12 May 2015
Sticky Post By Posted in Business Headlines, Marketing & PR With No Comments Permalink

Deflated Leadership Around Deflated Footballs

Sticky Post By On May 12, 2015 With No Comments

Tom Brady and the New England Patriots were just served their punishment by the NFL for the organization’s participation around the deflation of footballs used in the AFC playoffs games last season. In journalistic shorthand, this has become known as “Deflategate.” Brady received a four game suspension, the team was docked $1 million and lost some draft picks.

There is plenty of teeth-gnashing by the devoted Patriots fans and detractors alike regarding the severity and impact of the punishments handed down by the league. But that isn’t what this article is about.

What has been most interesting to me is the lack of leadership we are seeing from Robert Kraft- the owner of the Patriots and the Patriots as an organization. For those non-NFL fans out there, it is important to note the Patriots have been one of the most successful teams in the modern NFL. Robert Kraft wielded tremendous influence and respect among other NFL owners and the Commissioner Roger Goodell. It is also worth noting the Patriots were caught cheating in 2003 as well (Spygate).

Unfortunately, Mr. Kraft and the Patriots have not shown the same kind of leadership during this latest controversy that previously allowed them to rise to the premier franchise position in the NFL and garner worldwide respect as a winning organization. Let me break down some of the leadership mistakes I have witnessed.

Take responsibility and own the issue

Robert Kraft has been resolute in his objection to almost everything the league did as part of Deflategate. He questioned the motives, he asked for an apology from the league, he argued the investigation results and methodology and even railed against the punishment handed down. Despite a mountain of circumstantial evidence that would be enough to bury any public company’s CEO, Kraft refuses to take responsibility for his organizations problem. Deflecting blame and accountability makes him look weak as a leader- ineffective at dealing with issues and problems the team is facing.

Be clear and be consistent

After stating the Patriots would accept the findings of the league and subsequent punishment, Kraft ferociously complained about the severity of the fines, suspensions and forfeited draft picks once the sanctions were announced. He is sending the message to his team that you should say the right things only when you get what you want (or think you will).

Maintain a unified voice

Don Yee is Tom Brady’s agent. He has gone on almost every major and minor news program to skewer the investigators, league offices and anyone else associated with the prosecutorial side of the controversy. Don Yee is not a member of the Patriots organization and instead of trying to reign him in, the Patriots seemed to turn a blind ear to him and allow him to act as a defacto attack dog. Yee comes off as petty and self-serving and that doesn’t help the Pats in the short or long run. Everyone speaking on your behalf become the collective reflection of your organization.

Censor yourself as needed

You can’t put toothpaste back in the tube. Similarly, once you impugn your employer (NFL), boss (NFL Commissioner) and co-workers (GMs and owners from other teams), whatever positive legacy you once enjoyed quickly disappears. Kraft was one of the most revered owners in the league and was widely seen as the model for all NFL owners- and for good reason. He is incredibly charitable, he influenced important regulation and rule changes for the NFL which helped its popularity soar and, most important to his fan base, his team wins consistently.

Building your reputation as a leader can take years and require tremendous effort. Destroying that reputation can take minutes.

It’s hard to envision an eventual outcome where the Patriots, Tom Brady and Robert Kraft can regain the same stature and respect they commanded before this latest controversy. It will be really intriguing to see, with the benefit of hindsight, how that diminished reputation was hurt more by their response to the allegations then the cheating itself.

04 May 2015
Sticky Post By Posted in HR & Recruiting With No Comments Permalink

How “Talented” is your Talent Management Team?

Sticky Post By On May 4, 2015 With No Comments

We like fancy terms for things in the consulting world. We speak about KPIs, contribution margins and the cost of capital to name a few. Similarly, hiring and development functions have been turned into “Talent Management” which has always sounded a bit more like the job description for someone sitting behind a dais on American Idol, but in fairness, is probably a better term than simply HR.

Recently, I drafted a detailed selection strategy for a client who was using it to enforce the quality of candidates serving their company through a vendor. A little complicated but stick with me. I created the components of what my experience has shown to be important in hiring and retaining the best people.

  1. Candidate Profile- the skills and attributes needed to be successful in the role for which they are hired. Often, top performers are used as reference subjects and their attributes are used for modeling this profile.
  2. Resume Screening- scoring resumes based on the match to the Candidate Profile; the higher the score, the more likely the candidate gets an interview or phone screen.
  3. Situational Interview- questions centered on demonstrated behaviors during specific and actual circumstances that are likely to be replicated in the role for which you are hiring.

