What's Wrong With Taking Survey Data at Face Value?

I’ve been designing survey questionnaires and analyzing the data for so long that I often forget that some people may not be doing the deep dive and asking the hard questions of the data they’ve collected and for which our clients hire us (thank you, you know who you are). Maybe a little exploratory analysis, a tad of correlation, a glance at the verbatim comments and we’re done until the next time. Did we do a survey? Check. Did we do anything with it? Sure, sort of. Do we have a deep understanding of what the data means? Well….

What’s worse than not gathering intelligence from customers and employees?

Coming to the wrong conclusions!

I’m reminded of this fact by two articles I read last week: In This Case, Let’s Examine Dissatisfaction in the February issue of Survey magazine and Guest Perceptions on Factors Influencing Customer Loyalty in the current issue of the International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management.

In the case of customer dissatisfaction, the article suggests several calls to action:

Understand whether you have a category problem rather than a brand problem. In other words, your competitive space may allow easy switching with or without loyalty programs so make sure you know what your issue is before investing in programs that will not alleviate it.

Your market strategy will drive a customer’s perception of satisfaction. If you are a low cost provider, you have accepted that a lower level of quality and service is part of the equation. The danger zone you could find yourself in is in trying to be low cost while also attracting a customer who looks for a different level of product and service.

Benchmarking. I’ve never been a fan but lots of companies do it and the swirling vortex that you get sucked into is that you compare your performance to companies who target different customer segments.

Dissatisfaction may not arise from what you do but rather what other, similar companies do that you don’t do. Customers constantly evaluate decisions based on alternatives; some amount of dissatisfaction arises with your product and service even if you are executing your strategy perfectly.

My suggestions for arriving at the best conclusions possible from your data analysis:

• Keep your strategy upper most in mind when designing the project and return to it often when analyzing data. This means knowing who your competition is; who the ideal customer is and what your competitive advantages are.

• Design survey questions to be particular rather than general. The more generic the question, the less likely it is that you have actionable data and the more likely you potentially are arriving at the wrong conclusions.

• Don’t confuse happy with satisfied. If you want to meet a customer’s needs, you are aiming for satisfaction. If you want happy, that’s a whole different level of expectations.

• Perform data analysis from several different perspectives. Not all survey questions should be treated equally in reaching conclusions.

I’ll write more about the last topic next week.

5 Predictions About Analytics, 4 Tips to Get Started & 3 Cautionary Thoughts

This is the time of year for predictions and there is no shortage of them in the analytics arena. As business owners and managers are redoubling their efforts to find competitive differentiation amid tepid growth projections for 2011, analytics is seen by many leaders as a way to gain an edge.

There are a few key predictions that are shared by seasoned analytics champions and neophytes alike:

• Organizational data is proliferating at an alarming rate, both in terms of volume and complexity. How to make sense of all of this data will be a challenge for those not on the analytics bullet train.

• Desktop analytics will dominate the business environment, making large servers and high cost analytic languages no longer able to return the desired ROI.

• Mobile applications will be hot topics. Devices like iPads, smart phones and tablets will bring analytics into end users’ hands like never before.

• The gap between heavy analytics users and laggards will continue to widen and it will become apparent in areas like innovation and product development as well as bottom line results.

• Privacy regulations could make the collection of personal data more restrictive. At the same time, individuals may balk at the idea of how much of their private information is in the hands of third parties.

Michael Lock of the Aberdeen Group and Caroline Seymour of IBM’s Mid-Size Business unit have some helpful pointers for companies that are taking their first steps into business analytics:

Get Control of Your Data: This means bringing disparate buckets of data into a consistent environment so it’s easier for more people to perform multi-dimensional analysis.

Analyze Data in a Business Context: Data analysis in isolation provides no insight and therefore has limited value to the business. Analytics works for the organization when there is a business strategy to address outside pressures, an assessment of capabilities and analytical needs and the ability to use analytics across the organization.

Think Big – Start Small: This is what Michael Lock calls the Land and Expand strategy. Start with one unit or one pain point and work up to the enterprise level of data consistency. Match resources to the company’s budget.

