an authentic conversation to convey a vision, foster understanding, and bring about alignment.

The commitment and values conversations are an introduction to the company, giving team members an overview of how values work within the organization. This conversation will lead to the third discussion a company will want to have with its team members, the performance conversation.

 

© 2012 Ralph Dandrea. All rights reserved.

Tagged with: , , , , , , , , , , ,
Posted in Articles

Choosing the Right Words:

Posted on November 30, 2011 by Ralph Dandrea — No Comments ↓

How Language Choice Impacts Comprehension and Results

When we need to discuss a less-than-optimal situation with someone, we often struggle for the right words to effectively communicate what we need to say without causing resentment. Delivering criticism, no matter how constructive, is a difficult task. We can accomplish our mission in a more positive manner by phrasing our disapproval in the form of a possibility for the person, then enrolling him in that possibility. Instead of the individual leaving the discussion feeling bad, having just been told to change “or else,” we’ve now given him a possibility to fulfill.

How Enrollment Works
The concept of enrollment allows us to show someone that the possibility we are presenting is also something they want. The approach is based on appeal, rather than force, and it benefits all concerned. It is easy to persuade someone with rewards or even threats; however, the enrollment technique lets the individual decide for himself what is the most desirable outcome.

The technique is not for everyone. Without the ability to communicate a possibility effectively, the concept will not work. Instead, it will seem like manipulation. Most of us can see right through someone who is trying to persuade us into doing something by attempting to subvert our thought process.

The key to getting someone enrolled in your possibility is to provide the perfect contrast between two future states: the “almost certain, probable future” and the “exciting, possible future.”

The “almost certain, probable future” is what is currently happening and what will most likely occur if things continue the same way. The “exciting, possible future” is what could happen if they take action. The goal is to effectively describe the two futures so that neither one can be easily disputed. When there is no opportunity for dispute, the possibility is much less likely to meet resistance.

Using Language for Greater Impact
Your choice of words will be the determining factor for successful enrollment. They need to create the least amount of resistance. Successfully enrolling people into a possibility is most often accomplished by those who are able to make distinctions between two futures without creating internal struggles for the other person. Extreme words like “always” and “never” are likely to provoke such a struggle. When we tell someone, “You are always late for work,” it is natural for them to want to dispute that fact by pointing out that they were, in fact, on time more often than usual last month. If we tell someone that he never listens, he could try to prove that he does listen by saying he’s actually doing so right now. These examples show how important it is that our word choice is direct and indisputable so that we can avoid resistance and successfully enroll the person.

In comparison, moderate words like “sometimes” and “occasionally” are not likely to provoke a strong reaction of resistance. If we say, “I notice that you are sometimes late for meetings,” a person has little, if any, opportunity to dispute that he has not been late to a meeting at least once.

The golden rule is balance between communicating the issue effectively, but not aggressively, in order to eliminate resistance. The figure above shows how resistance increases with extreme words and decreases with moderate ones. The next time you need to choose words to address a situation, imagine the curve of resistance and where your language would fall.

This same graph can be used with many other word groups with related meanings. In this case, the group of words “never” to “always” are related in describing behavior frequency, and those words will engender a greater or lesser degree of resistance. The concept of greater or lesser resistance can be applied to other groups of adverbs, as well. For instance, you might describe performance by using the following range: worst, poor, average, good and best. Can you guess which will cause the most and least resistance? The same concept holds true not just with the five words in the graph, but with any words that describe a similar situation, especially a situation in which people are emotionally invested.

The next time you find yourself addressing a less-than-ideal situation, ask yourself if you can make your point using less extreme or aggressive language. Could you deliver the same message using moderate words? The more appropriate our word choice, the more chance we have of enrolling someone into a possibility, which is the most effective way to elicit the change we want to see.

 

© 2012 Ralph Dandrea. All rights reserved.

Tagged with: , , , ,
Posted in Articles

Workable Availability

Posted on November 30, 2011 by Ralph Dandrea — No Comments ↓

Workable availability is about getting clear that we will be accountable for our responsibilities at all times, even when someone else is standing in for us. This includes when we are on a lunch break, out sick, on vacation or working on another project somewhere. In almost every situation in life, we can make sure our priorities are being handled, if not by us, then by someone competent to take over in our absence.

Our team members should be able to expect that our responsibilities are being handled, even if we are temporarily unavailable.

Sometimes we need to be out of the office, but we can mitigate the effect it has on everyone around us with a little consideration. Here is a good example of an unworkable way to manage a personal appointment.

Sarah has to go to the doctor at 2:00. At 1:30, she leaps up from her desk and heads out the door. When she gets back to the office at 3:30, everyone is waiting anxiously for her, wondering where she’s been. Sarah’s boss is angry because a client called with an emergency about one of her projects. Only Sarah knew the answer the client needed, and no one was able to get in touch with her. Rather than realize that she dropped the ball on the client and her team members, Sarah reacts petulantly, annoyed that everyone expects her to be at her desk every minute of the day.

The real problem with this scenario is the loss of workability. Sarah’s client had a problem with her project and she was unavailable to help. Her absence affected the entire staff. They looked for Sarah, emailed her, called her and talked about her. This resulted in a loss of productivity for her colleagues, as well as anxiety for the client. If Sarah had simply take a moment to assign appropriate cover, this issue would never have occurred. Instead, a team member with no knowledge about the project had to take on the responsibility of assuaging the client’s anxiety and assuring them that Sarah (wherever she was) would call back as soon as possible and surely resolve the issue. The team member may have been able to answer the client’s urgent question immediately, with the same efficiency as Sarah, if he had been briefed.

Now imagine an alternative scenario. When Sarah makes her doctor’s appointment, she alerts her supervisor and her team members of the date and time she will be out of the office. She lets them know she won’t be available by phone or email. Sarah asks her team member Kevin to cover for her while she’s out and briefs him about whatever he might need to know regarding the status of her current projects. Fifteen minutes before she leaves, she checks her emails one last time to make sure there’s nothing that she can address before walking out the door. Satisfied that all is currently in order, and that Kevin has all the information he needs to temporarily handle her responsibilities, Sarah heads confidently to her appointment.

When Sarah returns at 3:30, Kevin smiles and tells her so-and-so called with a question about the project and that he gave him the answer. Sarah slides into her chair and gets back to work. No productivity has been lost, no clients are anxious and Sarah is seen as a responsible, competent team member. This is workable availability.

We can create workability by:
• Recognizing that we are expected to be generally available during our stated business hours.

• Understanding that if we are not going to be available, we must notify team members in advance whenever possible. We don’t need to provide specific details, but our team members will be more supportive if we offer general information about why we won’t be available.

• Informing team members about when we will be back in the office, whether we can be reached in the meantime and, if so, how they can contact us.

• Ensuring that someone else is prepared to triage on our behalf if a situation arises.

Workable availability is about setting expectations and being professional.

It increases the organization’s productivity, fosters a more enjoyable, cooperative work environment and enhances our client relationships.

 

© 2012 Ralph Dandrea. All rights reserved.

