citizenbay

Elegant Business: Pay your agency suppliers in a timely manner

I have been busy shaping up my work on what makes an Elegant Business (which started with my little chat at TEDx Porto on Elegant Business). Basically, a framework to help companies deal with the world they inhabit. A key part of this work is to shape up a variety of metrics to measure the level of Elegance in a Business.

One potential metric is something that reflects the relationship between a business and a supplier. A business could be dealing with lawyers, marketing services agencies, providers of parts or raw materials. The list is endless. So that makes matters a little tricky. How could I measure the Elegance of a Business when it comes to their dealings with different suppliers?

Here is one: the length of payment terms that businesses place on their suppliers. Seems ok to me (let me know what you think). Not a full reflection of the relationship at all, but one piece in the puzzle.

I do find it quite extraordinary that companies (usually large ones) dictate to the providers of goods or services when they will get paid. However it is how it is. And up til recently it was pretty straighforward. Supplier invoices. Client pays in NET30 days.

Now sometimes companies pay later than agreed. Over the (almost) 10 years running citizenbay I have both been a victim and culprit (not by plan, more by incompetence). I have had a couple of non-payers, but the vast majority of my clients have been utterly brilliant, incredibly fair, very elegant in that respect.

However, over the last few years the marketing services industry has seen a clear shift in the payment terms between clients and agencies, with terms of payment lengthening from NET30 days to NET45 days to NET60 days and climbing.

As Debbie Morrison of ISBA UK, in conversation on Twitter with me, said:

we've seen it develop over the last 2/3 yrs, it's led by the very top of co's CEO/board level not proc or marketing initiative.

Proctor & Gamble have announced that they are pushing the payment terms out to 75 days. The Chief Purchasing Officer offers this reasoning:

The working capital program will focus on moving to longer payables with our external business partners.  We completed months of external benchmarking in 2012, and realized that we were out of line compared to our competitive peer companies on payables.

So because others are getting tough, P&G are following suit. (Would be interesting to know how they drew up the benchmark list on that one!)

But according to Rick Hughes, the CPO of P&G,  they have the suppliers' interest at heart:

Our objective is to address this in a phased approach.  Rather than a simple “mandate” which we believe could be punishing for our small/midsize partners, we have developed a solution with pre-selected partner-banks that will enable us to offer a financial product called ‘Supply Chain Financing’ (SCF) that can create a win-win-win for our external partners, P&G, and the banks.  This approach not only will help mitigate some or all of the negative impact on the working capital of our external partners, but in many cases will create value, by enabling access to low cost capital for reinvestment.  

A big company trying to find a solution to help the small company is very laudable. Check out the wonderful Small Business Saturday work of Amex, for example. However, in the solution proposed by P&G, they have partnered up with 'pre-selected partner-banks' to offer a solution. But hold on a minute.

First, the P&G solution is one that aims to solve a problem that P&G have themselves created for their suppliers.

Second, 'pre-selected partner-banks'? Where do you start with that one? Are these 'partner-banks' the same banks who have drained economies of cash, and done little or nothing to support start-ups and small businesses with all that cash that governments had laid at their feet? Now they are going to help out suppliers, while P&G holds on to their cash for a longer time? Hmmmm, not convinced.

Mr Hughes then sums up with this:

This solution demonstrates P&G’s commitment to drive sustainable value through improved productivity for P&G and our business partners.

I have a feeling that some might disagree with that statement.

However, P&G is by no means the worst of the bunch (hence I guess their reference to the benchmarking). We are seeing NET90 days and even NET120 - AB-InBev is reported to have moved to this payment time-frame.

This of course has a wider impact. If the agencies are not getting paid until up to 4 months after invoicing, then spare a thought for their suppliers, especially the freelancers.

In this more fluid and flexible working world, many freelancers, consultants and small businesses can do without having to face even longer delays on payment - the impact on their cashflow will be expontially tough.