Very proud of myself, I presented this to the client’s vendor and expected some kind of appreciative response considering the detail and amount of work I had put into this effort. Instead, I was told they already had a great process and I needed to see what they were already doing. Having more than a few reservations based on their past performance, I agreed to review what they sent me.

About 5 days later, I received what was supposed to be their comprehensive hiring and development program. It was three documents. It had typos all over it. It lacked any kind of detail. It was in multiple languages (not kidding). It had a grammar test that had grammatical errors in the instructions.

Worst of all were the interview questions. They were hiring for sales agents and these were the only questions they were asking:

  1. What is the most significant historical event in the last decade?
  2. If you were president for an hour, what would you do to improve the quality of life for citizens?
  3. Do you agree with the following statement, “Money can’t buy happiness but it can rent it for an hour or two.”

These questions are what you ask an eighth grade student running for president of the debate club, not an adult salesperson in a professional environment. None of these questions will help predict the future performance of the candidate in the role for which you are hiring.

This speaks to the importance of your talent management team and the processes employed to attract, develop and retain the best possible people for your organization.

Think about the basic math of turnover even at entry level positions. Conservatively, let’s assume you have a total cost to hire, onboard, and train to the point of proficiency of $5,000 per person. According to the US Bureau of Labor and Statistics, total separations in February 2015 was 3%. This annualizes to 36%. If you follow this national average and have a small employee base of 25- an arbitrary number- you will replace nine employees per year at a total cost of $45,000. If you successfully improved your retention by 30%, you would see savings of $13,500.

We can get into the breakdown of what causes this turnover and some of it is probably healthy- some people needed to go or wanted to leave. At the most basic level though, it remains about fit and that starts with the hiring process. Top talent is in demand and you will be competing to attract it.

So you have to ask yourself if your Talent Management team is talented enough to get and keep top talent.

22 Apr 2015
Sticky Post By Posted in Redhawk Permalink

Congratulations to the team at Connect Your Home!

Sticky Post By On April 22, 2015

Congratulations to our client Connect Your Home for being named the Top Performer of 2014 by Time Warner Cable! Just one more example of the creativity and ambition on display every day at Connect Your Home!

Connect Your Home is the nation’s premier home services providers offering television entertainment, broadband, and security products from the world’s leading brands.

08 Apr 2015
Sticky Post By Posted in Operations With No Comments Permalink

3 ways to keep from killing yourself in your next meeting

Sticky Post By On April 8, 2015 With No Comments

Company meetings are the butt of many jokes and a central theme of the Dilbert comic strip. In most cases, the common business practice of meetings deserves this place in our collective satire. But they don’t have to.

Here are three things that can immediately shorten meetings and improve productivity within those meetings.

1. Have an Agenda

I know this seems obvious but I am routinely surprised by how often I participate in meetings that are carrying the burden of 12 or more people’s salaries, productivity and untold opportunity costs without an actual agenda. An agenda that keeps the group on task is a must. Recurring agenda items can be a great way to set expectations around subsequent meetings which helps to shorten meetings while covering the same information. If people know what to expect, they will be more prepared and the detail provided will be of much higher quality.

2. Limit the Participants

Does every member of the marketing department need to be there or can the Director share the relevant information to their team members later? Peoples’ time is expensive and unless each participant is actively contributing in a meaningful and truly unique way, they may not need to be there. If you are inviting people strictly so their ego isn’t hurt by being “left out,” it’s time to have a conversation with those folks about where they are placing their value on your organizations’ activities. Having them sit in meetings as human paper weights is not a good way to avoid that conversation.

3. Distribute Materials Ahead of Time

If you have a room full of people looking at a spreadsheet together for the first time, you just created the adult version of story time. Distribute any data or information 24 hours in advance and hold people accountable for being prepared to discuss the data. Not only can you shorten the length of the meeting, you can also increase the quality of the discussion as questions are raised, assumptions challenged or strategies debated.

This, of course, is not a complete list but they are the most common mistakes I have experienced and also the easiest to rectify. If your organization is willing to adapt these rules as standard practice, you may not reduce the number of meetings you have but you will spend less time in them and accomplish more in that time.

04 Mar 2015
Sticky Post By Posted in Sales, Strategy With No Comments Permalink

Now We’re Hacking Customers?