Tagged with: , , ,
Posted in Articles

Rating Your Team Based on What Really Matters:

Posted on November 26, 2011 by Ralph Dandrea — No Comments ↓

Values and Critical Behaviors

by Ralph Dandrea, Frederick Beer, Jonathan Coupal, Sean Flaherty and Hernan Chiosso

Determining a team member’s efficacy can be a daunting task. Traditionally, managers have relied upon their memories of recent events to critique performance during a review, which can lead to rather vague comments and, in turn, nebulous results. If we really want to see specific improvements, we need a measuring stick that can consistently gauge a team member’s values and critical behaviors.

After operating ITX for 14 years, my partners and I started to realize that some of the best work was being done by a handful of team members, and that others seemed busy but perhaps weren’t pulling as much weight. We liked all of our staff and could discern no obvious differences across the board as to why some of them were propelling the company forward and others appeared to be contributing less. All of these people were hand-picked for their skills, personality and other attributes that we thought would benefit us, so why wasn’t the team as effective as we’d imagined? We pictured them as powerful horses attached to a wagon. Though we had chosen only strong horses to pull the wagon, some of them were going in different directions, so the great horses were not making a great team. We began to think about how we could make sure that each person was aligned with what we wanted to accomplish as a company and sat down to brainstorm. We quickly developed a rating system that would gauge each team member’s true fit to our company, which we utilize extensively today.

How We Developed the System

The first step was to determine which horses were facing in the right direction to keep the cart moving and which ones were creating the resistance that was holding back the best team members, despite their considerable efforts. Then, we could eliminate the poor performers and create a team that would pull a much bigger load. An organization cannot be successful without unity, and a group of likeminded people is going to make a lot more progress than any one of them could individually. If we aren’t fulfilling our mission and living our values as a company, it is only to the extent that we have certain people on the team who aren’t doing so, and we made it our goal to identify them.

We need to make a distinction here that trips up a lot of managers when they are judging their staff. Asking if someone is living our values and aligning himself with our mission is a different question than asking if he is a good person. We tend to let how we feel about people affect how we view their performance level, as opposed to really looking at whether they are consistently meeting our goals. We don’t enjoy saying that people are performing poorly when we think they’re nice, but nearly everyone in an organization is going to be a decent individual. It’s not about being good or bad; it’s about alignment. The underlying premise is, if we improve alignment, we’ll get better team performance.

We knew we couldn’t just ask our managers to tell us if each team member was aligned with our corporate ideology. It would be too easy for them to come back and say that so-and-so was definitely aligned because he’s such a great guy. There had to be a system that evaluated people based on specific questions so that we could determine how they were living our values, such as integrity, rather than how they might talk about or intend to live by them.

Next, we created a system for those values wherein we ask if a person lives that value nearly all the time, most of the time or less than most of the time. The answers are then assigned two points, one point or zero points, respectively, so an individual can get a total score between 0 and 10 for alignment with our values. This is not what they believe, and not what we would like them to do, but an actual demonstration of how they live their lives.

For the other side of the equation, we came up with five performance questions. Whereas with the values questions, we could rather easily combine similar values into five key ones, with performance, we felt the list could be endless, so we brainstormed and wrote down all kinds of things that would make someone a good performer. Then, to narrow the list, which contained 64 attributes, we thought of three people who were good performers and three people who were not such good performers, current and former team members. We rated those six people against each of the 64 dimensions of performance that we had compiled in our brainstorm. To do this, we used only a 0 or 1 system. If we saw that everybody got a 1, a “yes”, for a specific attribute, the good and the bad performers, then the question was not a useful one because it didn’t differentiate. Likewise, if everybody got a 0, a “no”, then that wasn’t a distinguishing question. Third, if we found that two of the good performers got a 1 and one got a 0, there was too much variation to make it a valid question.

Once we eliminated the non-distinguishing questions, the ones where we had all ones, all zeroes or too much variability to be valuable, we wound up with eight questions. We combined those that seemed redundant and came up with what we felt were the five key determining factors for performance fit with our company. Then we applied the 0, 1 and 2 method again for each of the questions to determine fit for the second half of the equation.

As an example, one of the performance questions we ask is, “Can this person get themselves unstuck, or do they require frequent supervisory intervention?” If the manager can’t remember the last time he had to intervene with this particular person, he would give a score of 2. If he has had to intervene once in a while, he assigns a 1, and if intervention has been required more than once in a while, the person gets a 0.

With five questions for each category at a maximum of two points per question, each team member can have up to 10 points on each side. We determine fit with the company by multiplying the two numbers. The reason we take the product instead of the sum is that it doesn’t allow a person to be really good on values but really bad on performance and still seem to make up for it. Our team members need to have both. The more they are aligned with our mission, the higher their total score will be, and if their total is low on either side, their overall score is going to drop significantly. The highest someone can score is 100, 10 on each side. If someone has a 9 on performance and only a 3 on values, they’re rated a low score of 27, because we can’t allow alignment with performance to substitute for values. A high performer with poor values is eventually going to prove a bad fit.

Once we looked at the results of our test group, we were so impressed by how well it worked that we applied the model to everyone in our organization and it continued to produce interesting results. It singled out the people we had thought might be poor performers. It also made us take a closer look at questionable performers.

Using the Results

Score Prescription Archetype
42 or less Transition out Anchors
45 – 54 Counsel and reevaluate Lottery Tickets
56 – 64 Coach for continued improvement Solid Performers
72 – 100 Ensure high job satisfaction A-Players

 

Next, we had to decide what to do with these results. We determined that we needed to transition out individuals with a score of less than 42 and to counsel those with a score of 45 to 54. Typically, people in that range lost points because they weren’t consistently living our values or consistently performing. It’s easier to get somebody from a 1 to a 2 than from a 0 to a 1. If a person gets a 1 on a value, he might have that same value, but he may not be living it all the time because he doesn’t know how. For example, a lot of people don’t know how to live integrity the way we define it, so we have to teach them. If we can define it and give them the rules for it, then they can do a much better job for us. We can usually move team members up a couple of points with coaching, which will get them out of that danger zone, but they’ve got to get to the next level in six months to remain with us.

The next set of products is 56, 63 and 64. Those are solid performers, and companies who utilize this system are going to find that a lot of their staff will fall into this range. These are good players, solid people that we want to keep. We can still coach them a little because there is always room for improvement, but they are already pulling their weight in the organization – they are horses going generally in the right direction.

With 72, 81, 90 and 100, these are people you want to put into golden handcuffs. You absolutely don’t want to lose them. They are your key team members. There are only four possible scores in this range: 8-9, 9-9, 10-9 and 10-10. The action we take here is to make sure that these individuals are receiving excellent compensation, have very high job satisfaction, enjoy what they’re doing and have the opportunity to grow. Usually, no more than 10 percent of an organization’s team members will fall into this category.

If a company has never done any alignment work before and its evaluation shows that everyone is a contributor, the measurements are not helpful. Something is being overlooked. In our experience, we saw that some managers applied the system very rigorously, meaning that they weren’t afraid to ask tough questions and give honest answers. Others didn’t want to admit that somebody who was a good person wasn’t a good fit. They wrestled with that, the distinction between being a bad person and being a bad fit. To equalize the results, they tried all sorts of things, such as attempting to institute half-points or to change the system to rate people higher if they believed in a value but just had a hard time implementing it. The managers who are assessing people have to really accept that calling someone a bad fit is not besmirching their character.