Clearly, large companies are making a massive contribution to the economy and they are right to consider all routes to ensure long term success for their business.

However, the marketing services industry also contributes considerably to brand health, and will be ever more important as companies navigate the world. So you would think that the last thing a business would want to do is penalise the very community who can inspire, create and generate incredible long term customer value and trust for businesses. Instead, you would think that companies would want to inspire the marketing services industry even more.

I came across this fascinating little piece on the potential role that the Big 4 Accounting firms are playing in this move to longer payment terms. Aside from walking the walk and moving their own payment terms to longer ones (yeah right), maybe the Big 4 are seeing themselves as the new source of innovative creative thinking for brands. From creative accounting to brand innovation.

I might be wrong. I might be being unfair on big brands, and the piece might have it wrong on the Big 4.  Yet, it does seem that extending the payment terms to suppliers beyond NET30 days to 4 months, seems inelegant to say the least. At worst, it will negatively impact on the long term health of the client's business and that of the agency suppliers.

That's not good business sense for anyone.

Elegant Business: WFA Purpose in Marketing Survey & the need to cherish people who work for you

I recently attended the World Federation of Advertisers 60th Anniversary conference in Brussels. Excellent insights from CMOs of some of the largest companies in the world.

The opening speech came from Karel de Gucht, the European Commissioner for Trade. Whilst the core of his speech focused around the American/EU free trade talks, I was struck by what he said early on in his speech.

Marketing and Politics have two things in common. Neither have the best reputation in the world. We believe in what we offer...but we won't get very far if we can't pursuade others too

Such a candid comment is very welcome. Doing something about the reputation is the challenge. Trust is at the heart of the problem. In Europe, politicians are the least trusted profession. According to the recent 2013 Readers Digest Trusted Brands Survey, whilst firefighters reach a 92% Trust level amongst those surveryed, 90% of people say their trust level in politicians is either 'very little or 'not at all'. Sadly, advertising fairs little better in the Readers Digest Trusted Brands survey over the years.

No right-minded person in the marketing industry thinks that building trust is not essential to building business success. However, we at times seem to be losing focus on how to increase trust.

The smart brands have long realised that trust is not built upon the shifting sands of the Brand Promise. It is built upon fact, upon Delivery of the Promise, upon incredible customer service, upon innovation that makes our lives easier, better, healthier or more enjoyable. It is also built upon the passions of those who work at the company. The wish to go that little bit further, to come up with ideas for the business, to put in a few extra hours, to make the customer feel special even when times are tough for the employee. Trust in our colleagues goes a long long way

Which leads me to a great piece of work that the WFA carried out with those clever folk at Edelman.

At the event, the wonderful Rory Sutherland (@rorysutherland) invigorated the conference with his quick fire tour de force speech on behavioural economics. A difficult act to follow as always. However, Will Gilroy (Director of Public Affairs of the WFA) and Martin Porter of Edelman (who stepped in at the last moment for a colleague) did so.

They presented the findings of a great piece of work by the WFA entitled Putting Purpose into Marketing.

I found much of this piece of research interesting, but none more so than how Marketers and people defined Purpose.

Off the top of their heads, Marketers defined Purpose as:

creating progammes to positively impact communities - 65%

protecting and improving the environment - 56%

ethical business activities 56%

helping to address global issues - 52%

listening to and acting upon customer needs - 40%

It is laudable to hear senior marketers wishing to commit to programmes that will respond positively to people's needs and impact positively on society as a whole. A number of great examples were shared at the event.

Some companies though, still have a long way to go. One could point to the terribly complicated choice architecture put in place by many companies to frustrate people in making a complaint. The use of the 'what we are doing is legal' PR strategy of Starbucks & Amazon in response to the scandal of their pitiful contribution to UK Corporation Tax, comes to mind too. Trust is not a PR exercise. It is the foundation upon which success is built. Always has been and will be ever more so in this hyper connected world.

