13 Ideas to use analytics to improve the credibility of marketing investments.

Nov 10, 2019 | Governance, Marketing

 

Marketing is all about making assumptions about the future, and how your investment in marketing activity will enable you to deliver revenue and commercial sustainability.

Therefore, making informed assumptions then testing their validity as you implement, reassess and improve is a vital part of the exercise in investment optimisation.

CFO’s and CEO;s do not trust marketing: they are often seen as the makers of nice adds and suppliers of pens and mousepads to their children, they do not carry the credibility quotient of an analytical profession.

For a marketer, having credibility in the ‘c-suite’ is essential. You are seeking resource allocation decisions to be made on the basis of your best estimates of what the future holds, an imprecise exercise.

Therefore, tracking the performance of previous estimates, being transparent about those that did not work, while improving those that did,  is an essential part of building credibility.

Essential to continuous improvement of the returns from marketing investment is the ability to allocate scarce resources where they will deliver the most bang for the buck.

  • Shift revenue generating activity from low margin products to  those with higher margins. To do this you need to be able to segment revenues and margins by customers and product, as well as by actuals and percentages.
  • Focus investments in those larger opportunities at the expense of the smaller, maintenance ones. Unfortunately these are often the easier ones to ‘sell’ to the corner office, and it looks like useful activity so it is often the default. Explicitly dropping lower return projects in order to fund those with higher returns, and/or more strategically consistent outcomes builds credibility.
  • Increase investment in reducing customer churn, and increasing lifetime value. Recognising the costs of customer acquisition Vs the cost of retention explicitly, usually makes this an obvious strategy,  often ignored, particularly in commoditised markets.
  • Increase investment in attracting higher share of wallet for strategically important customers. Defining the depth and breadth of the ‘customer wallet’ usually leads to interesting debates that must be sheeted back to strategy, and where strategy is absent or thin, this debate throws a light on that situation.
  • Focus resources in the growing part of the portfolio where there is some level of product differentiation that customers value. As Warren Buffett has said often: ‘Price is what you pay, Value is what you remember’. Understanding the price/value trade-off your customers make is challenging, as there is so much inherent variation between customers and the context in which a purchase decision is made, but being able to articulate the quantitative parameters of those trade-offs builds great credibility.
  • Automate repetitive tasks while increasing the personal engagement at the close of the transaction cycle. The locus of power in the purchase decision has moved from the supplier to the customer by virtue of Dr Google. Potential customers no longer need sales reps, the most expensive part of the sales budget, to provide information, but customers still do often need the reassurance of another person to make the final conversion. Use your most expensive sales resource where you generate the best return from the investment.
  • Move into adjacent market areas, after demonstrating the risks and rewards of such a move.
  • Collaborations through the value chain to deliver leverage to your capabilities.
  • Increase investments in actionable marketing and market intelligence, and demonstrate the impact of good intelligence in the past.
  • Optimise high performing segments. Being explicit about the optimisation of current performance as a means to fund commercial sustainability builds credibility, and enables the more risky ventures to be supported by senior management.
  • Understand the customer journey and focus on the areas where conversion rates can be improved. Conversion rate dashboards are now relatively easy to set up and monitor in real time, and offer transparency and opportunities to improve by being tactically agile.
  • Increase investment in strategic account planning for strategically important customers. This may not always  be your biggest customers, it is those most aligned to your strategic aspirations, where a deepened relationship will deliver long term revenue sustainability.
  • Use the accountants tools, financial ratios, NPV and IRR, in your arguments, showing rolling results that give insights to the trends happening, and providing analysis that explains the trends.

 

Marketing will increasingly become the key  differentiator between success and failure in commoditising markets. Failure to build the credibility with the ‘c-suite’ necessary to make the long term investments in marketing required, will result in a shortened commercial lifespan.

 

Header cartoon courtesy of Tom Fishburne at www.marketoonist.com

 

 

6 ways leaders disrupt the ‘Lemming Effect’

Nov 4, 2019 | Governance, Innovation, Strategy

 

It is a confusing world.

On one hand, change is everywhere, and the pace of change is increasing as we watch. On the other, generating change in an organisation is really hard; we humans do not   like change, despite what we sometimes say. We are hard wired to resist it in the absence of a compelling reason, some set of circumstances that leaves us absolutely no option.

In the 50’s, psychologist Solomon Asch ran a series of ground-breaking experiments where he showed the power of conformity.

He shows a group of subjects two cards, one with three lines in it of different lengths, the second with a single line.  The question was, which of the three lines on card A was the same length as the line on card B?

He would go around the room, asking the question, and each person successively deliberately gave the wrong answer, until he got to the last person, the only real subject in the room. In an overwhelming majority of cases, the last person agreed with everyone else to the obviously wrong answer.

We are hard wired to conform, to agree with the group, to avoid being an outlier, even when the group is wrong; we still find it hard to do anything other than conform.

Evolutionary psychology at work.

Being outside the safety of the group, where cooperation added to the odds of survival, you conformed or you were expelled from the group, which meant you quickly ended up as sabre toothed tiger shit.