To benefit from the rating system, managers have to be well trained so that this discrepancy can be eliminated; otherwise, the information will be flawed. One of the ways to determine whether people are inflating scores is to have multiple people rate the same individual. That makes it easy to see if there’s one person who is consistently doing the padding. Except in rare cases, it really doesn’t happen that managers underrate their staff.

Using the System for New Hires

In addition to rating current team members for their fit, we are using this system for new hires. Again, in the interview process, we don’t actually ask candidates how they think they rate on integrity. Instead, we say, “Tell me about a time when you didn’t do what you said you were going to do, when you made a promise and broke it. How did you deal with it?” If they talk about cleaning up the mess, then we know that they get the concept of integrity. If they just say they made a mistake and, well, sometimes that happens, we know they’re not a fit for integrity.

Another thing we instituted was a set of questions about performance that we can ask interviewees’ references. We ask about things like their ability to get themselves unstuck and whether they spend their time on value-added activities. We found that if we ask references pointed questions about performance, we get better feedback. People giving references are often hand-picked because they have a high opinion of the person who is being referenced. They will tend to overrate or say good things about the individual because they think he is a good person, the same situation that can happen internally at first. However, if you ask references specific things, like if the person requires a lot of supervision, they’re not going to want to lie. They may try to put the person in a good light, but they will also be more honest. Using this system has greatly helped us to ensure that someone is a good fit before we extend a job offer.

Additionally, we put the rating system into practice when we have a team member who is leaving us or maybe hinting that he might be looking for something else. If someone tells us that he’s not happy in our organization, his score will determine our response. If a team member with a score of 81 turns in his notice, we’re going to pull out all the stops to keep him, whereas if he has a 30 or 25, we know that his departure will only improve the organization. You can just imagine how this has helped us to be quick and decisive when handling these types of situations. We never had that before. In the past, we’d flounder, wondering what to do. Now we know exactly what we need to do. We also understand that just because we’re not pursuing someone who resigns doesn’t mean we think he’s a bad person. He’s just not a good fit, and we have the ability to know that now.

For example, we had team member who was a really nice guy. He was great to have a beer with and was very friendly. He helped people on the weekends doing different things and participated in a lot of company activities, but when he came to us and said he was going to be leaving, we distinguished between the fact that he was a such a nice guy and that he wasn’t such a great performer. In the past,

we would have been more alarmed by his departure, worrying that a nice person wanted to leave. We would have made a mistake and kept him. People interview for personality automatically, but we have to make sure that new hires also fit with our mission and values, and the performance that we need.

Future Development of the System

Because we’ve learned that we will have the strongest relationships with those who are most aligned with our values and performance, we’re starting to apply a similar process to clients and vendors. It’s really held to be true so far. Just like with our current and prospective team members, we found that some customers we thought were good for us weren’t, and others we thought were not so good turned out to be the best to work with and the most profitable.

We’ll also begin looking at how we can eliminate as much subjectivity from the process as possible, to lessen the variability in the way different managers are rating people. If we ask three different managers to rate the same person, we’ll sometimes get numbers that are different. Fortunately, the variance we’re getting is more of magnitude as opposed to variability, in that one manager will tend to rate high in general or one might rate low. It’s not that we have one manager rating someone a 90 and another manager rating that same person a 30. I want to see how we can use language to structure the questions in a way that eliminates as much subjectivity as possible. We’ve done that to a large extent already, but if we keep testing new language, I believe we can reach the point where we get the same results no matter who is doing the rating.

The last piece of development that we’re doing is formulating a monthly conversation that should take place between every supervisor and each of his direct reports. Throughout the month, the manager will take notes about team members in terms of how they’ve lived each of our five values and five performance questions, then discuss those observations with them. The manager will also talk about the things he’s witnessed that month that were inconsistent with those key points. The feedback will be useful in identifying patterns and areas that need improvement, as well as determining strategies for coaching.

 

© 2012 Ralph Dandrea. All rights reserved.

Tagged with: , , , , , , ,
Posted in Articles

Distinguishing Superheroes from Villains

Posted on October 4, 2011 by Ralph Dandrea — No Comments ↓

Customer service is usually perceived as a necessary evil, not something we get excited about, on either side of the phone. What if we instead viewed our part of the customer service equation enthusiastically, as an opportunity rather than a burden? We might be more motivated to do so if we realize that each time we are called upon to tackle a client issue, we will be seen as either a villain or a superhero, depending upon our reaction to the problem. If we just plod through the interaction without really caring about it, we’re cast as the villain; if we deliver spectacular customer service, we get the role of superhero. We need to merit wearing the cape by demonstrating that we’re willing and able to come to the client’s rescue in a way that is meaningful to them.

Being relegated to the part of the villain doesn’t happen just because we do something wrong. If we’re not wearing the cape, the world often sees us as the villain.

Dressing for Success
The skill of looking for opportunities to be superheroes to our clients is one that can be cultivated. Of course, that doesn’t mean we want to start fires just so we get to be the hero. But we can train ourselves to root out our clients’ concerns so that we can address them in a spectacular way. That’s why I use the term “superhero” – fixing a problem changes nothing in the client’s eyes unless it matters to us as much as it does to them. Unless we’re wearing the cape and helping them in a way that will seem meaningful beyond the technical aspects, we’re just delivering the expected standard of customer service. Ho-hum. It makes us look more like helpless bystanders than heroes. Incidentally, the word “villain” is derived from the Latin word for farmhand. It was originally used to indicate someone who was not chivalrous and was thus unworthy of being a knight. When a client is unhappy or upset, that’s almost the perfect time to put on the cape. An even better time is always. Rather than putting on the cape, we can making wearing it a way of life.

What’s the difference between the following two sentences?

“Oh, great, there’s a problem here.” “Oh, great, there’s a problem here!”
Obviously, it’s enthusiasm – a “cape attitude,” so to speak. If you asked someone for help, would you want him to be a reluctant hero, acting like it was a hassle, or to be proud that you believed he could be of assistance? If we’re not thinking, “Oh, good, now I get to put the cape on!” then we shouldn’t be surprised when clients think we don’t care or are even working against their interests, because if their problems don’t truly matter to us, it’s the same thing, isn’t it? A person who has the same concerns as us is seen as a hero; a person who doesn’t share our concerns, or who does but doesn’t take action, is viewed as a villain.

People see those who share their concerns as heroes.

Sharing the Cape
We can take this concept a step further and design our processes and our interactions with customers so that everyone gets to wear the cape sometimes. For example, my company made a change in its collections system. We have a large pile of receivables due from hundreds of customers. The way it used to work was that our accounts receivable people called these debtors and aggressively tried to get them to pay. After repeated attempts, the customers stopped calling back and refused to pick up the phone because they felt like they were being hunted down by a villain.