Quite often when a company faces negative publicity, it is not the C-suite that deals with the brunt of the customer complaints, it is the shop floor assistant/call centre personnel/online community manager. They need all the support they can get, and need to feel that they are part of the business they work for. However, If companies place employee care so low down on the list of 'Purpose' then we are missing out a massive opportunity.

Meanwhile, when it comes to defining Purpose the marketers found this to be of much less importance:

Safeguarding and improving employee welfare - 18%

In the same survey, the public at large were also asked to define Purpose.

Listens to customer needs and feedback

High quality products or services

Treats employees well

So the general public see the treatment of employees as being critical.

As companies seek innovation and inspiration for future growth, harnessing the ideas and contributions of the incredible talent within the company could lead to business benefits, increased loyalty amongst colleagues, as well as raising trust amongst the general public. Having structured a Europe-wide innovation platform at Levi Strauss Europe during my days there, this is something close to my heart.

In a previous post, I mentioned a wonderful and elegant man called Robbie Robinson, who retired from London Underground after 38 years of serving the people of South London at various Tube stops. To mark his retirement, London Underground put up a poster at Clapham Common Tube wishing him well (see above). A small detail, but a detail that suggests that London Underground truly appreciated his positive contribution to people's perception of the organisation. A detail that suggests they cherished him. Which is no bad thing. Maybe at the 2014 WFA event, companies will be showcasing some of the great work they have done within their own organisations to cherish, and be inspired by, their own colleagues.

 

Elegant People: Mr. Robinson of London Underground

His name is Mr. Robinson.

He works for London Underground, often at Clapham Common tube station. Originally hailing from the Caribbean, Mr. Robinson has worked for LU for an incredible 38 years. Next week is his last week. He is taking retirement.

Whenever we see him, he is always ready with a smile, a hello and a how are you and the family. Even when he might be tired, he is always there for the community of people who pass by him in the ticket hall. He knows who my son is and keeps an eye out for him. Mr. Robinson epitomises what is great customer service, without thinking about it.

Mr. Robinson has Elegance in the bucketload. Now Mr. Robinson cuts a fine dash, but I am not referring to his sartorial elegance.

That is not my focus of Elegance.

The inspiration comes primarily from the worlds of mathematics, engineering and computer programming. Proof of a mathematical theorem to a complex problem is seen to be Elegant if it is simple, constructive, long lasting and effective. In computer programming, elegance is achieved by using the least amount of code to create a simple and effective output.

So I took this Elegance and transposed it into the world of Business, where all too often we over-complicate our relationships with people, be they colleagues, investors, partners or customers.

My TEDx speech was the first attempt to outline how Elegance may unfold in Business.

In essence, I see an Elegant Business as one that, amongst other things, is:

• agile to the evolving relationship with people
• shapes long lasting coherent business strategies
• seeks to build trust by delivering on the company promises
• has values that come to life on a daily basis throughout the organisation, rather than just sit on a powerpoint deck and the website
• makes life simple for their customers, their partners, their colleagues and their investors
• in the business of making business
• listens, truly listens to customers (aka people)

People within the organisation are clearly critical to this Elegance. A great cashier, wonderful service on the phone, a speedy and helpful response from someone at a company on Twitter. These and many other examples add to the sense of an Elegant Business.

Meanwhile, we have witnessed in the UK (and elsewhere) the monthly parade of obscene bonuses, rewards and pension pots paid to many bankers and others, each of whom seem to have had a morality bypass. We see senior management incompetence rewarded in the banking, political and public sectors.

With (justifiable) anger focused here, it is easy to forget the flip side.

We are surrounded by Elegant People. People who are to be admired, trusted and cherished. People who do what they do with dignity, with care and with a focus on doing their work with excellence and with pride. People like Mr.Robinson.

Yet in the rush to go somewhere, many people walk past and don't notice him or his colleagues. Place oystercard on the machine and go.

