Just think of the many jokes about consultants who act as if they are more concerned about looking for the next follow-on assignment to cross-sell than doing the current one well; lawyers who are suspected of running up the billable hours because they are paid by the hour; and advertising agency people who are more concerned with winning prizes than selling the client’s product or service.

Whatever your profession, you need to be prepared for the fact that, at the beginning of every new relationship, you must avoid confirming other people’s (inevitable) starting suspicions about your motives, and must actively work to demonstrate that you are, in fact, unlike the providers that the client may have experienced before.

This is not easy. It turns out that it is not enough just to be trustworthy. You must also know how to give the client the experience that you are visibly, obviously, trustworthy.

The Incident

The need to learn how to do this was brought home to me by a dramatic incident that happened at the start of my consulting career – thirty years ago.

I had been hired to help the executive committee of a major consulting firm in formulating their strategy. There were eight or ten senior officers of the firm around the table.

As I was generating various options for them to consider, the CEO suddenly said to me (in front of everyone else): “You’re not really trying to help us. You just want to see us change so you can get consulting fees.”

I had no idea what to say, and so said nothing. I was hugely offended. It’s one thing to dislike my ideas, but to question my ethics? Impugn my integrity?

The air hung heavy and silent until one of the other executives picked up the conversation and moved on.

I carried on working with that firm, through the term of my contract, and no-one ever referred to the CEO’s remarks again.

The silent approach worked that time, but it is not clear that it’s always the best way to handle confrontational challenges. What should you say or do when someone accuses you of only being in it for yourself?

When I wrote about this (now ancient) story on my blog in 2006, it elicited more responses than almost any other topic I have “blogged” about. As one of my correspondents said – “Here’s a topic we can all relate to.”

Apparently, confrontational challenges from clients (perhaps not of this precise form, but in the same “Gotcha!” category) are still quite common.

No matter what your profession, you too, are highly likely to encounter something like this suspicion and distrust in your career. How well will you be prepared to handle the situation?

Why He Did It

In order to figure out the right thing to do or say in situations such as these, it’s worth taking the time to try and speculate on what a client executive might be really trying to say if he or she were to challenge your motives in this way.

Among the possibilities are:

• The person has had bad experiences with previous service providers. He (or she) isn’t really reacting to anything you’ve done or said, but is showing his or her general view of outsiders.
• It could be a method of “testing” you to see how you react. (Yes, clients do that – quite frequently.) The client could plan to base his or her judgment of your motives (and skills) on the way you handle yourself.
• The client might be (appropriately?) annoyed at the person who had brought you in, possible because they had not engaged in the proper consultation and prior approval process. The “complaint” is expressed as if it’s about you, but it might really be aimed at someone else in the room.
• The client might just be asserting his or her power, sending a signal to you, the outsider, the person who invited you to the meeting (and, of course, everyone else!)
• It could mean nothing more than the fact that the client is the kind of person who has a generally combative shoot-from-the-hip approach.
• The client might be truly worried about past and current change-related initiatives – exactly what he or she is talking about – and is truly trying to address the issue of the need for change.

• It is also possible that the client is reacting to some (hopefully incorrect and unconscious) signal that you have sent that you do, indeed, have your own best interests at heart, not the client company’s.

  That’s an incomplete but nevertheless wide range of possibilities, each requiring, if true, a different response. (What else do you think might be among the possible explanations for the comment and behavior of a client in a situation like this?)

  In a perfect world, as soon as you are challenged in this way at a meeting, you would have the presence of mind (and mental agility) to diagnose immediately why the CEO said what he did – which of the possibilities above were actually the case. You could then proceed appropriately.

  But only a few of us are born with that skill. The rest of us probably need to prepare for such situations, and think ahead (if at all possible) about what we might say and do that would shed some light on the situation. How do you find out what’s really going on?

  Say Nothing?

  I have asked many people in my seminars (and participants on my blog) what they would have said in response.

  Some people think the best strategy would be to say nothing. They suggest that one should just let the comment hang in the air, and let everyone in the meeting feel the discomfort created by the challenger’s remark – while managing your own discomfort. If no one else in the room “takes the bait,” then you would still have choices left.