To give our accounts receivable personnel the opportunity to wear the cape, we took them out of the villain role. Now, our system automatically prints out past due notices that we can mail or email to customers. Instead of a person being the villain, today, the system is the villain. No one has to call clients to tell them they’re going to be disconnected or sent to collections. Whatever the threat is, it comes in the form of a system-generated notice that is made to look like it came from a computer, not a human.

As I said before, though, superhero status isn’t achieved merely by not doing something the client perceives as wrong; it’s coming to the aid of the “downtrodden.” With this system, our people can call the customers and say, “Sir, you’re a great customer, but I saw you received a disconnect notice. Please call me. I can help.” Because we changed our process, accounting gets to put on the cape instead of feeling like the bad guys all the time. The frantic customer is more likely to call in because he believes someone is trying to help him, and a person in accounting can be the hero who sets up a payment plan for him and placates the system by entering in specific dates and dollar amounts. The customer hangs up the phone feeling great about the hero in accounting who did battle on his behalf against the pesky system that kept sending him intimidating letters.

The next time you’re faced with a client issue, will your reaction make you look like a villain or a superhero? It doesn’t take superhuman effort to summon a cape attitude, yet your enthusiastic approach will leave a lasting impression.

 

© 2012 Ralph Dandrea. All rights reserved.

Tagged with: , ,
Posted in Articles

Introduction to Spectacular Service

Posted on October 1, 2011 by Ralph Dandrea — No Comments ↓

A 7-Part Recipe to Move Clients from Anxiety to Joy

When clients complain – in any industry, whether it’s service or product based, and whether it’s an internal client or an external client — our first instinct is to try to solve their problems. Although solving their problem is important, it’s only one part of a spectacular service interaction.

In order to maintain strong client relationships, we must also resolve the emotional aspect of the interaction. You must address the impact the problem has had on the client’s life and how the client feels about the circumstances. Ignoring this emotional aspect can limit your relationship, even if the technical side of the problem can be solved quickly and painlessly.

Think about the last time you had an issue with a product or service.  Let’s say when you called in to complain you experienced stellar client service.  When was your opinion of the company highest? Back when you hadn’t had any issues with them at all? Or after you called in and were treated with excellent care?

Chances are it’s the latter.

Every company falls down sometimes; it’s how we get back up that separates us from the competition.

Spectacular service is a seven-step recipe for reintroducing integrity into our relationship with a client by turning that client’s anxiety into joy, and ultimately, winning affinity and loyalty from the client.

The 7 Steps

Consider the following scenario:

Dennis runs a busy Internet company that relies on its busy website for product orders and client service issues. Servers Plus is the company Dennis contracted with to host his website and his business email accounts. There are 5 email accounts altogether, counting Dennis’s and his sales and support team.

On any given day, Dennis’s business processes 50-100 orders of product as well as multiple client service items. The website and email are Dennis’s life blood.

Servers Plus recently performed an upgrade which was done overnight on a Monday. Unfortunately, the upgrade failed and all of the servers are down which means that Dennis’s business – along with everyone else’s using Servers Plus – is stranded with no email and no website. When clients go to order products, they’re told the website is temporarily unavailable and to try again later.

Dennis relies on product orders to make payroll and the next cycle of paychecks is due in 3 days.

Now we’ll apply the seven steps to Spectacular Service.

Step One: Identify the Concerns

Dennis calls you to complain that he can neither receive product orders nor send and receive emails. This is not only affecting his entire business structure but his ability to meet payroll as well.

The first thing to do is to identify Dennis’s concerns and to understand the impact of those concerns not being met. Don’t assume you know his concerns, their impact on Dennis’ life, or how Dennis feels about it, as your assumptions may often be incorrect. This is not the time to ask fact-finding questions – rather, you must figure out where our relationship with Dennis is out of integrity.

Your questions will give Dennis the ability to let off some steam but always remember that his anger and upset are not directed at you personally. At this moment, YOU are the company. Dennis isn’t calling Fran in client service; he’s calling Servers Plus.

Keeping that in mind will help you avoid feeling defensive. The moment you start trying to deflect client accusations, that defensive tone will creep into your voice and this otherwise controllable issue could quickly turn into a wild fire.

You’ve identified his concern as that his email and web site are not working. The impact of this problem is that Dennis cannot conduct his business without these services, and he’s got to make payroll in three days. As a result, he’s anxious and angry.

Step Two: Acknowledge the Concern

Now that you’ve identified Dennis’s concerns and gauged his emotional state, it’s time to move on to acknowledgement. You can’t continue the process without first acknowledging the client, even if you don’t agree with everything they’ve said.

Remember this:

Acknowledgement ≠ Agreement

You have much more to gain from acknowledging the client than from disputing the truth of some part of their story. You’ll have plenty of opportunity to get to the truth, but not until you have the client’s permission to proceed.

So what do you say when Dennis tells you what has happened and how that will impact his business? Put yourself in Dennis’s shoes and demonstrate that you can relate to his circumstances: “I hate it when that happens” or “Hey, that’s not good. Let’s get working on this.” Whatever your response, it must be genuine.

A fundamental part of the acknowledgement process is to always do it from the client’s perspective, not your own. How would you react if you were the client calling in instead of the one in client service answering the call? And how would you feel if your very business structure was down and you had payroll to meet in 3 days?

The most common cause of customer service failure is the failure to acknowledge. As humans, we desperately seek to be acknowledged. So acknowledging a client brings the interaction to a human level.

Although you may feel the knee jerk reaction of skipping this step and heading right to a solution because you want to help Dennis, resist the temptation.  If you skip ahead and address the problem technically without first acknowledging it emotionally, the client will most likely become closed off to you, maybe even resentful. Dennis won’t be open to hearing the technical solution because he’ll be completely focused on getting you to understand and acknowledge the trouble you’ve caused him.

In addition, it is quite important that you do not take on responsibility or liability for Dennis’s concerns without thinking through the consequences. Just because Dennis is an unhappy client doesn’t mean that you should take on responsibility beyond what has been promised to the client. Be very careful that you don’t agree to liability that doesn’t already exist if you’re not prepared to follow through, or aren’t 100% sure about how to follow through.

Lastly, be sure not to paint your teammates as the scapegoats. Don’t tell Dennis that the tech guys are jerks and can never seem to keep the servers running smoothly and meeting capacity. This will only serve to ramp up Dennis’s agitation even more and his distrust of Servers Plus will grow exponentially. You’ve also just established yourself as a client service rep who isn’t a team player.

Know this: It’s impossible for you to look good if the team doesn’t look good.

The converse is also true: If the team looks good, then I look good.

Step 3: Recommit

Following the identification and acknowledgement of Dennis’s concerns, you’ll get the chance to recommit to helping him with his concerns. Servers Plus will continue to be the company that will meet – and exceed – Dennis’s needs and expectations.

As discussed in the acknowledgement step, it’s tempting to make excuses or place blame on other members of the team in an effort to make ourselves look like the hero.

Dennis truly doesn’t care about your personal reputation. He’s called the Servers Plus team, not you. Blaming the problem on your coworkers doesn’t make you look better. In fact, all it does is show the client our weakness as a team.

