Be Different or be dead

January 24, 2022

What is the best way to state your competitive advantage?

Source: Pexels

What is the best way to state your competitive advantage?

Perhaps you’ve got an incredible product portfolio built on an amazing technology platform and believe that the potential for revenue growth is staring you in the face.

The truth of the matter, however, is that if you can’t answer this question, your growth intentions will never be realized.

“Why should I do business with you and not your competition?” is the killer question faced by every organization.

In today’s noisy world with every organization shouting out why they should be chosen, the marketer needs to determine how to get their products, services and solutions noticed in the milieu. They need a competitive claim that is unique and stands apart from your competitors.

Unfortunately, however, competitive claims made by organizations today lack creativity, imagination and truth.

Copying pervades — I would give most organizations today a less than satisfactory rating in terms of how well they address this challenge.

The tendency of most is to go on a copying rampage where the priority is on replicating in some way what someone else is doing in terms of products, services, pricing, distribution and brand positioning. Other players are benchmarked on some capability and the copycat strategy unfolds.

Even a fast follower is a copycat; they just do it faster!

Copying doesn’t create uniqueness and differences; it proliferates sameness.

It dilutes any marginal differences among organizations that might exist and renders them all as look-alikes. And it lowers the bar for each competitor to achieve.

The usual clap trap — Most differentiation statements advocated by organizations and intended to convince us involve words like ‘best’, ‘number one’, ‘leader’, ‘fastest growing’, ‘most’ and ‘highest quality’ to assert their distinguishable characteristics vis-a-vis their competition.

These are common statements which add little to clarifying the clutter:
- We have the best sales team in the business;
- Our people strive to deliver the highest level of client service at all times;
- We offer the highest quality products;
- We have the most knowledgeable salespeople;
- We have been in business for over 30 years;
- We rank number one in client satisfaction;
- We are the preeminent sales organization in North America.

Unfortunately, these declarations add little understanding to help people select a company to do business with.

How exactly does having knowledgeable employees make an organization the right choice given a number of alternatives to choose from who will all claim the same thing? And who decided that an organization has the best customer service, and why should I believe them? 

And why should I be impressed with any organization that ‘strives’ to deliver great service — I won’t give anyone my business who claims their special sauce is that they try hard.

These statements are confusing and have little credibility with their audience. They are generally vague and aspirational without proven substance.

A credible competitive claim needs to be simple and specific in terms of how an organization is different from the competitive herd.
It needs to address a high priority customer need (claiming to be unique on something a customer doesn’t care about isn’t productive) and it needs to be true (failing to consistently deliver will drive a customer elsewhere).

Most competitive claims rely on overused clap-trap to position themselves against their competitors

In response to the need for clarity in competitive claims, I created what I call ‘The ONLY Statement’ as the practical way to do it.

‘We are the only ones that….’ is the claim that will cut through the clutter and make it clear why you should be chosen among your competitors.

“We provide the ONLY permanent solution that prevents biohazard contaminants (such as used syringes) and all other debris from entering manholes.”

What Jerry said

Jerry Garcia, leader of the former legendary rock band The Grateful Dead, nailed it: “You don’t want merely to be the best of the best. You want to be the only ones who do what you do.”

ONLY dispels the clap trap; here’s why:

Confidence — ONLY is bold; some might say arrogant. It’s audacious in the claim to be the one that owns a particular space and is prepared to show all to prove it.
This confident face of the organization, in and of itself, raises curiosity to find out what it’s all about. It’s not without its risks but well worth stepping out of your comfort area to say it.

Simplicity — ONLY is a simple expression which uses simple language. The low fog factor invites eyes to gaze on and process the thought articulated in it rather than struggle through what it means which is the case with the usual clap trap.

Clean form — ONLY relies on a binary view; the claim is either true or false. It exists or it doesn’t. It makes it very easy for the reader to assess both its relevance and its truth.

Emotional appeal — ONLY is built around what is relevant to the customer’s the organization has chosen to serve — what their target customer group cares about — therefore these specific people are warmed up to the competitive claim being made.

“We are the ONLY team that provides safety solutions anywhere, anytime that go beyond what customers ask to help build their business.”

This statement speaks volumes to those who could be in need on a moment’s notice and it reassures them that resources will be available to help them should the need arise.

Revealing shape — ONLY provides detail and clarity around what the solution does, to make it easy for the potential buyer to make an informed decision. It has the cutting edges and lines of specificity that attract followers.

“Unlike other distracted driving solutions that allow drivers to use their smartphone when driving, eBrake is the ONLY one that automatically locks a driver’s phone when motion is detected, but grants passengers unrestricted use.”

