Listening to Benjamin Zander on TED talking about one buttock piano playing, he makes the point that to get from the note B to E, he has to stop thinking about every note a long the way and start thinking about the long, long line from B to E, i.e. the vision of the piece he is playing.  He likens it to a bird who flies over the field who doesn’t care about the fences underneath.

According to Benjamin Zander playing on two buttocks we become focused on every note.  Playing on one buttock enables us to stay focused on the overall journey from B to E.  Why is another question, and is he right, I do not know, but it is amusing thought.

However it got me thinking, this analogy is equally appropriate for business.  How often does the overall vision for the business get lost, because everyone is focusing on the details, the everyday management issues that distract.  Management becomes completely focused on the ‘fences underneath’!  The vision becomes a cumbersome jerky journey that is not enjoyable to participate in.

So maybe a new management initiative is to insist everyone works on one buttock to help them maintain their focus on the bigger picture striving for the vision of the business!

In more practical terms, how often is the business reminded what the bigger picture is, the purpose of the business, the vision for the business?  Daily, weekly, monthly, annually – forgotten about, never to be repeated again once it was defined?  It is so easy to get caught up with the day to day of the job and forget about what the business is up for!

Consistently reminding oneself as the leader of the business regularly and doing so with the rest of the stakeholders at appropriate times (gets a bit boring if repeated too regularly) will maintain the inspiration for why they all turn up each day beyond earning a crust.

This assumes that in the first place the business has a clearly articulated vision that is is inclusive and not exclusive to just benefit the business itself or the business owner only.  A vision that inspires others to want to help fulfill in what ever capacity or contribution they can make would be the ideal to strive for.

This has been written on one buttock!

Focusing on the operational requirements of the business can be deeply satisfying and rewarding.

Things are getting done, results are being achieved.  There is a definite feeling that positive things are being done for the business.  Focusing on improving operational effectiveness and efficiency reduces overheads, erodes unnecessary cost out of the the business, streamlines systems and processes.  Feels good to be in action; achieving things; getting things done; getting results.

All good stuff to be doing and it is deeply rewarding and satisfying at a personal level as well as from a business perspective.  Emotional ‘operational’ gratification is high and totally justifiable.

However focusing on the operational issues of the business doesn’t grow the business, it keeps it streamlined and moving but not growing.  Topically the New Zealand meat industry is a case in point.  Historically the farmers have focused on improving the systems and processes to remain price competitive globally.  But there is only so much that can be improved each year.  Focusing on driving cost down to remain competitive becomes more challenging each year.  And the irony is New Zealand farmers are in countries like Argentina teaching meat farmers there the lessons they have learnt here in New Zealand.  Argentina has the potential to flood the market with meat once it becomes organised.  It won’t matter how good the systems and processes are here, economies of scale will mean New Zealand farmers will not be able to compete.

The Federated Farmers of New Zealand are now investing $150 million to develop and market their products.  The New Zealand meat industry has realised they need to switch their focus away from improving operational procedures to what the consumer wants if the meat industry in New Zealand is to survive as a primary export.

Time and time again I see businesses focusing on their operational issues giving it greater priority than the marketing issues.  It’s so easy to do until it is potentially too late.  Will the New Zealand meat industry be able to turn itself around soon enough?

The temptation is obvious because tangible results can be seen almost immediately.  It is very satisfying at an emotional level for humans to be doing things that produce results.  Marketing on the other hand doesn’t deliver immediate tangible results.  It feels very unrewarding in comparison.  And more to the point, it requires financial investment without specific certainty in the results.  Scary stuff really.  The President of the New Zealand Federated Farmers said in an interview last week with their investment of $150 million they expect a net economic benefit of $520m over the next 7 years.  In the same breath he added “…we have to believe the analysts, the people who have done the work…” finishing with …we have to believe these numbers, there will of course be cynics.” He knows they cannot continue down the path they have been going if they are to survive, but he is dubious!  The meat industry seems to run out of ideas operationally, it has no choice but to do things differently!

In marketing there is no certainty for business leaders and this is a challenge, but what I do know is focusing on internal operational issues does streamline and move the business forward, but it doesn’t grow the business.  Focusing on what the customer wants and modifying the operations to meet their needs will make the business’ products and services more attractive to buy.  It will maintain if not improve margins, and creates the opportunity to generate many more sales per unit than what was thought possible historically.