In order to strengthen the client’s view of the company, be sure to recommit on behalf of the whole team.  Recommitting can be as simple as saying, “This is not the standard we strive for here.  We need to fix this and, as a member of this team, I am committed to getting it fixed for you.” This identifies a certain standard and recommits to living up to that standard.

Now you’ve put yourself on Dennis’s personal team and let him know that you have his back as a team member. Think of it like this: you want Dennis to see you as seated right beside him in the trenches and not with something separating the two of you.

Skipping recommitment has a negative impact on the client because the concern always feels significant to them no matter how simple or easy it is to fix.  Clients sometimes overreact in the initial exchange because they’ve become so emotionally invested in the problem that they can do nothing but overreact.

But if you take the time to step back, acknowledge Dennis’s pain and recommit to addressing and fixing his concern as a fellow team member, his attitude may soften considerably. Even if he doesn’t say so, he’ll probably realize that he underestimated your dedication and may even apologize for being harsh.  As a result, a stronger connection can be established based on trust and integrity.

The timing of your recommitment is crucial. You must recommit before taking action but after acknowledging the client’s concerns. Why? Because if you take action immediately after hearing the complaint, the client will perceive that your action is a result of their complaint. They will be incented to complain (and maybe even be angry) every time they want you to do something.

Instead, acknowledge and recommit before you act. The client will perceive that your action is a result of your recommitment. This trains the client to ask for your commitment when they want something done, and will make future interactions with the client more pleasant and rewarding.

Step 4: Gather Information

After recommitting to Dennis, you’ll finally get the chance to ask some objective questions and find out the circumstances behind Dennis’s issue. This is the technical side of the equation and has nothing to do with the emotional concerns.

In your questions, be as specific as possible and remember to listen, not just hear. You’ll find that Dennis’s answers may give rise to other, more clarifying questions.

Some of the questions you can ask will be clarifying questions like… What were the exact steps you took when the issue occurred?

How did you discover the issue? How should it work?

Steer clear of any questions that are connected to the assignment of blame. These aren’t helpful because they undo the acknowledgement you’ve just given.

Step 5: Plan for Action

You’ve listened to the complaint, recognized the impact your client has incurred, recommitted on behalf of your team, and gathered the specific information necessary to devise a plan.

A good plan not only identifies the specific steps that must take place to resolve the client’s concerns, but it also is very clear on when it will be done and by whom. Be crystal clear about how you’re going to attack the situation, and whom you need to get involved. Include communication points so that you know when (or at least under which circumstances) you’ll update the client. And make sure that every step has a specific date and time on which it will be finished. Remember: A promise without a deadline isn’t really a promise, but rather is just a dream.

Resolving the issue may take considerable time and effort. In such a situation, it may make sense to first eliminate the impact and then resolve the underlying cause of the problem. This will give the client more immediate results and reduce the pressure to perform. But be sure to follow through with the entire plan. If you fail to eliminate the underlying cause you won’t have a sympathetic client calling again with the same problem.

It may turn out that you must involve other people in this plan. It’s now your job to get them enrolled in helping you to deliver on the promises you made earlier on behalf of the company. Bringing in other people DOES NOT relieve you of your recommitment to Dennis; you’ve just brought more teammates on board to help out.

You are now responsible on two fronts: the promise you made to Dennis to fix his issue and the promise your teammates have made to help out. To maintain trust and integrity with Dennis, it’s critical for you to remain engaged and involved even if you’re waiting for a team member to report back to you.

Because you’ve put yourself on the line with the client, now is not the time to “wing it”. If you’re having trouble creating a plan in which you have confidence, or you can’t seem to enroll those teammates whom you need to help deliver on the plan, escalate the situation to your supervisor.

Step 6: Manage Anxiety

After forming a plan for action, Dennis may still be experiencing anxiety as he awaits word of when the servers will be back up and he can, once again, conduct business and pay his employees.

This is where consistent communication will be your best friend. Keep your clients informed at all times. Provide your client with dates for completion and a regular diet of status updates – this prevents any further anxiety from taking hold. Be clear about the steps needed to complete the resolution of his concerns and how you’re enlisting the help of teammates.

Clearly establish with Dennis how often you’ll be getting back to him. He may require updates every hour and, if that’s the case, make sure to do that. Providing as many status updates as Dennis needs, when you said you would provide them, will help to reduce anxiety and reinforce Dennis’s trust about Servers Plus’s integrity.

Once you’ve called Dennis with updates consistently throughout the day, he may relax more and say the hourly updates are no longer required.

It’s all about Dennis’s level of anxiety. Making a future promise is always okay. Broken past promises are not. With a broken past promise, anxiety increases until the concern is fully and completely resolved. Managing client anxiety is key.

Unresolved anxiety is the single biggest cause for a client to invest time and money into creating a new relationship with a different company. If you don’t use communication to manage Dennis’ anxiety, he will, most likely, start looking for a company that can satisfy his needs and quell the anxiety.

And you’ll have lost a good client – all because you didn’t feel like dialing a number one more time, or following up on that communication as you said you would….

Step 7: Deliver on the Promises You Made

After managing Dennis’s anxiety proactively – you called him 6 times in 6 hours and then emailed him as soon as the servers were back up and running with a plan for how to keep this problem from happening again in the future – you’ve managed to not only address all of his initial concerns but have ramped up the trust and integrity by delivering results and then making sure that the solution is permanent.

While it may come at the end, completion is the cornerstone of good client service. If you don’t finish what you start, you can’t possibly satisfy the client. And if you can’t even satisfy them, there’s no chance they’ll be loyal. In this instance, you and your team were able to assuage Dennis’s fears by committing to fixing his issues and then kept in close contact throughout the day.

Anxiety not only travels fast, it’s infectious. The better you manage the emotional reactions, address all issues and resolve all concerns, the more joy the client will feel.

Here’s how to measure the completion of the deliverable: Have you resolved Dennis’ concerns to his satisfaction? If it’s a resounding yes, then you and your team have done their jobs. You have converted anxiety into joy!

Furthermore, you definitely want to be present with your client as they experience the moment of joy that you’ve created for them, even if it’s only by phone.

For example, when Servers Plus calls Dennis to let him know that the email crisis is over and his website is up and running again, the Servers Plus representative tells him to check his email for a test message. When Dennis receives it and opens it, Servers Plus is there on the phone to experience Dennis’s moment of joy that his business is back on track. And if something goes wrong when Dennis tries to get his email, you’ve saved him the frustration of calling back.

If you haven’t completely resolved the client’s concern, you must continue to resolve the loose ends because, if you don’t, you’re likely to generate new anxiety which will come to a flash point even faster than the old anxiety because it’s merely a new layer of angst atop the original. DO NOT turn the heat off Dennis’s problem until every loose thread – including the threads of the team members you enlisted to help – are wrapped up and tucked in.

How we treat our client has an enormous impact on how the client treats us.

Being there for the client’s moment of joy not only makes absolutely sure that the client’s concern is resolved, but also sets us up for positive interactions with the client in the future. The next time the client calls us we’ll be his trusted team member, not his adversary.

Conclusion

Using Spectacular Service, we can view client complaints in a whole new light: rather than dreading them as awkward conversations or extra, we can now view them as opportunities. We get the chance to prove our dedication to clients in a way that wouldn’t have presented itself without the complaint.