Sticky Post By On March 4, 2015 With No Comments

“Disruption”

“Game-changer”

“Hack”

“Bleeding edge”

“Thought leaders”

These are some of the currently ubiquitous terms revolving through business intelligentsia. Much like “synergy” in the 1990’s, it amuses me when words are invented or adapted to define something that was well-defined long ago. For the sake of brevity, I’m only going to pick on one of these terms.

“Hack.”

More specifically, I loath the addition of this word in front of actual business processes or endeavors to suggest a work-around or short-cut. Google any of the terms “Marketing Hacks” or “Sales Hacks,” or even “Life Hacks” and you will see pages of competing theories on the best way to get customers or people to behave in a certain way. Admittedly, those few theories rooted in actual science contain some pearls on how to engage audiences with ever-decreasing attention spans and who consume a wider variety of information sources than ever before.

The evolution of the “hacking” movement is devolving into something more unseemly. Take this quote from a website you can easily find through any search engine. This company, who uses the term “hack” in their business name, sells a service to find email addresses of people that are otherwise hidden in their social web profiles:

“Save time and sell more! Uncover your sales prospect’s previously hidden email addresses while searching Social Profiles.”

So you should invade a potential customer’s perceived privacy so you can make your quota? Genius. I’m sure your prospective customer wants to get unsolicited sales email on their “wholelottafun123” Facebook email address.

If you have to trick someone into interacting with you, how long is it going to be before that reputation is synonymous with your brand? Are you able to build a long term and meaningful relationship with your customers or are you are hoping to fool them into doing business with you?

I know this makes me seem like a dinosaur in today’s digital marketing universe and there are plenty of folks using the term “hack” that have noble intentions. I do celebrate the push to innovate how businesses prospect and find connections but I caution this slippery slope where the term “hack” is being co-opted.

What’s worse is this really often hides a more serious problem- your product or salespeople (or both) are terrible. Just pumping more and more unwitting prospects into a bad sales process or to incompetent salespeople is a quick route to failure.

It is interesting, at least to me, there aren’t any relevant search results for “Value Hacking.” After all, its value we should be creating for and promoting to our customers- not deceptive ways of getting them to engage with us. Maybe there aren’t any relevant posts because value is something that can’t be hacked. Your customers determine what value you are bringing through their experience with you and your product. Those customer who get real value from you and your product will come back for more and they will help bring you more customers.

18 Feb 2015
Sticky Post By Posted in Entrepreneurship, Funding, Start-ups With No Comments Permalink

5 Things Startup Competitions Get Wrong

Sticky Post By On February 18, 2015 With No Comments

Every city seems to be hosting startup contests where founders pitch their companies to a dais of “experts” live on stage in an effort to win some funding. Sometimes these competitions are massive and worth millions but many are much smaller; awarding $5k to $20k. It’s within these newer and smaller competitions that I have noticed a recurring series of mistakes.

1. The judges are not experts in entrepreneurial businesses

You see this when sponsors become the judges or the panel includes commercial bankers who are really not business-builders. I love bankers and many of my friends are a part of that industry but they are institutionally bad at valuating and understanding start-up businesses. They tend to judge a business idea in terms of if they would give them a loan and for how much.

2. Contestants are often post-funded companies that have been in business for a year or more

When you are awarding $10k to a company that already has employees and overhead, you have given them 6 weeks of operating costs. That $10k could have launched a prefunded company’s business plan and allowed them to get a credible pitch together to secure additional funds. Instead, you have floated an established company’s payroll for a few weeks. You’ve created almost zero value. If the contest is awarding $100k or more, that’s a different story but when you are giving away small amounts of prize money, focus on those for whom it has the greatest impact.

3. The best idea almost never wins

Based on the sponsors, the event’s host, the constituency of the audience and other non-business-related factors, the least deserving of companies often win these events. There are always ulterior motives at play and when those are allowed to propagate, you see some truly awful business models walking away with money that would have served a greater purpose being set on fire in the parking lot. Nobody wants to admit this happens- but it does.

4. The event tries to be “like” Shark Tank

As soon as one of these competitions invokes the Shark Tank name in its promotional materials, it immediately loses credibility with me. Mark Cuban is not coming to your event. It is a TV show that is 50% substance and 50% manufactured drama. The best contests hold non-public and lengthy discovery sessions between the companies and the judges. Financial details are poured over and every assumption is challenged. By the end of that process, a business plan has been credibly reviewed and vetted. When those judges name a winner- it’s a very carefully considered verdict. The contestants come away with invaluable insight and advice from experts that will benefit them in perpetuity.