Empower Non-technical Users: 77% of the Best-in-Class companies measured by Aberdeen Group have what they call “pervasive Business Intelligence with self-service usage”. Only 10% of the Laggards have it. End users have the business knowledge, the business context and the ability to create insight from data.

I’ve been involved in so many fads du jour, from reengineering to knowledge management. All of the concepts were stellar but became hijacked by (gasp!) consultants selling technology or off shoring services or some effort to gain short-term advantages. The problem seemed to be either that the ROI assumptions were inaccurate or that consultants rarely stayed around to see the business through the painful change that inevitably comes with disruptive innovations.

Now for the words of caution...

Leaders Drive Change. That’s what GE’s CEO Jeff Emmelt says and I believe him.

Culture Trumps Strategy. Becoming an analytics-based business means behaviors change across the board. This is often left off the To-Do list.

The Collective Mindset Needs to Shift. If data is a source of power in the organization; if people think they’ve been successful making “gut” decisions; if collaboration isn’t in your vocabulary, you have some work to do to build a successful analytics-based company. But, the rewards are going to be huge.

Segmentation: Not For Customers Only

These days, most of us know that if we aren’t segmenting customers in order to understand needs, retention patterns, expectations, profitability and so on, we can’t draw a straight line between our revenue generators and the results we want to achieve.

I’m reading an excellent book by Jac Fitz-Enz titled The New HR Analytics and, no, it’s not for HR practitioners only otherwise, I wouldn’t be reading it. The book is essential reading for those responsible for delivering results. Isn’t that all of us?

Dr. Fitz-Enz suggests that organizations are at the last gasp of the Industrial Age in terms of how we plan our workforces, improve our processes, use data and design our work. Trying to steer a new course using old thinking isn’t going to get us where we want to go. For example, he recommends capability planning, not workforce planning to support a business strategy. Workforce planning involves filling the same kind of jobs with broadly the same skill sets as we have now. Capability planning involves segmenting current and future skills into four categories:

Mission Critical: These skills are key to ongoing success and are necessary in any function; what Fitz-Enz calls a “make or break situation”. (Think David Petraeus)

Differentiating: Based on your current strategic direction or one that you want to execute on, what capabilities will give you a competitive advantage? These skills are similar to Mission Critical but not identical as their impact on the business is unique. (Think Steve Jobs)

Operational: What skills do you need or will you need to keep the company functioning? This is capability without which you would be less efficient, less productive and less effective.

Moveable: This is a critical segment. As the environment and a business’s response to it changes, the work changes but skills often don’t keep up with the change. The result usually is a build up of unnecessary costs and when they become a significant enough drain on results, leaders are faced with massive lay-offs and costly re-structuring.

Thinking "capability" and not "workforce" shifts the paradigm in terms of how your business acquires and builds necessary skills. You may hire Differentiating skills but bring in some Mission Critical skills on an as needed, project-by-project basis. You may outsource some of your Operational skills and will need to look long and hard at Moveable skills.

This is not a once-in-a-while event; it’s an ongoing process of scanning, evaluating and updating your game plan.

There is a growing body of opinion expressed by thought leaders like Jac Fitz-Enz and others who believe that what has worked in the glory days of the Industrial and Information Ages will not work in this Knowledge and Innovation Age. Tomorrow is already here; we should be asking the right questions about our capability and skills; otherwise, we run the risk of becoming irrelevant.

Are you caught between the Industrial and Innovation Ages? Have you started building capability or are you filling jobs?

Let's Hear It For (the New) HR

A lot of us have taken a verbal swipe at the HR profession occasionally; some have written about it. After all, they are the “people people” not the hard-driving, analytical, results-oriented business influencers that the rest of us are. Right?

I had an amazing experience a couple of weeks ago when I volunteered for SHRM-Atlanta at a call in Help Desk for job seekers hosted by a local TV station. Here are some of the things I observed about my HR colleagues:

• They Get It. They not only have a good grasp of business strategy but also are good at formulating it. The organizers developed a mission critical style and approach to this event that was awesome to watch. During our two- day call-in, the organizers were tracking call types and other metrics to analyze how best to follow up and improve for the next call in. I know they also will be tracking and analyzing call resolution.

