Paul Wallbank – Brilliant Communications

Author: Paul Wallbank

Risk free fallacies
One of the conceits of the late Twentieth Century was that we can engineer risk out of our lives.

Derivatives like Collateral Debt Obligations were thought to overcome financial risks, think contracts would eliminate business risks and wise central banks would massage the economic cycle to banish the risks of economic crises.

In schoolyards, the kids are banned from doing cartwheels and playing ball games – in response to a recent edict prohibiting physical activity at a local school an education department spokesman said the ban was to prevent, and not in response to, playground injuries.

So nothing’s happened to provoke a ban, just someone decided there was risk and the first reaction is to eliminate it rather than manage it.

In a litigious society where a culture of blame has developed this reaction is understandable. If a kid gets hurt in the playground then the parents might blame the teacher and one should be under no illusion that in the NSW state education system, the industrial concerns of teachers will always trump the welfare of students.

So the cartwheels must stop.

The strange thing with our culture of blame is that when something goes seriously wrong, such as the implosion of the banking system due to greed and misunderstanding of risk, no-one is held responsible.

For lawyers, this culture is understandable. After all, their job is to warn clients of legal risks and it’s true that every time we walk down the street or jump in our car we might make a mistake that could see us in court.

But we learn to manage that risk and we accept the odds every time we choose to drive down to the supermarket.

The danger in believing we can eliminate risk is that removing one element of risk often results in unexpected consequences – they are even more unexpected when you don’t understand the risks in the first place. CDOs and the shadow banking system are a good example of this.

Government seek to pass laws eliminating risks and in doing so create new risks, particularly when the Acts they pass are poorly written and badly thought out.

There is always the question of what risk we are addressing – in the modern corporatist political system, the PR risk to a government always takes priority over a real risk to citizens. Passing a law to protect the minister’s backside might make life more risky for others.

As helicopter parents, always hovering over our children and blaming teachers, schools, neighbours and other parents when something goes wrong, we’re creating a whole set of risks we don’t understand.

For politicians, managers and leaders their main responsibility is to manage risk, not pretend it’s been eliminated by the latest memo, law or silly schoolyard ban.

Similar posts:
August 28, 2012
A world of criminal sheep
Notorious unpaid blogger Michael Arrington recently described his battle with a bank over direct debit charges.

To overcome a fraudulent recurring charge on his credit card, Arrington cancelled his account only to find the bank moved the recurring charges to the new card, a ‘service’ designed to avoid fraud and save customers the hassle of re-establishing legitimate direct debits after a new card is issued.

Both of those are noble reasons but the core of this philosophy lies in a contempt for customers which can be summarised in two principles.

A customer is;
1. A sheep to shorn of any available cash through sneaky fees and shady business practices
2. A criminal
In the 1980s business school view of the world, customers are criminally inclined sheep who have to be regularly shorn to enhance profits and controlled so they don’t go anywhere else.

Only businesses operating in protected environments can get away with this today and the two obvious sectors are banking and telecommunications.

The telco industry long soiled its nest with consumers with dodgy charges and a contempt for customers which reached a peak (nadir?) with the ring tone scams where kids had their phone credits pillaged by fees they never knew they had signed up for.

While those dodgy charges paid the handsome bonuses of telco executives, it proved to another generation of consumers that these companies see their customers as sheep to fleeced on a regular basis.

Ironically it’s that lack of trust that dooms the telcos in the battle to control the online payment markets – their practices of the 1980s, 90s and early 2000s mean few merchants or consumers will trust them as payment gateways.

One of the strengths banks bring to that market is trust. Like cheques, credit cards succeeded as a payment mechanism because people could trust them.

In screwing customers over direct debit authorisations, the banks are damaging that trust as Arrington says “I really don’t think I’m going to be giving out my credit card so freely in the future.”

That’s a problem for businesses as direct debiting customers have been a good way to ensure cash flow and reduce bad debts but when clients perceive there is a high risk of being ripped off they will stop using them.

Businesses that insist on direct debits will be perceived as potentially dodgy operators who rely on locking customers into unfair contracts rather than providing a decent service for a fair price.

So the banks’ position of legal power works in their short term interest and against them – and the merchants using their services – in the longer term.

While bank and telco executives with safe, government guaranteed market positions will continue to treat customers like criminal sheep it’s something the rest of us can’t get away with.

The winners in the new economy are those who deserve to be trusted by their customers and users, if you’re abusing your market and legal powers then you better hope politicians and judges can protect your management bonuses.

Similar posts:
August 27, 2012
Finding the perfect customer
With the rise of social media we’ve spoken a lot about customers’ ability to rate businesses and overlooked that companies have been rating their clients for a lot longer. The same technologies that are helping consumers are also assisting companies to find their best prospects.

A business truism is that Pareto’s Rule applies in all organisations – 20% of customers will generate 80% of a company’s profits. Equally a different 20% of clients will create 80% of the hassles. The Holy Grail in customer service is to identify both groups as early as possible in the sales cycle.

Earlier this week The New York Times profiled the new breed of ratings tools known as consumer valuation or buying-power scores. These promise to help businesses find the good customers early.

While rating customers according to their credit worthiness has been common for decades, measuring a client’s likely value to a business hasn’t been so widespread and most companies have relied on the gut feeling of their salespeople or managers. The customer valuation tools change this.