Ask yourself where are you placing your focus primarily in the business?  Remember: -

Operations STREAMLINE the business – Marketing GROWS the business

Emotions are running high in Auckland with the shed debate on the Queens Wharf as is evident by the copious articles and correspondence on should or should they not stay.

Reading ‘Are the Sheds on Queens Wharf worth Saving?’ in The New Zealand Herald, published on 6th May, there were 87 comments posted when I looked today, the most recent being a couple of days ago.  The vast majority were against the sheds being retained because in their view they look ugly, an eyesore, a blot on the landscape etc.  There is a pervading sense of distrust of the council and architects, sometimes expressed in quite vitriolic terms and in particular concerning architects: -

• “…Our mindset is hopeless.  Or rather the smarmy self satisfied trendy Auckland city councillors or architects suggesting this nonsense.”
• “…Absolutely ridiculous.  Sell them on Trademe (sic) and let these “architects” buy them.”
• “…The architects who are in love with these gems should be imprisoned in them until they reconsider their foolish notions.”

These same people would rather have a new structure built to replace the existing sheds which would be designed presumably by the very same profession they profess to distrust namely architects.  To paraphrase a more well known phrase; never let logic get in the way of a good emotional vent!

Councillors are also getting in on the act.  On 1^st July, The New Zealand Herald published an article Strike the tent, let’s keep the sheds by Mark Donnelly, an independent Auckland City Councillor asking the Prime Minister  “…to reconsider the headlong rush into demolishing the Queens Wharf sheds to ‘host’ party central.” Going on to say later “…Mike Lee’s tent won’t cut it.  Where’s the wow factor?  It will just look like a cheap Band Aid - is that the message we want to send?

The New Zealand Herald published on same day the article ‘Noble’ sheds must stay, says architects who had written “…no convincing case has been made for demolishing the Queens Wharf cargo sheds.” They stated emotively “There are noble structures beneath the battered tin sheathing of these sheds…”

Everyone seems to be striving for the emotional high ground.  There are no winners in this game, emotions won’t allow it!  Both view points are right or wrong depending on your point of view i.e. the values you live by that you hold to be true.  So let’s stick to the facts.  The two cargo sheds are two storeys tall; they are 98 year old and are clad in corrugated iron.  I could continue to describe their building specification as indisputable facts, because that’s all they are – different bits of materials joined together creating a space within to store cargo when they were first built.

However it is the value people have placed on the facts that has generated the emotions in this case.  The facts are not that interesting in themselves.  People’s interpretation relative to their values is the interesting thing to observe.

So when considering the facts about your own business, remember it is the ‘values’ people will associate with the facts that needs to be managed if an emotional connection is to be achieved between your business and your customer.  Never more so when put in the context of your business’s target market and their values.  Look at Cadbury’s and the circumstances around their foray into using palm oil as a substitute in their chocolate here in New Zealand.  Where did the facts end and emotional reasoning take over both for the customer and for the New Zealand arm of Cadbury’s?  The result for Cadbury in this saga is they have been bumped off the number one spot as being the most trustworthy brand in New Zealand in a recent survey.  How is this affecting their sales?

Humans are emotional and when your business doesn’t share the same views as your customer, be very careful.  And in the case of the Queens Wharf Cargo Sheds, the ARC and the Government seemed to have got themselves into an insidious position where they dammed if they knock the sheds down and dammed if they don’t.

One thing is certain the New Zealand Herald will be stirring up the emotional pot – it makes for good reading.

We are business strategists and planners helping business to attract new customer and grow their business.  We do this by create and strengthening the emotional drivers that connect businesses with customers in a more meaningful and relevant way at each and every customer touch-point to increase profitability.

Our knowledge on how to attract customers and grow businesses is based on 29 years of working with retailers in Britain, Singapore, Australia, and New Zealand.

The store environment is where the ‘rubber meets the road’.  It is where the business has the direct interface with their customers.  This is where the business either wins or loses the sale.  They have moments only in which to engage the customer in a meaningful way to secure a purchase.  They have to win the heart if they are to win the head!

All businesses need to understand the emotional drivers of their target market if they are to attract and grow their business irregardless of whether they are retailers or not, the principles are just same.

Don’t you hate that question!  I do.  Yet it is important to engage a person right from the start.