• They Are Savvy About Business. This group of HR professionals developed a program, including training, researched resources, screened volunteers and marketed the heck out of this event using every channel available including social media; on time and with a shoestring budget.

• They Give Back. SHRM-Atlanta has a vision of Working For a Better Atlanta and from the Board down to individual members; they are trying to live out that vision in all that they do. I don’t think this approach is limited to our local people.

• They Believe in Education and Development. HR professionals are credentialed and take their own professional development very seriously. I never sat for the PHR or SPHR designation but I understand that the curriculum is rigorous and maintaining the credentials requires annual continuing education including strategic coursework. How many of us can say that about our own professional development?

• They Are Collaborative. These HR professionals worked closely with the Department of Labor and the television station as a seamless team; adding their own particular talents to create something bigger and better than anything they could create alone.

• They Can Execute the Heck Out of an Initiative. That says it all.

Is there a theme here? I believe it’s that HR isn’t “Personnel” any longer or the group that processes benefits and payroll or nags us about performance reviews. There has been a sea change and it can only benefit businesses that are challenged to do more with less and yet do it with the best talent available. Your HR department just might be an untapped source of what it takes to lead an engaged company:

1. Strategy Development and Execution
2. Identifying and Developing Leaders
3. Creating a Culture of Collaboration and Teamwork
4. Providing guidance and influence in human capital development and management
5. Selecting, developing and training customer-focused employees through a performance management system.

So, before we put our HR colleagues back in their box on the organization chart, take another look at your HR department. Talk to them; invite a dialogue. Better yet, invite them to your next strategy session. You wouldn’t dream of leaving out the Finance person, would you?

Is your HR Department leading the way to organizational engagement? What are some of the ways you utilize its strengths in non-traditional ways?

What Drives Your Numbers?

Stephen Sadove is a leader I can follow. The CEO of Saks, Inc. was interviewed by the New York Times recently and was asked about his leadership philosophy. His response was that leadership drives culture, which drives business results. Mr. Sadove went on to say that while Wall Street never asks about leadership, culture or people, they actually are what drive numbers and results. Mr. Sadove, you are my hero.

Trying to define organizational culture is a little like nailing Jell-o to a wall: slippery, messy and just plain hard. But, when a leader understands that the harder- to -grasp organizational elements actually make up the engine that propels results, we are at least half way to having a company that truly is engaged. While many C-Suite occupants are comfortable with spreadsheets and analytics (and no one would argue their essential value), the numbers don’t happen by accident or in a vacuum. It takes a lot of deep searching to arrive at a culture design that supports the results you want.

I recently saw a presentation by Reed Hastings, CEO of Netflix who, while not a fan of process, nevertheless, put the steps for embedding Values, Strategy, Leadership and People into a framework he calls Freedom and Responsibility Culture:

How Do We Define Success? For Netflix, business results are “continuous growth in revenue, profits and reputation”.

How Are We Going to Get There? Hastings defined the strategy as “rapid innovation and excellent execution”.

How Does Our Environment Support Our Strategy? Netflix’s culture specifically supports “effective teamwork of high performing people”.

What Would Jeopardize Our Success? For Reed Hastings, it is a culture that tolerates rigidity, politics, mediocrity and complacency.

From this high level, Netflix is able to articulate how its Values are embedded in its culture and specifically defines behaviors that will be rewarded and those that result in being cut from the team. There is no room for ambiguity in Reed Hastings’ vision of success, which means that employees know exactly what is expected of them (part of a team of high performing people) and how their jobs contribute to the company’s success goals (innovating and executing).

We are in an environment today which demands that we stand out in every way. To ignore organizational culture is to sabotage your business success.

Can you answer the four questions above for your company? Can your employees?

5 Things Your Customers Should Never Hear

I'm shocked at how some companies seem to have divorced the word "service" from the word "customer". What has happened?

Just recently, my customer experiences with a well-known brand have been frustrating and unpleasant. Here are the five comments I heard from this company that finally drove me to a competitor. And, I was thrilled to be paying twice what I would have paid otherwise because the experience was so incredible.