Proof — ONLY is easily measured by asking the frontline and customers whether the claim is true or not; the measurement process is simple.
In addition, the researcher can look up and compare other organizations and what they offer as a competitive claim and reach their own conclusions on ONLY’s efficacy.

Distinctiveness — ONLY is different. There is no other similar proven method of creating a claim of competitive advantage offered by strategy advisors in the consulting community.
It has a track record of success with many organizations I have had the pleasure of working with. No other advisor, consultant, academic or strategy pundit has a tool in their kitbag like ONLY but Roy — I am the ONLY one.

ONLY is a sound bite that punches above its weight. It’s small in frame and carries enormous impact.

Rules for ONLY — ONLY isn’t sexy through serendipity; it achieves sexiness by rigorously adhering to a set of rules to create it; here they are:

▪️ONLY must speak to the experiences and value you create for people not the products or services you want to push; it needs to be highly relevant and address the priorities that customers have expressed.
People want to buy things that help create memorable experiences for themselves or produce benefits that solve problems they have.
If an organization can craft their ONLY to address an overwhelming craving or desire their target customer has, a sustainable competitive advantage for the organization is within their grasp.

▪️Keep it brief. ONLY is a sound bite. It’s a nano-statement that shouldn’t require you to take a second breath. If it’s a narrative that consumes a page it’s not a viable claim.

▪️ONLY must talk to the specific customer group you are targeting and not the market in general. It’s really important that ONLY be as specific as possible which comes from addressing identifiable customers; market communication dilutes the claim which renders it incomprehensible and ineffective. Talk to customers rather than markets if you want your message to be acted on.

▪️Test your ONLY with customers and employees; it must be relevant — it satisfies a compelling want or desire customers have — and true — the organization delivers the capabilities promised by ONLY consistently day-in and day-out.
Claiming you are the ONLY one at something that your target customers don’t believe is deadly. They will tell everyone that you’re lying and that doesn’t turn out well.

▪️Consider your ONLY a draft. The reality is you won’t get it completely right the first time, so take your almost-there result and start working with it with your customer segments. Refine it as you go.
And stay alert for a response by a competitor who may suddenly come awake when they see your move.if this happens you may very well have to go back to the drawing board and make some changes.

“We are the ONLY First Aid Advocate that provides safety solutions anywhere, anytime.”

ONLY is a war-rallying-cry of sorts for your employees; it should get their juices flowing. It defines the hill you are claiming and dares the competition to climb it.
Your employees have to feel what it says and be able (with the help of the serving leader) to define exactly what it requires each and every one of them to do in order to deliver on it.

ONLY beats ‘best’; ONLY beats ‘#1’; ONLY beats ‘the leader in…’; ONLY is the clear winner if you want a sustainable competitive advantage.

Cheers,
Roy
Check out my BE DiFFERENT or be dead Book Series

‘Audacious’ is my latest…

• Posted 1.24.22 at 01:10 am by Roy Osing
• Permalink

January 17, 2022

Why your business tools might be useless and how to find the right ones

Source: Unsplash

Why your business tools might be useless and how to find the right ones.

Why are organizations infatuated with tools and have less regard for context?

Why do ‘experts’ push efficiency rather than strategic solutions?

Why is there a push to have best in class methods irrespective of business plan direction?

Numerous tools are available in business, including:

— Sales funnel management.
— Business planning SWOT analysis.
— AI technology applications.
— Predictive modeling.
— Psychology profiling.
— Email and social media applications.
— Recruitment software apps.
— Employee productivity tracking.

And on and on it goes.

Mypoic tools are available for literally everything we do in business.

I’m not suggesting that the right toolset for a business is inappropriate; it’s extremely important to be as efficient as possible in conducting business operations in order to keep costs as low as possible.

What I AM saying, however, is that in my experience there is often a void between the tools being used and their larger purpose—what higher level strategic purpose are they serving.

Organizations declare their strategy with programs aimed at achieving it, but in reality most disciplines within it continue to do things the way they always have, looking for ways to be more productive.

Marketing, for example, continues to implement competitive win-back and new customer acquisition programs using tools to be more effective at it, even though the business strategy says that retaining existing loyal customers should be the focus.

People seem to have difficulty thinking (and acting) at a strategic level, aligning their actions to what the strategy says rather than performing their specific discipline more efficiently — they are much more comfortable taking action that is prescribed by a formula or algorithm.

The AI pundits tell us how to use the technology in customer service and marketing settings and we go ahead and implement it with the supplier-designed functionality regardless of the organization’s strategy for marketing and service delivery.