When used effectively, this 7-part recipe delivers great results, including:

–     Restoring integrity and workability into the client relationship

–     Building loyalty within our clients because they can count on us

–     Building our reputation as a reliable and trusted partner

–     Making client interactions more fun – for the client and us

 

Start today by applying these seven steps to your client interactions, and see how you can turn a client’s anxiety into joy.

Special thanks to those who provided insightful feedback for this article, including: Jonathan Coupal, Lisa Daly, Rosanne Simiele, and Lisa Young.

 

© 2012 Ralph Dandrea. All rights reserved.

Tagged with: , , , , , , , , , ,
Posted in Articles

Distinguishing Specified from Important

Posted on September 30, 2011 by Ralph Dandrea — No Comments ↓

When issues arise at the workplace, it can sometimes seem like a scene right out of an Abbott and Costello bit, as one misunderstanding begets another until we and our clients are confused and unproductive. Situations like this often arise due to a lack of specificity.

Just because someone doesn’t specify something doesn’t mean that it’s not important.

In the famous routine “Who’s on First,” Abbott attempts to tell Costello the names of the players on a baseball team. The first baseman happens to be named “Who.” The failure to use specific language results in a hilarious comedic skit, as Costello thinks Abbott is obstinately refusing to address his questions. In real life, this would be extremely frustrating and result in a huge waste of resources. With any request, whether for information, or for a product or service, the specificity of language is crucial if we are going to be able to address people’s concerns.

A multitude of problems can arise when people assume that something is unimportant simply because it’s not specified. If you asked a roofer to repair damage caused by storm, for example, and you come home to find rainbow-colored shingles where there used to be black ones, you might have an issue with that. However, the contract only specified that he should tear off the ruined shingles and replace them with new ones. There’s no language referring to color. The contractor would be correct in arguing that he did what you told him to do, even though you’d also be correct in replying that he should have known that rainbow shingles on a six-bedroom Colonial is highly inappropriate. And, of course, a heated debate about specificity would ensue.

Employing Specificity
The fact is, it’s not useful to bicker about who’s wrong or who’s right, or who’s on first, for that matter. It’s much more effective to figure out the appropriate level of specificity for any given situation. We would expect the roofer, as a professional, to ask questions about details that he knows will matter to his clients. Homeowners usually care about color. Only if someone specifically stated that he wanted the cheapest price possible to ensure that the roof doesn’t cave in would it be reasonable to install rainbow- colored shingles. The professional roofer would need to ask the correct questions to determine what is important to the client to get it right the first time.

In the software business, clients often ask us for a specific feature, but the request is devoid of detail. They count on us to ask them the right questions. If we don’t, are we responsible? Sometimes. But it really doesn’t matter who is to blame, unless we’re determining who is going to pay to redo the work when it’s done all wrong. Plus, it’s hard to build a great relationship with someone when you are arguing over blame. It’s far more workable to avoid that situation at the outset. If a client wants a website, we ask questions and get the responses needed to figure out what they expect the website to do, what it should look like and contain, and any other factors that we know will matter to them in the end, even if the client doesn’t yet know precisely what they want. We lay out all the options and ask pointed questions to help them, and us, reach an understanding of what will be important in the completed project.

In any industry, an organization should have a set of questions for its clients prior to commencing a project. If the client is silent about something, it doesn’t mean that it’s not important, and it’s up to the service provider to consider the specificity that will be required to arrive at a workable outcome.

Precise Instructions Benefit Everyone
With a better understanding of what needs to be accomplished, we have both a more workable scope for the project and a more workable relationship with the client. People always speak with assumptions. The person who is making the request will assume that certain specifications are inherent, and the person who is receiving the request will assume certain specifications, as well, but they may not be the same ones. These differences can lead to issues that could definitely be avoided if the parties realized that just because something was not specified did not mean it was unimportant.

Specificity drives alignment.

The overall effect of a lack of in-depth communication is often a lot of wasted work. The roofer will have to tear off the rainbow shingles and install black ones. The website designer will have to start from scratch. Abbott will be stuck in an endless loop with Costello until either the questions or the answers are more specific. All of it is wasted time that could easily be prevented by understanding that which is important from the beginning so that the expectations of the person making the request are not overlooked. Wasted effort costs time and money, and if we want to avoid those costs, we need to pursue strategies to identify what is important, even when it’s not specified.

Strategies to Identify Important but Absent Specificity

  • 1) Pay attention to assumptions when receiving requests. Listen to what is being said, as well as for unspoken expectations. Respond carefully, rooting out any built-in assumptions and ensuring that there is alignment between both parties’ goals. Deal with any discrepancies immediately.
  • 2) Use your past experience. Consider similar projects you’ve worked on as a reference point. A service provider should have much more knowledge of common concerns than someone requesting the service for the first time. That’s why we’re the experts. We can glean expectations from standard questions based on comments and complaints we received on past projects. In software, we learn that people don’t automatically ask for certain things but will get upset about them later, so we add those items to our list of questions. We can better fulfill our clients’ needs and wants when we hold ourselves responsible for discovering their expectations before we start.
  • 3) Utilize an applicable standard. In most cases, there are industry standards that we can use to outline our specifications. For our organization, if we’re building a Web form to collect information from people who want to sign up for a newsletter, we can use an existing standard for the basics. We can then customize those standards to our own needs and styles, and add our own details. If a client wants us to write a program to transfer funds, we can use financial transaction standards so we don’t have to delineate the same items in excruciating detail. This gives us built-in completeness that we should absolutely utilize. We can also create our own standards. In either case, we must declare the standards that we will be using to our clients in advance.
  • 4) Consider what can go wrong. In fulfilling requests, think about how you could end up disappointing the client. Whether it’s rainbow shingles or an ineffective website, use the strategies outlined to make sure there are no unpleasant surprises. A good test is to ask yourself, “What could cause a reasonable person to object?” If you look at your specifications and find a potential point of contention, get more specific about it with the client.

Following these strategies drastically reduces the likelihood of failing to address something important just because it wasn’t specified, and it will increase speed and efficiency. Instead of simply jumping in and responding to a request, we can do a better job by helping our clients refine their request so we can fulfill their expectations the first time around.

“If I had an hour to solve a problem, I’d spend 55 minutes thinking about the problem and 5 minutes thinking about solutions.” – Albert Einstein

“A problem well stated is a problem half solved.” – Charles F. Kettering

We can create a highly workable environment by finding ways to make something right before we make a mistake. Too often, someone will say, “Well, the customer didn’t tell us they wanted that.” When we’re arguing about fault, it’s just about who’s going to suffer the waste. Yet, that really doesn’t matter, because even if we manage to be right, the client who is deemed wrong doesn’t want to deal with us anymore. A winning organization is not going to lose a client relationship over pettiness. Its team members will instead have the vision to foresee problems and solve them for the client before the project has even begun.

 

© 2012 Ralph Dandrea. All rights reserved.