At a simplistic level you can say your job description i.e. I am a plumber, an accountant, a teacher etc.  The answer is perfectly satisfactory, and the response to your answer could be equally perfunctory…  “Oh really, how interesting” – like I am really interested!  Or some sort of response to that effect!

You would like to be able to say something clever like Coco Channel did when asked the same question.  She could have said I sell perfume; however what she did say was “…I sell hope.”

That’s why I have found the question a challenge because there is a need to engage people quickly into what you do, if you are to hold their attention, particularly in a business situation.  The dichotomy is, however, people actually yearn for the familiar.  People like to be able to pigeon hole you.  It makes life simpler and less complicated; we really don’t want to have to think too hard about things all the time, unless of course we are interested.

What people are hoping secretly you might say is, I’m a fashion model, I’m an astronaut, I’m a brain surgeon, I’m a rodent exterminator – whatever, as long as it is not your stereotypical answer.  We would really like to meet people who have a job that is unusual, exotic, or exciting.  We are bored with the mundane, because it reminds us of what we may secretly feel is equally mundane.

Now here is the magic.  Yes, we might be a plumber; an accountant or a teacher, but what do we do really when we stop to think about?  What special essence, capability, or skill do we bring to the job that makes us better or different to other plumbers, accountants, or teachers?

A plumber may say…”If you’re up to your knees in water, I’m your man!”

An accountant may say….”There‘s only two things that are certain in life – death and taxes and I help you with one of them …”

And a teacher may say…”I’m training children for jobs that we don’t know exist!”

They have still stated what they do, but they have given it a healthy twist of interest that has the potential to be far more engaging, eliciting a probable response like …  “Oh really, how interesting – tell me more?” Or some sort of response to that effect!

So next time someone glibly asks you (out of necessity not out of interest possibly) “what do you do” – jerk them out of their reverie with a response that is engaging, amusing, or interesting leaving them wanting to know more about what you do.  And who knows it may lead to potentially new business opportunities.

It is not hard to work out.  It just requires a little bit of time set aside on your part to think it through!

PS.  This blog is dedicated to the patience and persistent questioning by Sandy Burgham (Marketing Director of Max Fashions) – but what do you do Michael?  Her words still ring in my ears today!

I listen to quite a few interviews  and this interview on Radio NZ with Daniel Pink reminded me of his book published in 2006 titled ‘A Whole New Mind’.  In this book he promotes the argument, that whilst logical left brain thinking is necessary, it is no longer enough on its own in today’s business world.  He particularly cites businesses that rely on processes in what Daniel Pink calls the ‘information age’.  The ‘information age’ relies on knowledge workers who are proficient in left brain thinking e.g. programmers, accountants, lawyers etc and that those businesses will struggle in what he is calling the ‘Conceptual Age’ we are entering.  His argument is processes are being commoditised either through software programs replicating what was the exclusive domain of a profession (i.e. accounting software packages like MYOB) or the work can be produced in countries such as China and India at far lower costs.  To state the obvious, the internet has transformed where and how we do business.  In essence it is now possible to outsource for a much lower cost the vast majority of left brain thinking work to other parts of the world or download the relevant information through Google searches for free or simply buy a software package that will do the same job.

It is patently clear traditional sequential business thinking is not enough on its own for a variety of reasons.  The Dunbar diagram below shows where the traditional focus has been when business seeks to improve their performance.  Left brain thinking can, with relative ease, rationalise existing processes and offerings to make them more cost efficient in order to gain the competitive edge for business growth, increase or reduce margins, reduce overheads etc.

The problem with this traditional approach in today’s business world is there is less and less room to improve business performance significantly and with any degree of longevity before competition matches or overtakes.  Dunbar states the significant breakthroughs occur when businesses create new business models or create new ways to deliver their product from the customer experience perspective to gain ascendency in the market place.  This is the world of innovation.  This is the world of using the creative right brain as well as the logical left brain both at the same time.  In other words, as Daniel Pink states, businesses need to learn to use the whole mind to stay competitive in what is being considered now as the Conceptual Age

So if you are wondering how you can change the dynamics of your business to be more competitive when you have exhausted all other traditional methods – salvation lies at both ends of the spectrum of Dunbar’s diagram and in your ability to use the whole of your mind not just the left side!

So many business owners are so busy working their business, at worst to survive and at best to grow their business.  It is an unrelenting process working on the business as well in the business.

But why work so hard just to keep the business alive or why work so hard to grow the business.  What’s the reason for putting all this effort in?  Why bother?