And the marketing analysts implement the new digital ad presentation tools as offered by the experts without understanding how ‘push advertising’ even fits in the overall marketing and customer communications plan.

People rarely ‘look up’ to see why they should be doing the micro stuff. They’re more comfortable implementing the preachings of others in their trade.

It’s impossible to pivot from micro-tool users to being guided by strategy overnight, but these 5 steps will help you start the shift to make the micro matter.

#1. Pick a champion

Since the use of tools is across the organization, you need a Champion to own and lead the pivot on behalf of the CEO (YES! this work demands the chief executive’s fingerprints on it if it is to succeed).

The Champion’s credentials:
— They must be the expert—strategy-savvy—on the organization’s strategy at the most intimate level.
— They must hold a high level of currency—trust and respect—with employees.
— They must be truth seekers not consensus builders.
— They must be audacious in their approach to the task. This is not a job for thin skinned people.
— They must have a high pain tolerance (to withstand the pressure to bend to self interest people in the organization who want to continue to use their micro toolset regardless of whether it fits with strategy).

The following actions are the responsibility of the Champion whose compensation should be tied to the results achieved.

#2. Understand the strategy

The Champion must ensure that every unit leader in the organization clearly understands the strategy at a detailed level and what it means in their area of responsibility. If the strategy, for example, is to retain high value customers, leaders must translate this strategic imperative into actions they must take in their particular area of responsibility—sales, marketing, customer service and so on.

This is typically where the breakdown occurs between strategy and tactics. People follow best practices in their discipline rather than shape the appropriate ones by the intended strategic direction.

This step is arduous and that’s why most organizations don’t do it. It requires hours and hours of work analyzing the business plan and debating the key actions required to consistently execute it.

Those that don’t do the work pay the price later on by getting little strategic payback on the micro toolset being used by employees.

#3. Audit the micro

Audit the micro tools being used through the organization. Determine what functions they perform and the degree of fit each has with the strategic imperatives of the organization.

To what degree does a specific tool—CRM for example— fit the overall strategy? Does the tool’s functionality deliver the strategic benefits sought or does it merely conform to industry standards for the CRM application?

The assessment has to be detailed and tough, not cursory and gentle.

If the tool doesn’t have at least a 75% fit with your strategy, drop it ‘below the line’ of tools that should be retained because they’re not delivering sufficient strategic benefits to warrant keeping them.

#4. Modify/delete the micro

For the tools ‘above the line’, keep tools with above an 80% strategy fit and for those in the 75-80% range, see if they can be modified to yield more strategic benefits.

It may be that with a tweak here and a tweak there, their utility improves and it’s worth the investment to do the work.

Again, be brutal on tools you think can be tweaked because tweaking costs could yield nothing in return.

Any tool that falls below a 75% fit must be killed. Stop using the tools that aren’t critical to the strategy and reassign their costs to greater purpose work.

Develop a decommissioning plan for these strategically unproductive assets and get rid of them; try and make it a seamless exit.

What do you do with the functionality eliminated?

Find another more strategic way to achieve the intended outcome. You can’t have it both ways: delete the unproductive AND keep the dysfunctional activity.

Either deliver the tool functionality in a strategic way or delete it.

#5. Hold leaders accountable

Notwithstanding that the Toolset Champion is the overall owner of the initiative, each individual leader in the organization must be held accountable for strategically aligning tools with strategy in their area of responsibility.

So make it matter by revising the organization’s Performance Management and Compensation Plan to include this responsibility in the annual performance evaluation process.

And publicize those who excel at mining out tools that serve no strategic purpose.

Organizations have limited resources to take on new initiatives, and this is an excellent way to recover costs that can feed innovation without having to add expense.

Cheers,
Roy
Check out my BE DiFFERENT or be dead Book Series

‘Audacious’ is my latest…

• Posted 1.17.22 at 05:58 am by Roy Osing
• Permalink

January 10, 2022

How process-focused leaders are relentless at delivering great results

Source: Unsplash

How process-focused leaders are relentless at delivering great results.

As I’ve said many times before, standout brilliant leaders think more about execution than the contents of the plan itself.

They spend endless hours and days figuring out how the organization’s business plan can be flawlessly implemented.

They believe execution precision is a key competitive advantage, whereas most other organizations focus on getting their strategy ‘perfect’ and run out of gas when it comes time to determine their execution fundamentals.

They are the Strategy Hawk in the organization who lives and dies by how the strategy is progressed and how results are achieved.