Tagged with: , , , ,
Posted in Articles

When the Clock Starts Ticking

Posted on September 29, 2011 by Ralph Dandrea — No Comments ↓

One of the key principles of customer service is understanding our clients’ perception of their interaction with us. It does us no good to do an incredible job if, at the end, a customer thinks we’ve failed them in some way. If we fail to see the total experience as our customers do, we will initially make mistakes in our relationships.

When does a customer’s experience begin? Is it the moment a portion of their project falls into our laps? It actually starts the moment they initiate contact with us, and it ends only when they are satisfied, not when we’ve completed our tasks. This discrepancy of perception accounts for many customer relations issues. If we take into consideration that the clock starts ticking for the customer well before they’ve reached our department, we’ll find a dramatic decrease in the number of times we think we’ve handled a client wonderfully only to discover that they have major complaints. We all know how to tell time, but we tend to only think about the time that personally involves us, as though no other employee’s contribution adds to the minutes, hours, days and, unfortunately, sometimes weeks. We may act as though we operate in a personal bubble instead of as the customer correctly perceives us: as a unified company. If a client has a problem with one of us, their gripe is with the entire organization. If they receive sub-standard service, the company as a whole gets blamed.

Let’s say a customer has a frustrating problem and reaches out to us for assistance. Before he even talks to somebody, he may be on hold for 10 minutes. Although the clock started ticking for that client the moment he made the phone call, our representative assumes that, because he just became aware of the issue, the clock starts when he answers it. He doesn’t feel responsible for the problem, the call or the wait time until the point when he picked up the phone. The customer might as well be on another planet, though, because his view of the situation is entirely different. He now has a problem with the company — The company caused him a problem, left him on hold for 10 minutes and now is blithely ignorant as to why he’s annoyed.

How do we handle this disconnect? Rather than working only to complete our assigned tasks, we should realize that we are always working as part of a team that exists to fulfill our corporate goals. At ITX, we had a system set up whereby a project commenced when a customer faxed us their signed contract. Whoever received the contract would then forward it to the marketing department. The marketing department would then go back to the salesperson with any questions before recording the contract. Then it would go to our vice president of delivery, who would assign it to a delivery team. Finally, the delivery team manager would call the customer, thank them for signing on and schedule a kick-off meeting.

The problem was, sometimes that process would take four weeks! During that period, the customer would obviously be impatient, knowing that he did his part by signing a contract, but we hadn’t done ours by getting back to him. Our customers had to call the salesperson to follow up, and they were not happy about having to do so. We disappointed them before even starting the project. What’s even worse was when the customer had paid us a deposit at the time of signing, because then their money was being held up, as well.

When I investigated this, I quickly saw what was going wrong in the process. When the contract came in by fax, often it didn’t get delivered to the marketing department the same day. This didn’t concern the person who received it, because they didn’t look at the fax machine at the end of the day but figured, okay, I got it today and am passing it along – no big deal. When marketing got the contract, they might have questions for the salesperson about some items and there would be a delay in the recording process. It took three days to get it over to the vice president of delivery via email, on average. That person didn’t handle it immediately, and took two to four days before the contract was assigned to a delivery team. The delivery team manager often refused to call the customer right away because he wanted to get his team together so that they could understand all the details of the contract before calling the customer. The team was unwilling to compromise its own comfort for the customer’s comfort. That delayed the process for another few days, and all of those days in between compounded to be several weeks.

At each point along the way, our team members started their own “clocks” when it was their turn to touch the contract. No one considered that the clock started ticking for the client on Day One and didn’t stop and start like a sports watch. Each person had an excuse as to why he couldn’t do his part any faster and refused to consider himself responsible for the entire delay the customer experienced.

It’s natural to want to be held accountable only for something we think is fair versus being held accountable for the level of service the customer receives. It’s a knee-jerk reaction to say, “Hey, wait a minute. I didn’t know about the contract until yesterday. It’s not my fault.” But if that’s the way we’re thinking, then we’re signed up for the wrong job. At our place in the corporate chain, we’re not hired to do things quickly and correctly, and then have an excuse when they’re not. What we signed up for is giving the customer great service, and therefore it is our responsibility to find out what is going on.

We ultimately changed our procedures to give our customers better service. Now the marketing person checks the faxes, not an intermediary who passes it on when they happen to notice it. Marketing needed to understand that they could pass the contract along to the vice president of delivery even if they didn’t finish processing it yet. The vice president of delivery is now willing to call the customer and say thank you within 24 hours instead of adding more time to the clock by handing off that responsibility to his team. A two- or four-week process becomes a streamlined 24-hour transaction that makes a favorable impression upon our client because we are making ourselves accountable for any delay the customer is experiencing.

A favorite motto of mine, which I learned from customer service guru John DiJulius, is “It may not be my fault, but it’s still my problem.” Our clients are the sole judges of when they are satisfied. Our job is to look at the totality of their experience and do whatever we can to facilitate great customer service at all points in the process.

 

© 2012 Ralph Dandrea. All rights reserved.

Tagged with: , ,
Posted in Articles

Managing Client Anxiety

Posted on September 29, 2011 by Ralph Dandrea — No Comments ↓

A workable relationship is marked by feelings of comfort, ease and safety. If one of the partners feels too much anxiety too much of the time, the opposite of those positive sensations, the relationship will be problematic. And if one of the parties exceeds his anxiety limit, the relationship is bound to fail.

Anxiety is evidence of an unworkable relationship. In a business situation, the responsibility of managing anxiety falls solely on the provider, who must prove to the client that they can be relied upon. If we allow a customer to feel anxious about our commitments to them, nothing can go right in that relationship.

Anxiety needs to be addressed all the time in order to have a successful relationship.

What Causes Anxiety?
Understanding the source of anxiety helps us manage it before the client even notices it’s there. Anxiety is caused by the fear of uncertainty. Fear comes from the amygdala, the little almond-shaped piece of the brain at the very center, sometimes called the “reptilian brain” because it’s the most primitive part of the mind. When we leave customers in a state of anxiety, that’s the area of the brain that is going to make their decisions. It’s not their frontal cortex. They’re not thinking rationally, and this can lead them to some really disruptive behaviors just because they’re feeling anxious.

That reptilian brain has one function, and that is to identify threats. When we sense a threat, that part of the brain thinks, “Do I eat it, or does it eat me?” This fight or flight reflex worked really well to keep primitive humans alive when we were faced with constant physical threats. The amygdala now more often assesses psychological threats. In business, it fears things like looking bad to peers or to a boss, being taken advantage of, losing money, not being in control, the projected consequences of failing and any number of scenarios that endanger what constitutes success for us. Our clients may then react with modern-day fight-or-flight retaliations like raising costs, firing providers or just making the relationship as difficult and uncomfortable as possible.

The goal of client anxiety management is to ensure that the intensity and frequency of it do not exceed what the client’s amygdala will tolerate. Once the level of anxiety surpasses the client’s threshold, his fight or flight reflex will kick in.

Taming the Beast
The first part of it is to understand what the client is feeling, then pinpoint the source(s) of the anxiety. The anxiety needs to be controlled before we can even begin to fix the problem. If someone calls in with an issue and we fail to let them know we get it and address it properly, their minimal anxiety is going to turn into a maelstrom of negativity. If we further fail to be apologetic, honest and sincere, there is real potential that the customer is going to spiral out of control and do something that could greatly affect the relationship. The extent of a client’s anxiety has to be quickly recognized and rectified before this is allowed to happen.