Sure it could, does, will provide a desired lifestyle, a certain quality of living life in a certain way that is attractive and desirable.  But is it meaningful work?  What will you have achieved at the end of it?  Will you get the recognition, acknowledgement you would like?  Will the business be able to give you the freedom to choose when you want to work or not to work at all.

Most business owners carry on just carrying on not really thinking about when they want to reduce the amount of time they work or how they can exit the business altogether.  Research indicates the majority of business owners only start to think about their exit strategy in the last couple of years.  Leaving it till then reduces the potential options available to them and the potential value of the business being fully realised.  At best they are hoping they will be bought by a competitor or by the in-house management team.  The reality is there may not be anything to sell of any real value – plant and equipment maybe, good will possibly.  The reason is most business owners are the business, they drive the business, without them, the business loses momentum.

I once attended a lecture given by Michael Gerber who wrote the book ‘The E-Myth – Why Most Small Business and What to Do About It?’  He asked everyone in the room to stand up if they had a business.  He then asked everyone to stay standing up if they could ring their business right there and then to tell them they were going away overseas and would be out of communication for 12 months and would be confident that their business will have grown or at least stayed the same when they returned.  Everyone sat down except for one man.  To this man Michael Gerber said “Sir you have a business,” then turning to the rest of us, he said “the rest of you have jobs!”

Determining to have a business that you own, rather than having a job in a business that you own is the first step in developing a planned exit strategy.  I know of one business owner who also attended this same talk by Michael Gerber.  They were the heart and soul of the business, without them their business would have folded.  They spent the next five years developing systems that could be replicated by others, strengthening the business’s brand positioning and reputation in the market place to a level where they were no longer needed in the business.  This gave them the choice either to sell at a far greater price or to enjoy the benefits of the new found freedom to turn their energies on to other things that inspired them whilst still retaining a level of income to support during their new endeavours.  They had their exit strategy well and truly planned and were able to realise it in a far greater way than they ever considered possible when they first started the process!

So do you have a planned exit strategy?

Listening to Radio NZ interview with Keith Alexander and Doug Hill a few weeks ago, I was struck by the power of language in the creative process of problem solving.

Kevin, an engineer by training, has for the last 17 years been faced with the challenge of how to create a trampoline without springs because of the concern for the safety of his children.  During the last 7 years Kevin has finally developed such a trampoline.  This year alone Walmart in America will be selling 150,000 of them and that is just one retailer (albeit one of the largest).  It has taken about 6 protype designs to develop the one trampoline that is commercially viable.

Apart from the sheer doged determination and patience to develop such a trampoline and be rightly reward for his efforts, there was a point in the interview where his colleague David talked about the trampoline as a ‘rebound surface’ which reminded me about the power of language, a trampoline is exactly that – however it is not a phrase that immediately comes to mind.

It set me thinking that many times in business; people are faced with a problem that innovatively needs to be solved.  I suspect with Kevin as soon as he stopped using the word ‘trampoline’ and started to use the phrase ‘rebound surface’ it opened up all sorts of new ways to look at solving his  problem for he was no longer bound by associative thinking bought on by the use of the word ‘trampoline’.

So the next time you have business problem that needs to be solved, reframe the language you are using.  The trick is to detemine the essence of what the thing is you’re trying to solve.  Trampoline is a trampoline until you realise that in its essence it is a surface that rebounds a weight that is dropped on to it.

If you are interested in just how Keith solved the problem, here is the link.

Original audio source (ntn-20100318-1129-Spring-free_trampolines-048.mp3)

I like this analogy, so couldn’t resist adding this as well!

Here’s how it goes: -

Not only can marketing be likened to running a marathon, it can also be likened to going on a rocket to the moon.  I say the moon, because shooting for the stars, whilst commendable, the preparation for getting there takes even longer.  Better to shoot for the moon, and treat the moon as a staging post before going for the stars!  This is the thinking of NASA and see all the challenges they are and have faced!

When NASA sends a rocket into space, there is enormous amount of preparation prior to launch, the planning is detailed and complex.   When the rocket is launched, the amount of fuel consumed to give the rocket enough thrust to break free of earth’s gravity and give the rocket enough momentum to get to the moon is quite staggering.  However once the rocket has broken free of earth’s orbit, the amount of fuel needed from then on is quite minimal in comparison.