Process thinkers

One trait that these execution leaders possess rarely gets attention is their process-thinking ability.

Audacious leaders are extremely competent process thinkers.

Why is process thinking important?

Because results are always produced by people working horizontally ACROSS the organization rather than vertically within it.

Marketing may create an unbelievable small business value package solution, but if it’s not presented to the target customer in the right way OR if there’s no inventory OR if it’s not delivered seamlessly, OR if it doesn’t work as promised, sales targets are missed and the package dies on the vine.

So, if you’re the VP Marketing, you might be tempted to judge your worth in terms of the creative products your team comes up with or the added features that add value to your current product line.

But if you’re serious about the performance of the organization and not just marketing, you must consider the complete go-to-market performance of marketing’s work as a fundamental part of your role.

Silos don’t deliver stuff to customers, cross functional teams do.

Process-thinking leaders are exceptional at performing these tasks:

#1. Process definition — They define the one or two key processes in the organization that determine the sales success of their products and services.
The idea is to define the processes that hold the key to delivering a product to market and therefore are critical for revenue generation.

#2. Process ownership — They assume ownership of the key processes they’ve defined, filling a void that exists in every organization.

Who owns the product delivery process in an organization? Who is that single person who should be held accountable for the process outcome and overall performance?

The truth of the matter is that in most organizations—I can’t think of ONE exception—a process is never owned by a single function because it involves employees of several separate functions.

The process-thinking leader steps up to take ownership of the processes critical to their performance.

As VP marketing, I assumed the Owner role of the installation process for one of our data services because the process was essential to my revenue line and because there were performance issues with getting the service to our customers quickly and seamlessly.

No one else wanted the messy task so my executive colleagues were happy to let me take on the work to assemble a high quality team representing every piece of the process puzzle.

#3. Process mapping — They map out these processes to clearly understand how the current process works with particular emphasis on the number of hand-offs and on the complexity of the work that is performed in each node in the process.

In the marketing case, for example, the VP might define the product configuration process—preparing the software for the small business product—as key to sales, and HOW configuration is presently done and what the work looks like in terms of its complexity.

Mapping is a revealing piece of work, because it shows the potential break points where things could go terribly wrong and negatively impact go-to-market performance in terms of time and quality.
Too many nodes—handoffs—in the process impacts product delivery time to the customer, and complicated work at various nodes could cause work errors.

#4. Process re-engineering — They take the lead in making the processes they define more effective—producing exactly what is required— and efficient—supplying it when the customer wants it.

Process-thinking leaders micromanage the processes that matter to them; they assume the responsibility to do so.

They transform ‘as-is’ process maps into ‘new state’ processes by simplifying the process—reducing the number of hand-off points—and the work done at each process node.

And these re-engineering leaders are different from others who have been schooled in the science of process management. They engage their customers in the design of the new process, believing that the optimum system is one that enables customer engagement not controls it.

#5. Objectives and measurement — They set end-to-end objectives for each process they manage in terms of time and result.

The delivery process for our small business package, for example, might be tagged with the objective of having the product in the customer’s hands 24 hours after the order has been placed.

In addition, an objective is set for each component of the process—order received, order passed to configuration team, configuration done, delivery team advised—adding up to the overall 24 hour objective which has been ‘approved’ by the customer.

Finally, measurement systems are designed and put in place for the Owner’s constant scrutiny and follow up.

Takeaways

Leaders who are truly dedicated to strategy execution need to own the key processes that influence their results.

They need to step up and assume the responsibility even though the process owner function is not formally part of their job description—the VP marketing, for example, doesn’t have product delivery process ownership anywhere in the document that defines their role in the organization.

Yet if the leader wants better results, they have to get involved and follow the 5 simple steps I’ve outlined in this piece.

Own the process—engage the customer—design a new one—measure the hell out of it—keep tweaking it—watch your performance soar.

Cheers,
Roy
Check out my BE DiFFERENT or be dead Book Series

‘Audacious’ is my latest…

• Posted 1.10.22 at 04:05 am by Roy Osing
• Permalink

January 3, 2022

Why new dauntless sales methods should replace the old tired ones

Source: Unsplash

Why new dauntless sales methods are necessary to replace the old ones.

Everyone knows what sales is, right? After all every one of us is exposed to the selling process almost every day of our lives so we must understand what it is and how it works.

The traditional role of sales is focussed on ‘the transaction’, the exchange of a product or service for money.
And within this context, the challenge for any salesperson is to get more efficient at making a successful transaction.