  This is a tempting option. In an ideal world, of course, someone else would soon leap to your defense, saying something like: “I’ve known this person for a long time, and he/she is not like that.”

  But you can’t bank on that happening! (In fact, in my experience, the odds are low that it will.)

  Other people would argue that, when awkward situations like this arise, you need to “survive” until the nearest coffee break, lunch break or end-of-day adjournment, and find a way to ask each person one-on-one (in confidence:) “What just happened there? Is that a real issue?”

  Back in the days when I was a smoker, I could do this on the pavement outside the building or wherever we sinners were banished to. I’ve had more than my fair share of hushed bathroom conversations, too.

  It is also an option to try to have a closed-door one-on-one discussion with the “challenger” himself (or herself) after the meeting. That would take courage, but at least there would be a chance of resolving the issue (and beginning a more constructive relationship) in a calmer setting.

  Reinforcing the temptation to do nothing is the theory that, if you were to react directly and perpetuate a discussion of your motives, it would only serve to reinforce the topic of your ethics, potentially turning it into a real issue.

  Among the many goals you might have in figuring out a response, one of the most important is to avoid derailing your discussion of the issues.

  Possible Responses

  But doing absolutely nothing clearly isn’t right, either. At that very moment, it might be tempting to shrink into a small, invisible ball, but that is unlikely to be very helpful.

  What response could you give if someone challenged your motives in the way described in my story? When I have posed this question to various groups, the suggestions have included replies such as these:

• “If you’re not comfortable with me, then that’s completely fine. Nice to meet you and all the best for the future.”
• “I don’t fully know about your past experiences with consultants, but I have your best interests at heart.”
• “I will do right by you, because it’s much more important to me that you be successful and that I can build a long term relationship with your firm, as well as use you as a reference to help me grow my business.”
• “A few more billable hours don’t mean much to me. I’ve got a full plate as it is. My success is driven only by your success.”
• “You don’t need me. However, as you know, my work comes with a guarantee. I’m clearly happy for you to decide whether it has been worthwhile and whether or not you want to pay me.”
• “I understand if you don’t want to, and that’s fine – we’re all busy people, so just let me know either way and we can get on with our day.”
• “I only work with clients who provide me with real, as opposed to manufactured, challenges. Generating fake work for the sake of a quick buck wouldn’t actually benefit either of us, would it?”
• “I know this is always a major concern when working with consultants and I thank you for addressing this concern. Let us invest a few minutes to visualize the benefits we want to obtain for your company in this process.”
• “That’s not how I operate. If you really believe that, then let me give you a last piece of advice – for free: find an advisor you trust.”

• “It’s my role only to help provide options and create ideas. I’m not here to make decisions for you or to force you into anything”

  What do you think? Do you think any of those responses would have “worked?” If not, what would you have considered saying at that precise moment?

  Notice how easy it would have been to turn the CEO’s comment into an argument, with you and your challenger immediately being on opposite sides. Many of the possibilities given above are both contentious – implicitly or explicitly – and defensive.

  And by making it a contest, you almost certainly will lose.

  Another Approach

  It’s worth reflecting on the fact that, at least in the situation I have described, the CEO didn’t ask a question. He made a statement, one that was possibly (maybe even probably) addressed as much to the whole room as it was to me.

  You could argue that, in situations like these, your integrity hasn’t really been impugned. It has just been challenged. It is up to you to demonstrate that you can deal with the challenge and then move on. The key here would be to find a way to demonstrate integrity, rather than react to the fact that your pride has been wounded.

  If you are capable of it, probably the wisest and most effective way to respond would have been to exhibit a calm demeanor that truly deflected the attack, without taking it personally and without any attempt to defend yourself. (Not easy!)

  On my blog, Johnnie Moore commented: “I’ve been practicing doing this when someone says something surprising (pleasant or not) and I’m not sure what to say. I simply invite them to say more. ‘That’s interesting. Could you say a little more about that?’ This acknowledges the person instead of defending; gives me a little time to think; and often elicits more information. ”
  Another approach would be to ask the CEO if he or she wants to pursue this topic right now. That way, if he or she is just trying to rattle you and has no substance, he or she has an easy way out. If you were to start by questioning him when he was only “joking” or testing, then you put him or her on the defensive. Since he or she can’t lose face in front of his subordinates, that’s a bad outcome.