And so it is in business, the amount of time required to plan a marketing campaign takes time and money with very little to show for it.  It seems like for businesses, they are pouring money down a hole with nothing seemingly happening.  This is frustrating, and frankly this is scary – cash flow can only go so far.  Then when the actual campaign launch starts, even more money is needed (fuel).  However, it has to be remembered, with all this energy being expanded, the purpose is to ultimately lift the business to a new level of financial rewards, thereafter requiring less energy (money) to maintain these levels of rewards.

The thing for businesses is to recognise and plan for this.  I am not aware of any rockets making it to the moon with less than a full tank of fuel.

I find it interesting that some businesses decide to turn off the fuel and then belatedly realise they have dropped back to where they started.  If a business can’t afford to go to the moon, then shouldn’t set their goals so high.

Fortunately, there are other ways to lift the performance of the business that are less costly, do not require so much planning and do not require shooting for the moon as the first step. Setting the business horizons lower, it is possible to ultimately reach the moon in incremental steps if so chosen.  It takes longer, with smaller rewards along the way, but these can be used in part to fund the next lift in performance.

Whether a business is shooting for the moon in one go, or building up to it, both actions take time and effort to achieve the respective goals.  they both require endurance, they will test the stamina of the business.  Marketing, like fuel, cannot be turned off and on at will – once it has been turned on, it has to stay turned on.  Throttle back – at worst the business will return to where it started or at best it will take longer to get the results required to lift the business’s performance.  The worst thing to do is turn the fuel off altogether and then at a later date, turn it on again expecting to carry on where things were left.  It doesn’t work like that.  Once turned off, the business returns to where it started.

All that energy will have gone to waste.

So when businesses decide they need to market themselves to lift their performance, they need to recognise the following and plan for it: -

1. Set realistic goals that can be funded.
2. Plan well in advance – recognise sustainable results don’t happen fast.
3. Stay focused on the goal and don’t let up.
4. Build incrementally as funds become available
5. Never ever turn the funds off altogether

There are several things frustrating about marketing, but the big one is – where are the tangible results for all the money and effort that has been put in i.e. where are the sales?  Where’s the return on our investment?

Apologies for stating the obvious that 80% of marketing is about creating the opportunity for sales to be made, it is not about making the actual sales themselves.

So why bother with marketing, why not go out and just sell?  Yes but what are you selling – well widgets of course.  Okay and who are you selling to and why do they want your widgets, what makes them so special and different to the widgets being sold by another company?  How will you make your widgets stand out as being more special than another company’s widgets when in essence they are the same?  How are you going to sell these widgets – what is the most effective way to sell them involving the least amount of effort in terms of time and money?

These questions are just so frustrating; I don’t have time to answer them, I just want to get on selling the damm things!  I know who my customers are, I know their names, and where they work, live etc, what more do I need to know, I don’t need any of this marketing rubbish.

The old adage, more haste less speed is so true here.  Selling does and will generate certain results relatively quickly grabbing whatever comes along first.  This is opportunistic work at best eventuating in the company being just another pig scrabbling away for the scraps left in the trough along with so many other companies.  This is no way to grow a business effectively for the long haul.  It is exhausting work for the return on the effort put in and ultimately it is not sustainable.

This is like deciding to run a marathon, you don’t just turn up on the day and start running, you will probably never finish and if you do, it will have taken you a long time, leaving you totally exhausted and injured swearing never to do a marathon again or at least deciding that if you are going to do it again, you will train first!  There are months of preparation that has to be done before you even step up to the start line.  And it isn’t just about doing lots of running, there is weight training, a special diet to adhere to, taking supplements, having the correct running shoes etc.  The actual preparation time is far longer than the actural marathon takes and when actually running, it is so much easier and faster to reach the finish line.  And on finishing, you still have the energy to recommit for the next marathon to improve on what you achieved in this one.

Running a business is an unrelenting endurance test, worse than a marathon; there is no finish line to get to (unless there is a planned exit strategy in place).  Selling in itself, by itself is an exhausting and unrelenting process.  On the other hand, identifying how to promote effectively your widgets to minimise the sales effort will make the never ending marathon of selling more product (or winning new business) less gruelling, less of an endurance test.  And having gone through the initial hard yards to obtain a certain level of fitness, it so much easier from then on, requiring less effort to maintin that level of fitness ongoingly.

Think about it, would you turn up for a marathon without doing any training first in preparation?