Not an attractive prospect.

There are not too many sabre toothed tigers left around, but the safety of the group is still a driving force in our behaviour, so we have to change the mind of the group.

  • Create a catalytic event. When confronted by a crisis, where the status quo has clearly failed to deliver, change is suddenly made easier to implement.
  • Identify the opinion leaders in the group; convince them, let them do your persuasion work for you. ‘Local’ networks and opinion leaders are very powerful as change agents. Conversely, they are in a position to block any change they do not like.
  • Identify a ‘keystone’ change, one that forces other changes, that that clearly demonstrates the value of wider improvements that can be achieved. Managing a manufacturing business as a contractor, we had an assumed  capacity problem, that necessitated long runs to inventory to service demand. The result was slow inventory turn, redundant stock that could not be sold, and excessive working capital, all problems stemming from the capacity limit. On analysis, the real problem was in the scheduling of the production process, which created a bottleneck at a key piece of machinery. This was solved by rejigging the timing and order of activities, changes that were strongly resisted by staff until a mandated trial clearly demonstrated the substantial productivity benefits that accrued.  This one  change led to significant improvement in almost all other productivity and financial KPI’s.
  • Create stories that the group members can relate to, that demonstrate the costs of no change are greater than the risk of change. The story related above took on a life of its own, as the staff involved rewrote history, by assuming the responsibility for suggesting and driving the ‘keystone’ change.
  • Have great clarity about the benefits of the outcome after the change, how it will be achieved, and the benefits it will deliver. Again, the story above had a knock-on effect through the business, as the results of the improvements were made very public, and credit given to the staff involved.
  • Embed the changes into the operating psyche of the organisation. Culture is elastic, and unless the binds of the past are comprehensively broken, they will spring back once the pressure is released.

Lemmings are persistent creatures, if not too bright. Put a barrier in place in front of the cliff, and they will climb it, unless there is an alternative path that is made to be more attractive in some way leads them in a different direction.

How are you disrupting the Lemming Effect in your enterprise?

 

Cartoon credit: Mike Keefe Denver Post.

 

 

The two things we have to achieve for our grandchildren

The two things we have to achieve for our grandchildren

Oct 31, 2019 | Governance, Leadership

Yesterday I listened to a hysterical condemnation of Woolworths, who had come clean to the Employment Ombudsman when they realised they had underpaid staff.

Another example of big business rorting workers, or more evidence of the impact of overwhelming complexity of a system causing self implosion?

Woolworths is the biggest private sector employer in the country, so it is reasonable to assume they have the will and resources to ensure employees are paid properly. On the other hand, with the complexity of the award systems, staggered and differing shifts, varied hours of operation, and the sheer number of people moving from one job classification to another, across locations, the complexity of the payroll must be staggering.  

Over the millennia, as we humans have become more ‘civilised’ and our social and commercial systems more sophisticated and complex, from the early Greeks through to today, there has been an increasingly delicate balance at play.

Varying supply systems and the bureaucracies that control them, deliver the means by which the surplus from our collective endeavours is distributed. While the cost of that complexity is less than the revenue generated, we continue to become more complex. Once we reach a tipping point, where the revenue generated is less than the cost of the management bureaucracies that enable it, we become pointed at shitters ditch.

Look at almost any part of the ‘management’ systems in a democracy. There are always competing priorities, with vocal advocates on all sides. The tax system, NDIS,  defence, social welfare, personal power Vs institutional power, and on, and on, and on. In Woolworths case, the responsibility to get employees pay correctly compliant with various agreements and regulations, while remaining in control of, and extracting maximum return from the biggest expense incurred in operating, is such a balancing act.

It seems to me we have reached if not passed the tipping point.

As Hemingway asks in the Sun Also Rises:

‘How did you go bankrupt?‘

‘Two ways:  Gradually, then suddenly”

Unless we find ways to address just two challenging items, we will continue to slide, as complexity increases, goals become more fluffy,  and accountability diffused .

Those two items:

Priorities.

Focus.

We have to identify and prioritise the few key things upon which the future of our children and grandchildren are based.

We then have to focus resources on their achievement. It will be long term, incremental, and politically difficult, but the alternative is ugly.

The challenge is the same for any enterprise as it is for the country, only the scale is different, along with the accountability. After all, politicians have 3 or 4 years to make a start, depending on the location, while public companies have  to make adjustments quarter by quarter or be castigated by the stock markets.

I wonder if we mere mortals have the grit and foresight to act?

A very rare few do, they are not mere mortals, they are true leaders.

Have you seen any recently?

 

Cartoon credit: Scott Adams and his mate Dilbert.

 

 

 

A critical antidote to confirmation bias.

Oct 28, 2019 | Governance, Leadership, Management

Confirmation bias is a seductive bitch.

We see what we expect to see, the things that confirm our existing views and expectations, to the exclusion of alternatives. When taken to extremes,  loonies like holocaust deniers, and the ‘no vac’ lot emerge and sprout their fact and logic free poison, and attract a small following, and the rest of us just fail to understand how.