Many small certainty-producing acts can add up to great certainty for the client. Just a few small anxiety-producing acts can add up to great anxiety.

We can quell anxiety by sincerely being there for our clients when they reach out to us, answering their calls promptly, reassuring them that their projects are on track and rectifying any mistakes we make immediately with complete openness and accountability. We can also restructure our process to provide additional certainty. We might add some new resources, bring in a high-level coach to help the people who are working on the project or get people they trust to vouch for us, either in their organization or ours. The different things we can do depend upon the type of organization we operate, but regardless of the particular ingredients, the recipe won’t work unless we keep their anxiety in check.

Different people have different anxiety tolerances, so we need to be aware of when we’re getting close to their limit so we can figure out what will make them feel more comfortable. Some people are afraid of all uncertainty. Some only feel fear after a few instances of uncertainty have occurred to them. If we’re dealing with an individual who can’t tolerate much ambiguity at all, we have to manage their anxiety much more closely than we would normally. Unfortunately, many times we don’t know our clients’ tolerance, especially in a new relationship. So, for best results, we should minimize their anxiety at all times.

To be the most successful most of the time, strive to minimize clients’ anxiety all the time.

Often, simply communicating more often will do the trick, and that may change throughout the course of the relationship. They might not be feeling much anxiety at the beginning of a project and then something goes wrong that causes them more anxiety. Alternatively, a new client may start a project with a lot of anxiety because they’re working with us for the first time and then later on feel confident in our abilities and get more comfortable. We might satisfy an extreme need for certainty by providing a daily status report instead of a standard weekly or monthly update. Shortening the gap between communications and being crystal clear about the project’s status is just one way we can mitigate their stress. We can change how we’re managing their anxiety based on how our clients change in terms of the level of anxiety they’re experiencing.

As another example, I had a client who always feared losing his job because he was unemployed for a while before getting this job with a big company. He was always afraid that if he didn’t deliver he’d lose his job and his paycheck. He was all about employment security. In his case, more calls about the project weren’t going to manage his anxiety, because the project wasn’t his main concern. When I figured that out, I made sure I gave him the information he needed to give to his boss so that he felt secure in his job. It didn’t matter if the project was late or there was a problem, as long as he had a good excuse to give to his superiors that kept him from getting fired. It wasn’t that I had to fix the project as much as I had to give him something to tell his boss.

One thing I’ve found to be very helpful in my business when a client is anxious about the end-date of a project is to give them a steady diet of completed tasks. Instead of saying that we have 10 more things to accomplish before they can use our service, we manage their anxiety by getting one of those aspects finished, not by working on all 10 at once. In this way, we provide evidence that our time is being spent serving the client. That evidence needs to be tangible because their amygdala is in charge. They need to be able to see it, hear it, touch it, taste it or smell it. Giving clients proof of progress greatly eases their uncertainty.

We can use a variety of methods to manage each client’s specific anxieties because they all have unique needs and limitations. Whether we are proving ourselves to a new client or making reparations to an existing one, the responsibility rests squarely on our shoulders to be aware of their anxiety level at all times. Then we can take steps to eradicate those negative feelings and replace them with concrete evidence of our commitment.

 

© 2012 Ralph Dandrea. All rights reserved.

Tagged with: , , , , ,
Posted in Articles

The Case for Positive Language

Posted on September 29, 2011 by Ralph Dandrea — No Comments ↓

Language affects our feelings. When we use normative terms to describe a person or situation, we are essentially saying that they are good or bad. If it’s perceived as the latter, we might trigger an unintended fight or flight reaction that results in negativity directed toward us. Usually, we don’t want to make someone angry or defensive. We want to state our opinion or objective. When the person responds in a way that seems inappropriate, we may not realize that we started it by using language that could be perceived as judgmental. If we truly want to exact a change, we can say a situation is unworkable and explain why. That’s less offensive than saying something is wrong. We’re not judging it; we’re simply coming to a conclusion about it, which is that it doesn’t work. A positive approach opens the door for discussion, which can lead to more workability.

Normative terms, such as “good” and “bad,” are grounded in subjectivity; a positive term like “unworkable” is less personal because it is a conclusion based on the facts of our experience.

In order to have positive discussions, we must avoid judgment in our language. If we want to have a positive conversation about topics that are normally emotionally charged, such as the debt ceiling or abortion, making good and bad judgments will render it nearly impossible to reach any kind of conclusion or agreement. For example. if we’re talking about tobacco use and we say that smokers are bad and disgusting, smokers and the people who care about them might get defensive. The language of judgment can create unworkability in that conversation. Instead, we might talk about what problems addiction causes and how that might be addressed. We’re not avoiding the issue by leaving our personal opinions out of the conversation. We’re actually doing something about it by avoiding useless rhetoric in favor of finding a workable solution to a real problem.

To foster change instead of resentment, talk about what something really is, not what you think about that reality.

Let’s use the example of someone who is often late for meetings. It happens so frequently that it’s become the habit of the other attendees to joke about Brad’s 90 percent chance of delaying the proceedings, even though they are not really amused. If Brad’s colleagues really want the bad habit to change, they won’t call him out on it in a publicly humiliating manner, making him feel like a loser, or call him into a private meeting to tell him how bad of a job he’s doing in this regard. It would only cause Brad to have resentment, with the result that he probably won’t care if he’s late next time, too. An opinion changed by force tends to remain the same, as the adage goes.

Change doesn’t happen by making someone feel blamed and judged. Change occurs when we state the facts that can’t be denied and explain how they make us feel. In this case, Brad’s team members could state the irrefutable truth that he is sometimes late and that it makes them feel like he hasn’t considered the ramifications of leaving everyone waiting. This type of language is less likely to put Brad on the defensive; it will pave a path for discussion and change.

Normative language creates judgment and results in fear. Positive language encourages alignment and creates more workable relationships.

When we’re using positive language, we’re selecting words that create clarity and curb emotional response. If you want emotional response, use normative language; if you want change, use positive language. This works at all levels. We can deliver even hard facts with clarity to produce change, instead of delivering insults that cause chaos. It works because we are stating what we believe to be true with the awareness that, in fact, it might not be. Letting the other person know that we have such-and-such an opinion about something but are open to discovering that we might be wrong is not attacking; it’s stating how we currently see the world.

Be clear that what you’re voicing is your perspective, and that you accept that the way you see it might be different than the way others may see it.

A final point worth mentioning is that positive language needs to be conveyed with a corresponding tone. Using positive words in a “bad dog” voice will undermine what we are trying to accomplish. Make sure you are using a positive tone to accentuate your message.

The best relationships develop from communicating effectively about what is and isn’t working. It’s entirely possible to have a great conversation about something “negative,” as long as we eschew normative language that breeds resentment in favor of positive language that encourages change.

 

© 2012 Ralph Dandrea. All rights reserved.

Tagged with: , ,
Posted in Articles