It's Not My Job: I don't care about your job description. If you are speaking to me and I didn't get through to the night watchman by mistake, at least make an attempt to be helpful. Your voice mail system is friendlier but it can't help me.

Those Are the Rules: I'm the profit center or hadn't you noticed? I'd like to give you $1000 but your rules are getting in the way.

That's Another Department: Your silos don't interest me. Your web site said I could have that color.

We Don't Know When That Part Will Be Available: Then why did your web site let me build a configuration with that part?

My Supervisor Will Just Tell You the Same Thing: Let's see what s/he says when I Twitter and blog about this experience.

Somewhere along the line, this company thought it could get by with third-class service but no one can afford to do that these days. Maybe it was a cost-saving measure but skimping on service is a losing strategy.

Clearly no one at my former technology supplier thought to connect those moments of truth that roll up into a customer experience otherwise the web site would have been in sync with its supply chain. How can you let that happen when you've promoted a build-it-yourself-you-can-have-it-in-three-days experience as your competitive advantage?

I don't blame the sales/service representative. After all, those are the rules. And, he sounded as dejected as I felt by the end of our painful encounter. Someone at that company lost two customers; never to return. I wonder when the higher-ups will notice that a rush for the door is impacting earnings. I cannot be alone by the looks of their competitor's store when I walked in to buy my new laptop. People were stacked up like cords of wood.

Service isn't something that's nice to have: it will make or break all of us who sell something (which is all of us). What are YOU doing about your service? What are the things you never want to hear from your customers? Here's the one thing I don't want to hear: Good-bye.

Strategic Decision-Making: Bottom-Up or Top-Down?

One of the many challenges facing business leaders when changing strategic direction or reviewing new opportunities is knowing how or when to involve the company at large in the process. It used to be that strategy was strictly for the Board of Directors or the most senior executives and it's true that the final decision -- the buck -- stops with the CEO and perhaps a few executives at the top. However, there is a golden opportunity to engage the workforce up front so that they know what they are going to execute and why. This approach also can make for better decision-making.

A few thoughts below on why gathering ideas and information as well as assumption-testing and implementation is a Bottom-Up process while the final decision is Top-Down.

Diversity of Thought: Once we get to the top of wherever we are, we tend to share the space with others who think like us. Introducing other people who are at the front end with customers and suppliers or who have a unique perspective like Human Resources, Marketing, etc. will provide a broad spectrum of information and insight that is invaluable when evaluating opportunities. Experience tells me that there is always at least one person who brings a point of view so different from the business leaders and so on the mark that it changes the course of strategy development for the better.

Utilize Bias: Rather than thinking of bias as a negative, consider it a necessary part of evaluating strategy and opportunities. Our experiences and the work we do shape our perspectives; we recognize other peoples' biases and tend to view them unfavorably unless they mesh with our own. The leader's job is to acknowledge the biases, including her own, balance them with good dialogue and help the contributors have their say without dismissing their ideas prematurely.

Use Scenarios: It's a rare thing to find that a strategic decision is correct 100% of the time. There are complex ideas, a lot of information and many assumptions that go into the process. There also is a need to avoid paralysis and make the best decision in the time available. That's why it's critical to have all assumptions documented with alternative scenarios or plans in the wings to course correct. The worst case is having the company execute the strategy, get a long way down the road before it's discovered that certain assumptions were incorrect and the strategy is flawed. Aside from wasted time and resources, employee could see the failure as their own and will be reluctant to get behind the next important decision. It's important to let employees know that testing assumptions is part of strategy execution and that raising a red flag is a critical part of their jobs. This is how successful strategies are designed: they aren't perfect 100% of the time at the outset but there is a process to modify and move on.

Make Timely Decisions at the Top: That's the job of the CEO. It's why they are called decision-makers.

Use Strategy Maps, Metrics and Scorecards: Translating complex ideas into visual representations and creating metrics that test the success of a strategy are both helpful tools for the business leader and employees who have to implement. It isn't necessary to invest in sophisticated technology. Below are a couple of examples using only the software on our laptops (thanks go to my business partner, Cathy Missildine-Martin, SPHR for creating these).

