Survey Software, Web Survey, Online Surveys, and Enterprise Feedback Management solutions from Vovici

Your email:
   

Welcome to the Listening Post!

Your single source for everything Voice of the Customer (VoC) and Customer Experience (CxP). And, don’t forget you can follow us on twitter @vovici, or come check us out on Facebook and join the Vovici Network on LinkedIn.

 

Current Articles | RSS Feed RSS Feed

CEM in the Age of Customer Capitalism (Roundup)

 
Wall Street sign

While bloggers this week have been discussing the Harvard Business Review blog post "Five Ways to Heal American Capitalism", by Roger Martin, more fascinating to me is Roger's article in the January/February issue, "The Age of Customer Capitalism". His thesis:

Modern capitalism can be broken down into two major eras. The first, managerial capitalism, began in 1932 and was defined by the then radical notion that firms ought to have professional management. The second, shareholder value capitalism, began in 1976. Its governing premise is that the purpose of every corporation should be to maximize shareholders' wealth. If firms pursue this goal, the thinking goes, both shareholders and society will benefit. This is a tragically flawed premise, and it is time we abandoned it and made the shift to a third era: customer-driven capitalism.

Walker Information has two blog posts discussing the ramifications of this shift for researchers. In "Customer Capitalism: Does It Pay Off?", Mark Ratekin writes:

If we assume that customers are the source of all future earnings, then logic would suggest that maximizing customer value would be the best way in which to maximize shareholder return in the long run.

Do the data bear this out? Professor Martin provides some anecdotal examples in support of customer capitalism; we can add several more from our work with clients...

 

  1. We continue to see a statistical connection between what customers say they will do and what they actually do;
  2. We have witnessed the correlation between a customer's loyalty and his/her revenue growth rate, profitability, willingness to buy across a firm's multiple categories, etc.
  3. The Walker Index, a composite of Walker's publicly-traded customers, continues to outpace the broader market indices in total; [to which I would add, also check out the Forrester CxPi and stock performance]

In addition, the academic literature provides analysis consistent with what we see in our client work.

However, the notion of Customer Capitalism is another example of easy strategy that is extremely hard to execute.

So how can you use CEM (Customer Experience Management) to execute such a strategy?

  • In "Things to Consider When Implementing a Customer Capitalism Strategy", Mark argues that the four key areas to focus on are organizational support for customer centricity, integration of customer data into work processes, incentive alignment to customer needs, and effective communication plans to both employees and customers.
  • Bruce Temkin in "It's All About Your Customer's Journey" writes, "Over time, the decisions that companies make end up straying farther and farther away from addressing the actual needs of customers....That's why companies need to use tools and processes that reinforce an understanding of actual customer needs. One of the key tools in this area is something called a customer journey map (also known as a touchpoint map). Used appropriately, these maps can shift a company's perspective from inside-out to outside-in." Bruce just published an independent Forrester report, Mapping the Customer Journey, outlining best practices and five steps for building a customer journey map.
  • Don Peppers argues on John Oswald's blog that you need a framework for making the hard decisions about priorities and investments. "If your marketing exec says, well if we want a good customer experience then we should just DO these kinds of things, then our question is: What if the cost is $100 million? Or $500 million? See the problem? At some point a balance has to be struck, but where? Simply saying that CXP leaders tend to have better financial results than CXP laggards won't solve the hard problem of resource allocation. To solve this problem you need a metric for the benefits of customer-experience-management that can be converted to dollars and cents. That's why we invented the financial metric, Return on Customer, a precisely quantifiable measure of the efficiency with which a company's customers are creating value."
Customer Capitalism presents one of those discontinuities in the marketplace that will separate the winners from the losers. Make sure to help position your company to be one of the winners by relentlessly focusing on measuring and prioritizing improvements to the customer experience.

Comments

If we assume that customers are the source of all future revenue, then Marketing's primary mission is to win and to keep customers. The strategy for doing that is to offer cusomers more of what they are looking for. More today than yesterday. More tomorrow than today. And (ideally) more than competiion every day. 
 
The best tool I know of for executing that ambitious strategy is the market-driven competitive assessmnet. This is a three dimensional picture of the market: its wants and needs; its priorities; and its evaluation of competitive offerings. This set of data enables us to identify and size opportunities in the marketplace (which contirbutes to answering the question: is it worth what it will cost to improve our offering?).
Posted @ Saturday, March 06, 2010 1:33 PM by Robert Burian
Great summary of some of these arguments, Jeffrey. And Robert - while it's obviously a good idea to know your "market," the weakness in this kind of assessment is that it will inevitably treat all customers as if they are identically valuable and have identical needs. Markets are good first approximations of reality, but that is all. Understanding individual customer differences requires a much more robust analytical framework, in my opinion.
Posted @ Monday, March 08, 2010 7:07 AM by Don Peppers
Don raises a question that had long troubled me. How can the consumers within a market be the same and yet be individually different? I've concluded that a large goup of people can agree on the desire to have a common set of wants and needs. Within the larger group, individuals will have different sets of priorities (that is, getting some wants and needs is more important than getting others). That allows a market to be similar accross and individual within. I've delt with generating twenty key "benefits" customers across in a market are seeking. They all agree that these benefits would be good to receive. Cluster analysis will pull together consumers that share a similar set of prioities. That's where we see some interesting and actionable differences. As for satisfying the individual customer, I tend to belive that is the sales rep's responsibility. He/she develops the one on one relationship that pulls together what the individual customret wants from what his/her organization is willing to provide.
Posted @ Monday, March 08, 2010 4:42 PM by Robert Burian
Let me add another way we identify individual differences within our market assessment. We ask participants to evaluate brans' ability to provide the benefits everyone is looking for. There can be quite a disparity here. Brand usage is recorded. When we compare the evaluatioons of a brand's users from non-users, we get a good picture of the brand's image. One from users; another from non-users. I have worked with a major brand had a higher image from non-users. This presents the company the challenge of living up to its image.
Posted @ Tuesday, March 09, 2010 7:08 AM by Robert Burian
Jeffrey, thanks for referencing my blog on this topic. While there is much overlap among the four factors I describe, I would reinforce the need to integrate the customer capitalism strategy into work process flows. Tools are important, but if we assume that people have good intentions (as well as enough work to do), then ignoring how customers fit into the overall work flow will force employees to either focus on customers or comply with internal processes. This, to me, seems like an unnecessary choice. My latest blog relates this to Chef Boyardee's latest ad campaign - http://blog.walkerinfo.com/blog/walker-information-blog/0/0/customer-centricity-the-business-equivalent-of-eating-your-vegetables . On the topic of markets vs. individuals, I would argue that both have merit, but they have different points of focus (as Robert is suggesting). Focusing on overall findings looks at broad-based factors that have the greatest probability of impacting all customers – these have their greatest application when looking for systemic issues that the firm should address. A focus on the individual customer embraces the notion of individual differences, and therefore is best suited for strategic account planning. Thus, the two perspectives complement one another, in my opinion.
Posted @ Tuesday, March 09, 2010 1:35 PM by Mark Ratekin
Post Comment
Name
 *
Email
 *
Website (optional)
Comment
 *

Allowed tags: <a> link, <b> bold, <i> italics

Latest Posts

Loading
What's New
Independent Research Report: Why Customer Experience? Why Now?
VoC on Twitter
Verint Blog
Verint Blog: Read the Latest from the Verint Systems Blog