One of the companies the NYT looked at was eBureau, a Minnesota-based company that analyses customers’ likely behaviour. eBureau’s founder Gordy Meyer tells how 30 years ago he worked for Fingerhut, a mailorder catalogue company that used some basic ways of figuring out who would be a good customer.

Some of the indicators Fingerhut used to figure if a client was worthwhile included whether an application form was filled in by pen, if the customer had a working telephone number or if the buyer used their middle initial – apparently the latter indicates someone is a good credit risk.

Many businesses are still using measures like that to decide whether a customer will be a pain or a gain. One reliable signal is those that complain about previous companies they’ve dealt with; it’s a sure-fire indicator they’ll complain about you as well.

What we’re seeing with services like eBureau is the bringing together of Big Data and cloud computing. A generation ago even if we could have collected the data these services collate, there was no way we could process the information to make any sense to our business.

Today we have these services at our fingertips and coupled with lead generators and the insights social media gives us into the likes and dislikes of our customers these tools suddenly become very powerful.

While we’ll never get rid of bad customers – credit rating services didn’t mean the end of bad debts – customer valuation tools are another example of how canny users of technology can get an advantage over their competitors along with saving time in chasing the wrong clients.

Similar posts:
August 26, 2012
Creating a service mindset
In the Foreign Correspondent report that inspired yesterday’s post about the start up community angel Investor Raval Navikant said “you don’t need customer service anymore, you have Twitter.”

While it’s refreshing to hear that Twitter is now rightly seen as a customer service channel rather than a marketing tool, it’s worrying that startup businesses still have such a low opinion of supporting their users.

This is the mindset for the web2.0, social and cloud computing communities – that user support can be done though Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs), user forums or an anonymous email address that might get read once in a while. It’s the self-help model of helping your users and it’s the biggest weakness of online services.

A worry for these businesses is that big organisations now beginning to remember the importance of customers. What has traditionally been small business’ advantage is being eroded.

At an Australian Computer Society Foundation lunch in Sydney yesterday Testra Corporation’s diector of Products and IT Enablement, Jenny Woods described how her company is moving to a more service centric culture.

While this isn’t simple in a company the size of Telstra, a task made harder by the telco industry’s customer hostility, it’s certainly a process that’s underway.

There’s a long way to go for Telstra. Along with that traditional telco antipathy towards their customers, they are big company with plenty of silos and aligning management KPIs so the temptation isn’t simply to gouge customers for short term profit is a big change.

Changing that ‘soak the customer’ mindset is the biggest challenge in making companies like Telstra service centric and that means management at all levels have to buy into the process.

Without that senior and middle management commitment, customer support will just be seen as the poor relation to other divisions and will be outsourced to the lowest cost provider at the first opportunity.

Part of that change to a service mindset is in trusting your staff. Jenny described how Telstra abandoned scripts for their home Internet customers and told the support agents they could use their initiative – as a result customer satisfaction went up, problems were solved faster and the number of modem returns slumped.

“The people who do the work, know how to do the work” says Jenny and it’s good that Telstra’s management is recognising the skills in their workforce.

Much of that anti-service culture we see in large organisations is because management don’t respect the skills, experience and knowledge of their workers. Instead they’re treated as naughty children who can be slapped into line with a stern memo.

Today’s economy doesn’t favour businesses and managements who think like that, the organisations that will do well this Century those who are flexible, value their staffs’ skills and have managers who see their role as more than micro-managing their silos.

It also means delivering a product you’re proud to support. If you won’t support your products, then your customers will go to a competitor who looks after their clients.

We fell into a trap into thinking customer service didn’t matter during the late Twentieth Century, it was always a myth and now we have to deliver.

Similar posts:
August 25, 2012
Billion Dollar Babes
“It changed everything. It changed the game for a lot of us and you know it made a lot of people feel very anxious and sort of compare their own success.”

Lisa Bettany, the founder of Camera Plus lamented how Facebook’s billion dollar purchase of photo app Instagram purchase changed the start up community on Australian current affairs program Foreign Correspondent.

In the program Foreign Correspondent also spoke to Australian and Italian startup founders looking to make it in Silicon Valley. On being asked what they hoped their business was worth they all had the same answer – a billion dollars.

There’s no doubt Jindou Lee’s Happy Inspector home inspection app or the Timbuktu kids’ story website are great products and should be successful business. But is business success only measured by a billion dollar exit?

In Garrison Keillor’s Lake Wobegon every child is above average, it seems in Silicon Valley every successful business is worth a billion dollars.

Every founder in the current app or web 2.0 craze says “it’s not about the money, it’s about changing the world” yet scratch them and they are all on the lookout for the greater fool buying them out for an improbable sum.

One could say that a billion dollar cheque does change the world of the person cashing the thing although exactly how a iPhone photo app changes the world may escape some of us.

At the same time the Foreign Correspondent story was being aired the founder of Y Combinator – Silicon Valley’s most successful accelerator ‘s founder – warned the heat is now out of the market after Facebook’s market flop.

Paul Graham was elaborating on a letter he wrote three months earlier where he said, “If you haven’t raised money yet, lower your expectations for fundraising.”

If the billion dollar valuations are going out of the startup mentality then it might be better for all of us. It might mean our youngest, best and brightest really are focused more on building things that will change the world rather than buying mega-yachts for themselves and their VC investors.

Similar posts:
August 24, 2012