We humans tend to see things as if we were looking out a window.  It consumes less cognitive energy when patterns of the past are just assumed by our brains to be repeated, so that is the brains default. The further back from the window, the narrower the view, but however close you get, there is still a restriction.

The challenge therefore is to find an alternative window through which to look at the problem facing you, or better still, assemble a few others with different windows through which they look at the same problem.

Do  not just  think outside the box, get another box!

One way to use this different box, or window, to continue the metaphor, when facing a challenge is to ask better questions, ones that force the challenge to be examined from different perspectives.

  • Why is it so?
  • Where is the leverage?
  • Have we described the problem correctly, or just the symptom?
  • What is the pain point?
  • What has to be true for this outcome to emerge?
  • For this expected result to become about, which assumptions have to be accurate?
  • What happens if we do not decide?
  • What does this challenge look like in other arenas?
  • Are we relying too much on data?
  • What does the behaviour of others when confronting this really look like?
  • Is the data we have reliable, or has it been ‘managed’?
  • How is this different?
  • Have we simplified the challenge sufficiently for a solution to emerge?
  • What would the devils advocate say?

I could go on, but you get the picture.

Driving change in a business means butting heads with confirmation bias.

This is why you need a distinct catalyst to kick it off, and keep it running, for the change process to be successful.

Ask better questions!

Are SMART goals redundant?

Oct 16, 2019 | Governance, Innovation, Strategy

 

Goal setting and the subsequent resource allocation decisions taken to address the goals are an integral part of every management job, no matter where on the organisational totem that job stands.

Setting goals appropriate to the level at which they are being implemented is a function of being appropriate for the level, as well as ensuring they are consistent and aligned with the overall goals of the organisation.

The greater the degree of alignment, in conjunction with the greater the degree of relevance of the goals to those at every level to which they are being applied, the more effective they will be.

‘If it cannot be measured, it does not matter’. I subscribe to this idea, first articulated by Peter Drucker,  with the simple caveat that it is not always right. As Einstein said, ‘not everything that matters can be measured‘. For example, How do you measure the value of good parenting? We all know it is good for the individuals, and the community, but what are the objective measures of good  parenting?

 It is also important to make the distinction between goals and KPI’s, which are simply the signposts along the way towards goals by which  you measure progress. Confusion of the meaning of these two terms is common, and destructive.

The acronym SMART was used a lot in the past to set the goals of an enterprise, function, teams, and even individuals. It seems, unfortunately, to have gone out of fashion. Perhaps because managing objectives in such a way increases accountability, which might just be a good idea!

Specific. Be very specific about what the objective is, no fluffy words, no ‘get out of gaol’ card.  What is it exactly that you want to achieve?

Measurable.  What are the measures to be employed that will chart progress towards the goal, and most importantly,  tell you when you have achieved it

Achievable. Do you have the capabilities required and the cultural and performance frameworks that will enable the achievement. Is everyone on board? It is hard for employees to strive to achieve an objective  they do not believe in, or think is unachievable. 

Relevant. The goal is consistent with the overall strategy, and contributes to  the delivery of that strategy.

Time-bound. Deadlines drive performance, and highlight activity priorities. The overall goal end point needs to be agreed, as do the key points on the journey

The poster boy for a SMART goal was JFK’s 1961 goal of landing a man on the moon and returning him safely by the end of the decade.

Header photo by NASA. Astonishing to think it was 50 years ago, I remember it like it was yesterday.

 

The often fatal flaw of the Family business

Oct 3, 2019 | Governance, Management, Small business

Family businesses have many advantages over publicly owned entities, largely around the pressures that apply to investment decisions.  They can, and often are, made with timeframes that would be unacceptable to a publicly listed company.

They also often contain the seeds of their own destruction.

On top of all the usual human pressures that exist in every enterprise, ambition, envy, personal gain, and all the rest, you also have the dynamics of family, and often multiple families, overlaid on the more usual pressures.

The mixture can be toxic.

It takes considerable leadership skill to address these added pressures, usually driven by the sense of entitlement that comes from: ‘it is our business, therefore we can do what we like’.  

There is no easy fix I have ever seen, but recognising a problem, catching it early and creating an environment where merit, and not bloodlines is rewarded, is a good first step.

This statement assumes two things: that there is a performance management system that is unbiased towards anything other than merit, and that there is a cultural understanding that bloodlines come second to performance.

A very unusual combination in my experience that requires rare leadership qualities, and extended self -awareness.

I have trouble thinking of a more challenging situation than having to fire your child, for whom you have built and nurtured an enterprise, because they are not the right person for the role they covet. The downside is if you do not, the non family members who are the backbone of the place will leave very quickly, or at best, tread water while it suits them, adding little real value in the meantime.  

Often an antidote is to have an outside advisory board of some sort that acts as a sounding board, advisor, performance manager, and sometimes executioner.

 

Header photo credit: Amar Chauhan via Flikr.