We have known Mr. Robinson for 27 years now, and we will miss him. For us he is a symbol of what is great about public transport, and about customer service. The London Underground tends to get negative coverage when trains fail to work, buses are late and strikes occur. Yet for the vast majority of the time the people who work at the stations, on the trains, boats and buses, do their best for us.

So if you pass by Clapham Common today or next week, say hello to him. If you can't, how about saying hello to the other people who look after you on your journey from A to B on the bus or metro instead.

I think Mr. Robinson would like that.

Encouraging people into the physical store

Those lovely people at GDR Creative Intelligence kindly asked me to ponder how retailers could get more people to the physical store.

Driving more people to store, or driving people to store more often, in itself is intensely challenging.

With rates, rental, utilities and supplier costs rising, and banks doing little or nothing for small and medium size retailers, the high street retailer could do with some positive news.

Yet the hurdles continue. The big supermarket chains have for years wielded their influence over planning departments of local government to help secure out of town shopping complexes. Over recent years they have been moving back into town creating their local/mini/city stores. The sad irony of course is that they have often taken up empty retail space vacated by the smaller retail businesses driven out of business by the supermarkets themselves. Nice.

Then of course, we have the shift online. Why brave the cold weather when you can shop online, save petrol, save time and get stuff delivered to your door.

Plus, retailers now face the indignity of having people come to their stores to use the space as product showrooms, then get out their mobile to find better deals online.

However, I have given it a go and shared my thoughts. Drawing upon a myriad of examples to highlight what might be possible, I have even provided examples of what can be learned from those lovely supermarket people.

When I met Carmel Allen, Editor in Chief of GDR Intelligence, I took notes of our conversation on my iPad, using the mindmapping software iThoughtsHD. I like to use the tool to capture different lines of thought and themes during a meeting.

When she saw what I was doing, Carmel immediately suggested I mindmap my thoughts on getting more people to the physical store.

So I did.

It appeared in Issue 45 of the GDR Creative Intelligence Report. Here is the mindmap in pdf form for you to download if you fancy taking a look. The pdf has hyperlinks built in, so you can explore some of the examples I have shared.

As ever, thoughts appreciated

Paul

 

In search of an Elegant Business

 

Earlier this year, I was kindly invited to speak at TEDx Porto and chose to share my thoughts on Elegant Business.

For some the idea of Elegant Business may conjure up smart business outfits, coiffured hair, fresh breath and well heeled shoes.

Elegance in how one dresses in business is not to be ignored. There is a fine balance to be found between the 'rules' of a certain culture or community in business and being yourself. However, the focus of my speech was elsewhere.

Elegance in Business can also be seen as the pursuit of better manners. Anyone who has suffered poor customer service or had to listen to a company boss promise one thing whilst receiving something quite different, may empathise here. A business that fails to treat their customers with respect and consideration, and there are many, is not an Elegant Business.

Given that many people have lost Trust in institutions and business - politics, banking, advertising to name three - going back to the basics of customer care would help a lot. However, once again the focus of my speech was elsewhere. My focus lay in the world of mathematics.

Like businesses, Mathemeticians are faced with hugely complex problems to surmount. They seek solutions that are long-lasting, constructive, effective, simple. They seek simplicity in complexity. It is what they call the search for an Elegant Solution.

Often it takes a left-field look at the problem to get there; fresh thinking; lateral thinking. One thing is certain though. An Elegant Solution is not necessarily simple to find.

Computer programmers seek Elegant Solutions too. The great programmers create something incredible using the simplest of code.

Business needs such elegance. And there is no better place to start than with marketing.

People (not customers/target audiences/segments/consumers/employees/staff) are supposed to be 'at the heart of the business'. People are faced with more choice in their lives, but also greater complexity. Yet rather than making life that little bit easier to navigate, brands often confuse and complicate matters.

Above is my speech at the TEDx Porto event earlier this year. In it I showcase where elegance can be found and give a few thoughts on what can be done to develop a culture of Elegance in Business.

If you are interested, I will also be sharing examples of Elegant Business on this blog over the coming months.