5. There’s fine print about the award money

More needs to be done to explain to contestants any requirements that will be imposed on claiming the prize money after it is “awarded.” This includes details around benchmarking or timing thresholds required before the money will be made available. What tax implications exist and was that explained to them? One competition I watched closely actually had a very short window where the winners could claim their award and it required hours of drafting financial reports and updating the business plan. At one point, the 2nd place winner decided the $6k they won wasn’t worth the effort and forfeited the money.

It’s truly outstanding that more of these competitions are popping up all over the country. These events can be future-altering opportunities for start-up businesses or they can be thinly-disguised advertising events for the paying sponsors.

As with most innovative ideas, the shift toward commercialization happens at some point and the original altruistic motivations are supplanted by the attraction to revenue and marketability. We’ve seen this shift happen with the best events. If you think that AOL purchasing TechCrunch won’t turn Disrupt into an event where sponsors look to sticker-up everything that moves like a NASCAR, you may be sincerely disappointed.

If organizers can focus on creating the best possible value for their sponsors while maintaining the worth of the experience for contestants, these competitions can help launch the next big idea.

05 Feb 2015
Sticky Post By Posted in Sales With No Comments Permalink

Sales is Not a Dirty Word

Sticky Post By On February 5, 2015 With No Comments

Over the last 10 years “Sales” has been renamed “Marketing” or “Business Development.” I recently heard about an organization calling their salespeople “Revenue Engineers.”

Baloney…

It is true that “sales” as a function has changed and some organizations have not recognized that yet. They are still sending their salespeople on what I call “Pitch and Prays” where the sales process is still just a numbers game and anything that moves gets pitched. Or even worse, they are asking their sales folks to makes hundreds of contacts through email or phone calls which is the equivalent of driving at night without lights. That leaves sales pros and customers describing those experiences in dirty words that would make George Carlin blush.

While we spend significant mental energy renaming sales functions, we aren’t supporting or developing sales leadership like we should. According the Harvard Business Review:

“To put a finer point on it, of the 479 U.S. business programs accredited by the Association to Advance Collegiate Schools of Business, only 101 have a sales curriculum, and a mere 15 offer either an MBA in sales or some sort of sales-oriented graduate curriculum. Sales may be vital to businesses, but of the 350,000 students a year who earn bachelor’s degrees in business from American universities, and the 170,000 who earn MBAs, only a tiny fraction have been taught anything about it.”

But, there are organizations that are starting to realign the value of salespeople with their customers. This is demonstrated when sales people focus on facilitating the purchase for a customer. Every organization has a different process for purchasing products or services and many of those processes can be difficult or time intensive. Successful salespeople are realizing this and creating value by navigating those processes with or even for potential customers by preparing documentation, gathering required information or even writing RFPs for prospective clients.

If you want to see this practice in action, visit an Ethan Allen retail location. Those folks are tremendous at facilitating customers’ purchases.

Most customers already have the relevant information about your product, your competitors’ products, pricing differences and has probably called a colleague or two before you get to actually engage them. You need to add real value to your sales process by thinking about how you can facilitate purchases more than selling something.

The difference in winning new business can be as much about “how” the sales process works and the customer’s experience buying from your salespeople. This is especially true in highly competitive markets or in commoditized products.

When an organization does not recognize and act on this shift in a sales function’s value to their customers, there may be a very dirty word used to describe their performance- failing.

Teaching Sales– Harvard Business Review

12 Jan 2015
Sticky Post By Posted in Business Headlines With No Comments Permalink

Who are you rooting for in 2015?

Sticky Post By On January 12, 2015 With No Comments

It is relatively safe to say we live in a routinely cynical business world where we spend much time relishing in a competitor’s missteps and trying to out maneuver colleagues for that next promotion. It is because of this competitive business environment that we often forget to consider those we are rooting for.

It is quite en vogue for January blogs and articles to recap the previous year or make bold predictions for the upcoming one. I want to challenge everyone to take some time to think about those individuals you are rooting for this year. To illustrate what I mean, let me share a partial list of my own.

I’m rooting for Ted Alling, Co-Founder of the Lamppost Group and all around great human being. Ted has spent the last few years funding, supporting and cheering on young startup companies with a specific investment commitment to Chattanooga’s burgeoning entrepreneur community. He represents the best in entrepreneurship and we should all celebrate more people like Ted.