Scorecards should be created at the lowest level that can be properly measured and aggregated. Metrics are relevant to that level (can be aggregated or disaggregated) and are designed to help everyone understand what is being done, what they are responsible for and how they are contributing to the success of the company. Isn't that the definition of engagement?

So, the final decisions including those that pull the trigger or the plug as well as the tools and the responsibility for idea gathering is still Top-Down. Idea generation, testing assumptions and providing feedback on what's working and what isn't is Bottom-Up. It's a two-way street.

Better. Faster. Cheaper: The Evolution of Competitiveness

I've been getting ready for a webinar on how to design a winning strategy, which meant some research to emphasize the point that strategy isn't dead or even on life support. It's just that for some, the last decade meant getting real big (and rich) real fast; and strategy seemed so yesterday. Who had the time? Maybe if those responsible for two bubbles in the last ten years had taken time to figure out how to really create wealth and not play shell games, the global economy wouldn't be in a shambles.

When I first started in strategy development, it was called "corporate planning" and while it was valuable for decision-makers, it also had such a long cycle that the plan was out of date before it was bound (yes, we had nice binders). So, the planning part had to go away but in the process, the real substance of strategy got lost for a while.

I put my research into a timeline (see below) and it was impossible to lose sight of the enormous changes in the business climate since WWII. During each major cycle, lasting about twenty years, companies adapted to the forces shaping the economy and the climate for business. Each cycle was created by unique circumstances and the successful companies developed new strategy as well as tools and techniques that not only ensured survival but in many cases, created a unique advantage and wealth. Businesses were getting Better. Faster. Cheaper.

As the business climate entered a new cycle, what was a competitive advantage or a winning strategy had become at best, the cost of doing business and at worst, a commodity.

As we enter the 21st century, we've wrung the efficiencies from process reengineering; we've de-layered and downsized people; off-shored jobs and invested in the same technology everyone else has. Now what? Where is growth coming from?

I think companies will set themselves apart by living up to their Mission (Purpose) and by standing up for their Values. Their real competitive advantages will be people, even though the traditional workforce may not exist. Ideas will be the new currency and innovation the new capital. Even economists are using tools called "Behavioral Economics" to explain market forces instead of relying on traditional financial tools. Companies that develop strategies for this new cycle before anyone else will be Better. Faster. Cheaper. Then, I had an epiphany: this is what the Engagement Thing is all about. It's not a program or slogan or campaign. It's about design: integrating elements that are unique to you and creating a company that Engages. This could be your winning strategy for 21st century growth and business results.

Or, if you think it won't happen, sit back and watch what all of the burned out employees, self-starters, young entrepreneurs and Boomers looking for an encore career do with Engagement.

Is your business ready for this new cycle? How are you going to be Better.Faster.Cheaper. Is your company Engaging?

Values Matter: Is Your Compass Pointing to True North?

I read an interview the other day with the CEO of a major retailer who talked extensively about the impact of the company's values, called Foundation Principles, on how the company is run. I consult with clients on strategy, so I'm interested in companies that 1) have actually thought about their Values; 2) have articulated them; and 3) lead by them. Values can be the compass that guides business decisions, large and small and in my view are necessary precursors of a well designed strategy.

There are seven Foundation Principles according to the web site and each one is articulated in detail. It is interesting that the CEO blogs on the site, so at some level, he models the Leadership=Communication Principle. Job postings on Careerbuilder.com described the company history and its Principles, a departure from the usual list of job requirements. That seemed to follow the 1=3 Principle whereby one great hire is better than 3 good ones. The posting would attract those who feel a fit with the culture.

There are a lot of leaders who truly believe that their companies are run according to established values so I decided to do some research to find out if employee and customer comments mirror the Principles. Customer comments and reviews that I found were full of high praise and good reviews so the Principles of Creating Mutually Beneficial Relationships and an "Air of Excitement" seemed to be part of the customer experience. Then I looked for employee feedback and found quite a few recent ones that unfortunately were not all positive. On a 5-point scale, employees rated the company a 3.1 and gave the CEO a 47% approval rating. Why the disconnect with the other data?