 

 

 

What is Media? A work in Progress

 

 

What is media?

 The media industry is in flux. Media Agencies and Media Owners are redefining themselves, whilst others redefine them too. New companies are appearing with what seems increasing speed, carving out their own territory in the land of 'media'.

 

Once 'media' and 'digital media' were separated in the communications proces, with 'digital' often being relegated to a bit part in the client pitch (as 'media' still is when side by side with 'creative').

In many companies, the line between 'digital media' and 'social media' is in place, the former sitting in the silos of 'Paid-For' and 'Owned' media, the latter falling into media that needs to be 'Earned'.

Yet more silos for 'media'.

Once there was a clear divide between the content maker and the content distributor. This line is blurring ever more as the days go by.

Who makes and who shares now? Is 'media' only focused on the distribution or sharing of great content or is there something more to the industry and to the word itself?

I was kindly invited by the World Federation of Advertisers to present on the topic of 'Innovation in Media'. During my research on the topic, I kept coming back to asking myself what is 'media' in 2012. I have helped many companies shape their local or global media and communication strategy, and helped them define an approach, a philosophy towards media.

However, I thought it would be useful, at least to me, to explore how people define 'Media'.

Via the medium of Twitter, I asked a selection of Media Agencies for their input. Sadly, the response was not as hoped for (as you will see in the deck).

However, I also approached a number of incredible people on Twitter, with whom I engage with and get continually inspired by. All 13 of them thankfully responded to my question "What is Media?", and I have incorporated their responses in the document above.

This document is merely a work in progress. I am keen to hear your definitions too, and I promise to compile them into a future report and share again.

So if you read this and feel compelled to share your own definition of "What is Media?", then head to the comments section below, head to my slideshare over here, or join me in twitter (@citizenbay #whatismedia).

Hope this is of some use and stimulates debate (at least a little)

Paul

The Media Fad Syndrome: Short Term Thinking in Marketing

The investments committed to marketing are investments contributing to the short, medium and long term health of a business. 

The most common criticism of the marketing function from others within the organisation is what is seen by some as the near cult-like reverence to the long term ‘brand identity’, at the expense of 'present market realities'. In other words, stop the 'fluffy nonsense and let's just get out there and sell!'

All well and good having a fancy brand plan, they say, but if consumers are running away from the business right now, then a long term plan is just wasted energy. In other words, 'stop the fluffy nonsense and let's just get out there and sell!'.

There are many far wiser and far more eloquent than I to counter this prevalant argument.

It is true that a focus on the ‘brand’ can consume companies and the brand teams to the point of being unable to spot consumer shifts happening right under their noses, so a greater level of flexibility and agility is essential in any brand approach now.

However, I would argue that whilst in theory brands may be looking to the long-term, at an executional level there still seems to be a number of brands (and agencies) who are suffering from the short-termist disease that I call Media Fad Syndrome. 

This is simply the addiction to having whatever everyone is having.

I have been around the industry for a long time, and one thing is for sure. Conference companies make good business offering up the next ‘hot topic’. A few years ago, Second Life was going to be the new United Nations/social phenomenon/brand heaven. A little before, you could not move without hearing how the future was going to be in 'branded content'. 

Then came the widget. No self-respecting advertising or media agency could NOT suggest a widget as part of the marketing ideas for clients. then it was very much the rise of the Facebook Page. I was on a coach recently, and the coach company had a sticker on the side, inviting people to be the coach company's friend on Facebook. This might be a great idea, but for the life of me I am trying to work out how.

Then it was the turn of the iPhone apps, and then the iPad apps. (Sidenote: few are asking for Android yet, even with the massive smartphone penetration of Android...another style over substance discussion for another time perhaps)

What next in the MFS? What was the reasoning behind any of the above examples of the last few years? Was this based on rational business analysis, or a desire to 'do something that's hot'? Are we fearful of falling behind if we don't do what everyone else is doing? Is it all the fault of the Conference Organisers or Jounalists, or are they merely reflecting what everyone is talking about?