I’m also rooting for Noha Kattan who is a Program Manager in Saudi Arabia’s Ministry of Labor. Noha has been tasked with creating programs that improve the participation of Saudi women in academia and professional endeavors. Noha will be creating these programs from scratch and in a culture that has struggled for generations with the rights of women to pursue an education or professional careers. She will need to be bold and brave for herself and all of Saudi Arabia. I can assure you she is capable of both.

Brian Colligan is the Opinion Editor of the Daily Press in Newport News, VA. He has been outspoken in his support of equal marriage rights as legislation in that part of the country has become national news. For all the talk of the “New South,” few issues still carry such strong opposition and fear as equal rights for the LGBT community. In most regards, those feelings still represent the “Old South.” I’m rooting for Brian because we all, collectively, need him to continue to push issues that make us consider how we treat each other.

This is a partial list and I’m not intentionally excluding others- but now it’s your turn. Will you take the time to think about who you are rooting for in 2015? Will you go so far as to write down who those people are and why you are rooting for them? Lastly- will you tell them you are rooting for them?

Few things are more powerful than knowing someone is pulling for you simply because they appreciate who you are and what you are trying to accomplish. Selfishly speaking, maybe we can try to emulate those characteristics that drive us to pull for them.

So, who are you rooting for in 2015?

03 Dec 2014
Sticky Post By Posted in Business Headlines With No Comments Permalink

Really Jeff Bezos?

Sticky Post By On December 3, 2014 With No Comments

I found Jeff Bezos’s comments about the “billions of dollars” worth of failures he has been responsible for at Amazon rather cavalier. While I get his point that innovation is expensive and can be offset by a few real “hits,” Amazon is under increasing market pressure to turn a profit and is coming off an epic failure with the Fire Phone. I think I expected him to be a little more conciliatory. Here is the article from Business Insider: http://lnkd.in/eF3wFPj What do you think?

25 Nov 2014
Sticky Post By Posted in Sales With No Comments Permalink

The Poor Economics of “Numbers Game” Selling

Sticky Post By On November 25, 2014 With No Comments

For almost any growing business, the pursuit of top line revenue is a constant and everlasting pressure on the entire business. While your salespeople feel that pressure acutely, the entire business understands and appreciates the need to always have money coming in the door. This pressure can create behaviors that are productive and behaviors that are detrimental.

Productive behaviors can include increased teamwork in the face of a customer deliverable while detrimental behaviors can lead to heavy discounting at the end of a measurement period to hit a sales goal.

The pressure to generate revenue can also lead to economically irrational behavior. One of the most common examples of this irrational behavior is the propensity to chase every opportunity regardless of its quality or potential to actually turn into revenue. The phrase “sales is a numbers game” has been repeated by so many sales “experts” that people tend to believe it. That phrase isn’t completely wrong- only 90% wrong.

You do need to make contacts and that is a “numbers game.” When dealing with commodity products or transactional selling, numbers play a huge role in success but to distill effective selling down to nothing more than a dial-a-thon is both simplistic and costly. If a prospective lead isn’t qualified, you can waste significant time and resources and generate little revenue in return.

Historically, managers have measured salespeople on two main data points; the actual revenue generated (sold) and the top of their pipeline (how many contacts they have made). They should be obsessing over conversion percentage- how many sales they generate from a set number of potential customers.

Every prospective customer carries a cost to your organization. Those costs can be in travel, entertainment, company resources and opportunity cost. To create a simple illustration, let’s assume every prospective customer costs $1,000 to get to the point of making a decision whether or not to buy. Also, each customer is worth $10,000 if they actually buy. If your sales department makes 10 sales presentations per month and converts three of them into actual sales. The cost to the organization for these overtures is $10,000 and the sales are worth $30,000.

What if you were able to make the same three sales but only conduct seven sales presentations? The cost of the presentations to the company would by $7,000 but the sales would still be worth $30,000. The effective profitability of the closed sales increases from $20,000 to $23,000- or 15%. If this pattern repeated itself for the entire year, the total profitability advantage would be $36,000.

That improved profitability can be the difference in needing 5 salespeople instead of 6 and all the associated resources to support that extra full-time position. It can also help you rationalize your sales effectiveness and capacity.

Despite this economic reality, company managers continue to push the “numbers game,” without thinking about how conversion percentages drive increased profitability.

Hire Us

Just-in-Time Resources for Entrepreneurial Businesses

Contact Us
First
Last