Extreme views generally get posted but as there were as many 5's as 2's, the scores were not negatively skewed. Not one negative comment was about pay. Many mentioned a new scheduling system; others talked about their manager or losing a benefit or lack of a career path. They talked about how things "used to be". It's easy to dismiss disgruntled employees' rants except that sometimes, they are leading indicators of something amiss internally. Unhappy employees today; unhappy customers next week.

The funny thing about values is that when you talk about them, institutionalize them and use them as key differentiators, people tend to take them seriously. Especially employees and customers. They think you'll really do what you say. This company's values don't need to change. That's the point of values: they are enduring. They guide and are the foundation of culture, strategy and engagement. They are a bulwark against lapses of judgment. A couple of thoughts:

• Listen to your employees. Let them talk and be involved. If they are involved in a dialogue internally, it's less likely they will be ranting externally.
• Walk the talk. At all levels. Middle managers are accountable, too.
• Clear, credible communication. Communicate the tough decisions in a way that employees understand the "why".
• When your employees describe your values as "Kool-Aid", it's time to take a long look at your culture. It could be broken and that is hard to fix on the fly.

Is your company built on a foundation of values? Can your customers sense them in their interactions with your employees? Do your employees believe that your values are more than a plaque on a wall?

The Wisdom of Strategy

In his Wisdom Manifesto, Umair Haque shreds the idea that strategy development is anything other than a wallet grabbing scam for consultants. I'm trying not to be hurt by this sentiment, but it's hard. The author suggests that strategy be replaced by organizational "wisdom" and goes on to offer some rather pithy contrasts between the two concepts. My question is: why is it either/or? Why can't strategy design and wisdom co-exist? I don't believe they have to be mutually exclusive. In fact, where would strategy be without wisdom and vice versa?



Let's start with some definitions to establish whether strategy and wisdom are exclusive. Wisdom is the ability to discern or judge what is true, right or lasting; insight. Strategy is a plan of action designed to achieve a particular goal. Logic dictates that applying wisdom to a business opportunity is absolutely correct. An example of strategy without wisdom is the Dot Com bubble, when a sock puppet could appear on television to persuade you that buying pet food over the Internet instead of the grocery store was an idea whose time had come (RIP, Sock Puppet).



Umair Haque suggests that wisdom ignites, energizes and channels. Maybe, but to what end? As Walter Kiechel, author of The Lords of Strategy suggested recently in a Harvard Business Review interview, "If you don't think strategy is important, look at what happened to GM and Chrysler when they forgot about their customers and how to meet their needs." And then there's Toyota, who seemingly abandoned a 60-year strategy that frankly had been working well, and pursued a growth-at-all-costs strategy (and what a cost) without bringing its considerable wisdom to the opportunity. Strategy without wisdom is not confined to the auto industry, sadly.



Strategy allows businesses to think about their people, operations, customers and opportunities in an integrated way. It doesn't have to be painful or drawn out or rely totally on numbers. As Walter Kiechel suggested, a new way of thinking about strategy design today is bringing together people and analytics in a systematic way to be more granular and to become adaptive.



A process I've used for twenty years, adapted over time because of shifts like globalization and prcess engineering and the like, strongly relies on organizational wisdom.

• Values: know your Purpose and what you are about. In a crunch, do you stand by your Values or jettison them?



• Know where you are now: your competitive environment, your market(s), competitive advantages, customer base and internal resources including debt structure and access to financial capital.



• Frame the opportunity(ies) that are present. Assess the risks to your existing environment that each opportunity presents and the rewards that could accrue.



• Close the gaps so that your existing business is not strained beyond it capacity to absorb the inevitable change that new opportunties bring with them.



• Develop scenarios ("What if...") Changes in strategic direction never happen in a vacuum. Assumptions should be documented and become the source of a Plan B, Plan C, etc. Scenarios allow swift course correction when necessary.



• Use action plans to execute the strategy and metrics/scorecards to measure the reality against expected results.



• Keep on keeping on. Strategy design should be on the agenda of every Executive Committee and Board of Directors meeting. This is not a once a year project.

Does your business engage in systematic thinking about your future? Do you apply organizational wisdom or fly by the seat of your pants? Or, do you think the environment is too complex to design a long term strategy?