Old tired sales methods

So traditional sales teaching is populated by such topics as:

- The cold call.
- Funnel management.
- Conflict resolution.
- Client resistance.
- Competitor analysis
- Time management.
- Sales metrics.
- Closing the deal.
- Forecasting.
- Product knowledge.

All of these topics are intended to enable the sales person to ‘push’ as many products as they can from inventory into the hands of the client and make the sales process more efficient—selling the maximum number of products in the shortest time possible.

The issue with the traditional sales model is that if we are teaching every sales person these same ‘micro-selling techniques’, what distinguishes one salesperson from the other? What makes one particular sales person special enough that the client decides to buy from them over and over?

The way it’s done today is that the masters of micro-selling consistently achieve their quota—they sell the most—and they are given a large pay bonus and most likely a free trip to some exotic place as their award for being the ‘Salesperson of the Year’.

In today’s world, the standout salesperson is recognized by their organization as the one who consistently sells the most.

That’s how they distinguish themselves—they push the most FROM the organization TO the client.

This traditional view of ‘What makes a great salesperson’ is not only short sighted—the focus on annual sales adds limited long term value—it’s narcissistic—the organization rewards itself and often to a great extent leaves the client out of the equation.

The traditional view of sales needs to be replaced with more of a client-centric approach. The historical product-centric paradigm of sales worked when technology was ‘primitive’, when clients’ needs were relatively simple and when competition was not so fierce.

Back then, clients were happy to get their basic needs met and were ok with having the product as the main focus of the sales engagement process.

But not any more.

Today, clients are barraged with salespeople representing a myriad of companies all claiming to be ‘client saviours’ offering the lowest prices and the best quality products.

Who does the client believe with all this noise?

Well, I can tell you that the sales rep who has been the cream of the crop by mastering micro-selling techniques doesn’t stand a chance in this world because clients see their behaviour for exactly what it is: self-serving, egotistical, insincere, dishonest and no different that the person who pitched their proposition to them a few minutes ago.

Today, clients are looking for a salesperson who is consumed with finding out what the CLIENT needs, wants, desires and craves and who is prepared to invest their time to discover them.

If you’re not selected by the client to serve them, what good are all the micro-selling tools you learned?

Right.

Client-centered sales isn’t about products and services; it’s about communicating a sales proposition to the client that is unique and different from the competition.

“I got top marks in Conflict Resolution” doesn’t get you much if the client is faced with giving their $MILLION business opportunity to 1 of 5 hungry competitors all hungry for their business.

Competitive context is missing

What’s missing is the competitive context within which micro-sales methods can be meaningfully practised. It’s the framework, if you will, that defines how the competitive game will be played and hence how the sales process must be designed in order to win sales.

Competitive context, the way I think about it, is the declaration of what your organization does to beat the competition and secure the customer.

In practical terms, my method of declaring competitive context for any organization is to create ’The ONLY Statement’ that defines why someone should buy from you and not the other guy. addresses the need for organizations to be specific in terms of what makes them special in a field of competitors.

The ONLY Statement is a declaration of what you uniquely do to serve what your targeted clients need want and desire, and is expressed like this:

‘We are the ONLY ones that…’

Here are two examples of ONLY Statements I helped clients create for their organizations:

▪️“We are the ONLY team that provides integrated safety solutions that go beyond the needs of our customers ANYTIME, ANYWHERE. We are committed to growing our customer’s business. We ONLY serve safety.”

▪️“We provide the ONLY solution that permanently stops people from depositing biohazard contaminants through manhole covers.”

Sales organizations need to press executive leadership to create The ONLY Statement that sales can use, or if that’s not possible for whatever reason, sales should create ONLY for themselves to use.

‘We are the only sales team that…’ would be an extremely useful way to move from products to a client-centric approach.
It would force thinking around what really matters to their clients—their wants and needs—and how sales intends to deliver them.

ONLY-selling methods

Depending on the client wants and desires sales intends to respond to, ONLY-selling techniques include topics such as:

- ’Secret’ gathering.
- Client intimacy.
- Being a strategic force.
- Losing the sale.
- The old sales model is dead.
- The new sales roles.
- Caring sales.
- Discovering client ‘leaners’.
- Why you should stop selling.
- Sales listening skills.
- The Sales Report Card.

Sales efficiency in a product-push context is short sighted and doesn’t add any sustainable value for organizations.

Strategic sales in a competitive ONLY-context is the only real way to survive and thrive in the long run.

Start teaching ONLY-selling ways now.

Cheers,
Roy
Check out my BE DiFFERENT or be dead Book Series

‘Audacious’ is my latest…

• Posted 1.3.22 at 04:13 am by Roy Osing
• Permalink