  If the CEO wanted to talk about it right now, then you could ask for more information about the issues. You could try and shift your role from “advisor” to “facilitator”, by asking whether or not he or she sees a need for changes, and then asking for other people’s reactions to his comments.

  The key here is to stay focused on the problem and the proposed solution – shifting the conversation away from discussing you, and back to discussing the issues.

  Attempting to justify yourself will never work. It’s better just to act as if your challenger couldn’t possibly be questioning your integrity.

  Another approach would be to try to make sure that the responsibility for dealing with the CEO’s statement is shared by everyone in the meeting, not just you.

  You could ask all the other executives, “Is this an issue that this group is concerned about? If so, should we discuss it before we go any further?”

  That would give the other executives the opportunity to express either their agreement with the CEO’s sentiments or their assurance that they have no such concerns. And you will get a chance to see which way the wind is blowing.

  This approach can, however, be risky. You would have to worry about whose side the rest of the executive committee would be on if you tried to make the case for your honest intentions.

  Would they support him – or you? In general, the odds are against you. Even if they don’t distrust your motives, why should they take the side of the outsider in an open discussion?

  Worse, what if everyone did feel the same way as the CEO, or even worse again, took his side so as to not offend him?

  From that point of view, perhaps the last thing you really want to do is pose the question to the group in real time. Their answers are highly likely to be driven by appearance, politicking and positioning.

  Rehearsing

  Hard as it is to figure out the right thing to do and to say in situations such as these, it can be even harder to use the right tone and body language that accomplishes the goal that you have.

  There is a paradox here. You cannot be convincing about your trustworthiness simply by asserting it (“I’m trustworthy – honestly!”) Accomplishing the goal of being trusted means that we must learn how to handle ourselves in ways that people actually experience our sincerity and integrity.

  But to pull this off, we may need help not only with finding the right words, but also with the process of becoming self-aware of our non-verbal body-language. For most people, it will be necessary to rehearse reacting to suddenly challenging situations in order to ensure that they, indeed, come across to others as they wish to come across.

  Consider, for example, the advice given above to “let the (challenging) comment hang in the air, and let everyone feel the discomfort – while managing your own discomfort.”

  This is not a simple thing to do. How does one learn to manage one’s own discomfort? Situations like these call for what I call “adrenalin control” – the ability to control one’s own reactions, behavior body language and even breathing so that you can respond in a way that accomplishes what you intend.

  The most important thing to realize about situations like these is that when they occur, we rarely have the self-control to think and react rationally and thoughtfully. In a very real sense, we are put into a state of shock.

  If you are the kind of person who has a track record of picking up on social clues, staying calm in the face of challenge, saying what you mean to say just as you’re saying it, then obviously you don’t need rehearsal. (But – boy! – am I jealous of you!)

  Diffusing an emotional situation is never easy, and few of us know exactly how to do it. Even those who can are not always able to describe how they do it.

  Other people need practice and tips on these things. I think helping “non-naturals” with their emotional skills (or whatever you want to call it) is an important thing that firms can help their people with (at any age.)

  Some people have a concern that it might be artificial to try to anticipate situations such as these, and to have a pocket full of what they (pejoratively) call “semi-canned responses.”

  Personally, I think there is no inherent virtue in trying to “think on your feet” if you are not very good at it. Planned responses are a huge problem if your intent is to mislead. But good intentions alone do not mean that you will succeed in leaving the right impression. You need to ensure that you know how to exhibit (not just possess) trustworthiness.

  Naturally, there can be a risk that over-rehearsing leads to focus on “the performance” rather than conveying your sincerity. The question of which is the bigger risk (over-rehearsing and being phony or under-rehearsing and being unprepared) comes down to each person’s interpersonal and social skills.

  This is, I believe, an important topic, often neglected in professional firm training. In discussing these issues in my seminars and presentations, it is commonly reported that many people feel that a majority of their client “failures” have come from getting the emotional / interpersonal tone wrong.

  The simple fact is that no-one ever taught us how to come across as trustworthy. No-one ever prepared us for events such as clients who challenge our motives.

  You may not have an experience exactly like mine, but the odds are high that you will be faced with some kind of “Gotcha!” challenge from one of your clients – something that will catch you unawares.