Skies Are Friendlier When People Are Engaged

I read a good article the other day by Mila D'Antonio called The Strategy That Fuels Customer Engagement. The article outlined so clearly how a good company can stumble and recover with a laser-like focus on the five key areas of any business: Strategy, Leadership, Culture and Employee and Customer Engagement. And, what JetBlue discovered along the way has added to its understanding of the direct and quantifiable impact of these elements on business results.

When a company blunders, as JetBlue did on Valentine's Day 2007 at JFK Airport in New York, when thousands of passengers were stranded for hours aboard planes, one course of action that has become popular is to not respond to the incident at all or respond only if pressed and, if at all possible, pass the blame to someone else. Instead, JetBlue took responsibility and created its Passenger Bills of Rights. Its founder and CEO paid the ultimate price with his job. But, dig a little deeper, as the article outlined, and you'll discover that JetBlue took a systematic view of the problems and, rather than engage in a short-term PR exercise, overhauled the way employees and customers viewed the company, for the long-term.


JetBlue's strategy is to differentiate itself through a customer-and employee-centric culture. Leadership would not tolerate any declines in employee or customer perceptions of the airline as a good place to work or a good flying experience. The changes started with a plan for improving employee engagement results as the thinking was, if the company improved those metrics, customers would receive great experiences (what we call the Spillover Effect).


What the JetBlue executives learned was:

• Engagement is highly correlated with the liklihood that an employee would recommend JetBlue as a good place to work.



• JetBlue's revenues are closely tied to engagement so small improvements in key driver metrics generate big results.



• Key drivers of crewmember engagement are pride/personal commitment, brand, crew leaders, executive leadership, team/people and work environment.



• These six dimensions of engagement are now mapped to revenue growth and shareholder value.

• Listening to employees in terms of what they like about JetBlue and their jobs has resulted in many cost-saving ideas and efficiencies.



• Data gathering is only part of the story. Real insight comes from taking the right qualitative and quantitative approach, including linking behaviors and outcomes to hard results like shareholder value and growth targets.



• Designing an engaged company is not an event or a rah-rah program but a systematic approach to questioning the status quo, learning and adapting in order to execute a successful strategy.

Leaders make mistakes; it's how you recover from them that people remember. The core elements of the business are interdependent and should be viewed that way because they impact your results in a big way.

What drives engagement at JetBlue isn't necessarily what drives engagement in your organization. What are your engagement drivers?

What is This Engagement Thing?

For about a year, I've been receiving Google Alerts with tags that contain the word 'engagement'. Sometimes the articles or blogs have useful information; sometimes they are just sales pitches.

Nevertheless, the concept of engagement in the workplace is fascinating because, for me, it's a "Duh" kind of idea. Isn't it common sense that when people are engaged in what they do, they perform better; they are more attached to the organization and they contribute at a higher level than less engaged people? Ah, but common sense isn't common practice.

We are complex creatures, we humans. We tend to be engaged by an idea or a cause that is meaningful, maybe bigger than ourselves and which enriches our lives. Unfortuately, in a lot of workplaces, work has been reduced to activities and tasks. Senior mangement may not even be recognized (see Undercover Boss) or is the sender of an occasional email. Financial performance is not shared or discussed widely and the company's Mission is engraved on a plaque in the lobby. Maybe it's time to connect the dots and see that for an employee to be engaged, the organization must be engaging. It's easier to see how the concept works in a model:

Vision and Mission: They are foundational elements of an engaged company. People know what you stand for and why you exist. Decisions are based on these elements and behaviors are driven by them.

Strategy: Engagement starts here. People see the "big picture" and hear about organizational strategy because it's part of everyday activity. They are part of something bigger than the jobs they are paid for and can see how their work fits in.

Leadership: Listens actively and communicates frequently. Leaders are trustworthy and believe evangelically about the potential of the company, the people who work there and the customers they serve.

Culture: The way things really get done in an organization; the stories and the rituals; the practices and the collective tone. If Strategy is the Head of the organizational body, Culture should be the Heart. Culture can deliver or derail any leader's strategy if it isn't designed to support it. Cultivating an engaging environment is a key priority.