However, these are merely symptoms of The Media Fad Syndrome, not the root cause. Branded content can be exceptionally effective for brands, while Facebook pages can be extremely efficient in delivering to specific business objectives too.

All channels of connection mentioned in the visual have value (except Second Life).

BUt we are talking about an addiction, a fix for ‘something cool’, 'something on trend' with little clarity on the business objectives for the investment. 

Agencies sadly are particularly prone to MFS.

If the use of the ‘latest thing’ is for Marketing R&D, with proper measures of success locked to it, then great. That works for me.

But when the ‘latest thing’ is done more out of an emotional need for ‘cool’, then the Media Fad Syndrome needs to be treated fast.

As companies suffer from this virus, other companies have managed to steer clear of this, by worrying less about the short term and the long term. They focus on the evolving now, the EVER  PRESENT.

We have moved to a multi-sensory marketing landscape where the people's relationship with brands cannot be measured by 3 week 'campaigns'. The relationships are forever evolving, ever changing, and always happening. We have shifted to marketing that is real-time, always ON. On the one hand, delivery in this world is about as short-term as you can get, but equally it requires a vision that has long-term direction, yet one that has a fluidity not normally structured in company plans...

So time to get serious about MFS and stamp it out. Considering a fluid future, rather than a long-term or short-term one could be the start of the healing process

Conference Bingo at the Festival of Media 2011

Well, the Festival of Media is underway again.

Last year I had fun following it on Twitter, whilst playing Conference Bingo.

Here was my card of last year.

   

So I have prepared one for this year too.Here it is.

Some old ones (they just keep coming back...) Some new ones, and soem that will definately not get mentioned.

I particularly like the Angry Clients one, as I have met a few over the last 12 months where the gap between Agency Promise and Delivery has got wider in some client's minds...

I will also be following the event to see whether two words get much of a mention:

Sales            Trust

Am always an optimist.

Nothing really to say about sales. Pretty straightforward. With lots of talk at the conference about measurement, ROI and so on, I would love to know what a CFO would make of these conversations.

Meanwhile, at the conference, I would love to see a little time committed on how Agencies can build trust with clients and how Companies can strengthen trust with people...

Anyway, back to the Bingo...

curious about Great Mind-Mapping Tools Number 1: 3P (Pen, Pencils & Paper)



It started with The University of Greenwich. My friend and wonderfully curious person, Dr. Gauti Sigthorsson (@conceptbin), invited me to speak with his students at Greenwich University. His brief was for me to share my experiences on setting up my own business, networking and generally getting noticed.

So I started to create a powerpoint presentation of thoughts...then got bored...

I found myself switching to pen and paper, gathering my thoughts on my notepad the night before…

As I scribbled away, I soon realized I had doodled a nice little mindmap.

I then raided my son’s pencil case, sharpened the pencils...

and then colour-coded the lot.

I haven’t done this for a while, but it worked a treat…

Speaking with the group, I would briefly look at my notes, see my flow, check what I have missed, and come back to it.

Here are my notes...

 

I really enjoyed the session. No Powerpoint. No Keynote. No desire to show 1 picture or 1000. No concerns about infographics. Just conversation starters to generate discussion, rather than a lecture.

It seemed to work for the attendees too.

I think it was because the focus was on the CONVERSATION FLOW rather than the SLIDESHOW.

This Pen, Pencil & Paper combination might just take off…

 

Q: To regain people's trust, do brands need to do less marketing?

My friend and fellow curious citizen Dr. Gauti Sigthorsson put me onto a fascinating discussion amongst academics in the digital humanities space. I am still delving in and out of it.

One of the subjects touched upon was the relative value of Google NGrams to those in academia.

Which led me to do this...

 

Pointless? Meaningless? A fundamental truth?

There are so many things wrong with this chart, but the simplicity of it should at least stimulate debate about the importance of Trust in brand behaviour...