Employees: The lifeblood, the true asset of every company. Most of us WANT to be engaged but our companies often don't give us sufficient reason. I agree with Dan Pink in his new book, Drive. People are motivated by Purpose, Autonomy and Mastery, assuming basic needs are met (Thank you, Abraham Maslow).

Customers: The reason we get up every day and go to work, remember? As Peter Drucker said so often, management is about knowing what your Purpose is, who your customers are and how you're going to make a profit. Designing an engaging customer experience is an Outside-In job.

So, engagement is not a slogan, a program or a one-time initiative. Connecting the organizational dots is what engagement is all about. What do you think?

Late Night Showdowns: Lessons in Leadership

Whether you are Team Conan or Team Leno, playing out a dysfunctional company battle in public shines a light on the role of leadership and strategy in a situation like this. As long as we are being asked to be voyeurs, maybe there are some lessons to be learned and applied in our own organizations.




1. Hope is not a strategy; arrogance is no substitute for intelligence: How much research and analysis went into the ultimately disasterous decision to opt out of 10PM prime time drama in favor of a bland copy of a great brand? Strategy doesn't have to be a dusty, hidebound process of number crunching and Death by PowerPoint presentations until the next cycle in a year. Strategy is the means by which we decide how we are going compete successfully; it's a dynamic process that continuously examines the larger external world along with the opportunities and pitfalls that are present.


2. Listen, gather feedback and act: What input did customers -- in this case, the affilitates -- have to the decisions that were handed down from 30 Rock? Were other key people with a vested interest in the ongoing health of the network asked for their insights? What about other employees and viewers?



3. Creative destruction + Risk assessment = Success: Any bold company has to engage in some creative destruction otherwise it ossifies and becomes a dinosaur. In this case, did anyone at the top ever throw out the crazy idea that risk as well as reward should be investigated?



4. Loyalty is a two-way street: it seems there was a cavalier idea that the two key employees would loyally support decisions that would not benefit their career aspirations. Money isn't always the answer. If you want loyalty, be trustworthy.



5. You Know Where the Buck Stops: the key executive in this drama did own up to the mistake, albeit somewhat late in the day and with many caveats. Another key executive, however, displayed monstrous ego by savaging one of the star players in the media. Inexcusable. You get the big bucks; you fall on your sword when the situation warrants it. You and your company will be better for it.



The behavior of the two key players was insubordinate but I believe they reacted to poor leadership and a failed strategy.


A strategic mistake is an opportunity to learn valuable lessons. If no risks are taken, no innovation is possible. Are there other lessons we can learn from this sad situation? Did you ever make a mistake that became a great opportunity?

Bold or Bewildered: Do You Have Momentum for Success in 2010?

I was in London for New Year's Eve, watching the fireworks over the Thames with Big Ben tolling and the London Eye outlined in brilliant colors. There was a palpable "something" that rippled through the crowd as we watched the end of one decade and the dawn of a new one. Maybe it was a sigh of relief or an inhale that signaled expectation. Did you feel it too?


I think what I experienced on January 1st was momentum: a sense of drive and energy to leave the past year and embark on the present. When I returned to the States, I did some mind mapping of the Economy, Consumers and Business Response. A great exercise. I recommend it.

So, based on the maps, I came up with quite a few root causes that drove my predictions for businesses in 2010. Here are a few in no particular order:

• Companies will be Bold or Bewildered.

• Customers will extract every penny of value from all purchases, especially discretionary ones.

• Bold companies will make growth decisions but not in a stupid way.

• There are two types of Bewildered companies: those that have many opportunties and/or are on the cusp of making quantum leaps and those that are stuck and don't know which way to go.

• Access to financial capital will continue to be limited.

• People are fed up with what they read and hear about Wall Street, government and less-than-stellar- leadership in both public and private sectors. Their emotions will drive significant changes in the way they think about all institutions.

• The temporary workforce is not just a cover story in BusinessWeek. I talked with a client recently who is already implementing a plan for a temporary workforce in a key functional area.

In future blogs, I'll be exploring these and other trends and how they impact our lives in and out of work.

I'd like to know from you: How are you creating success in 2010? What is your company doing to proactively respond to the shifting mood of the country? Do you have a strategy? What are some of your predictions for 2010?