  The good news is that the skills are learnable. It is possible, with guided practice and experience, to understand how you come across to others, and to learn how to handle yourself well in stressful client situations. Experience helps – but so does thinking ahead and anticipating awkward situations that might – and probably will – happen to you.

  ***

  My thanks go to the many participants in my seminars and blog who joined in the discussions on this topic.

  ]]> http://davidmaister.com/articles/2/97/ http://davidmaister.com/articles/2/97/ Sun, 01 Jan 2006 12:00:00 -0500 Client Relations Articles david@davidmaister.com (David Maister) http://davidmaister.com/articles/2/97/ A few months ago, I was having dinner with an acquaintance, a world-famous professor at one of the most eminent business schools, who asked me: “What’s a blog?”

  I was, at first, surprised. But then I realized that it was really only nine months or so since I had first learned the term. The world is moving fast, and we all have to both learn and teach simultaneously, doing both at an ever-increasing speed!

  (My professor friend is now up and blogging, but as a possible service to others, I will include a few definitions in this article to assist those exploring the topics for the first time.

  Two features set apart a blog, or web log, from other kinds of websites: ease of publishing and reader interaction. Blog software is designed so that people with no computer experience can easily put their writing online, in their own blog or by adding comments to those of other people.

  The conversations that arise can be both lively and informative. If you aren’t familiar with blogs yet, you can start by taking a look at the blog on my website.)

  This article is about some of the lessons I have learned (or relearned) about marketing in an Internet world, through my own recent marketing activities. I hope others will benefit from my experiences at what (for me, at least) feels like the frontier.

  Among the topics I will address are:

  • Helping busy people search
  • Online tracking systems
  • Nurturing the core community
  • Helping people help you
  • Gathering input
  • Becoming a more valuable resource
  • Word of mouth
  • Website navigation
  • Serving multiple constituencies
  • Participating in the broader marketplace
  • The role of traditional off-line marketing

    The Question

    Along with every other enterprise, I face the challenge of creating awareness of my activities. I often describe my reputation as being like the measles — spots of great inflammation, surrounded by vast areas of untouched territory.

    A large part of trying to build my reputation is thinking through how to bring my free materials — articles, podcasts, videos and blog — to the attention of a broader audience who might find them useful.

    (Podcasts take their name from a combination of iPod + broadcast. They are audio broadcasts available online. Typically, you can download individual episodes or subscribe to a complete podcast series with software (such as iTunes) that will download new episodes for you automatically.

    While some podcast fans listen to podcasts on iPods, many people listen to them right on their computers, or burn them to a CD to listen to on a car stereo during their work commute. If you aren’t familiar with podcasts, you can listen to an episode right on my podcast page — without installing any special software.)

    Since I’m not selling these things, and I’m a consultant who gives marketing advice anyway, it should all be obvious and easy, right? Not necessarily.

    As my experience in past years with published books proved, you can know a lot about how to get hired as a consultant for many thousands of dollars, and still know absolutely zero about how to get people to part with $20 for a hardbound book. Even though I’ve had some big sellers, I still don’t know how to market books. I’m not sure anyone does!

    Having put a lot of effort into making my resources available online in a variety of formats (so that people would have a choice as to how they preferred to access new ideas and information) I still had the task of making busy people (many of whom were not heavy Internet users) aware that all these new resources existed.

    So, I wrote about this on my blog, asking: “Many of you ‘discovered’ my work somehow. The question now is how to make it easier for others to do so. Are there things I can do to encourage people—and make it easier—to tell more of their friends about my materials? Advice, please. What’s an effective, but classy, way to do this?”

    Within a very few days, I had a flood of comments from readers including clients, competitors and professional marketing advisors, all offering insight, lessons and practical advice. (My original query and all the comments may still be found on my blog.)

    Helping Busy People Search

    Jeff Merrifield, who works at a global accounting firm, helped me grasp the first key point: “Unfortunately, most people are just too overwhelmed with electronic input and filter out everything that is not urgent or from a trusted source.”

    This perspective was reaffirmed by someone who identified himself only as ‘Peter,’ who observed: “Your topical (important and urgent) blog posts are my favorites.”

    Topical, important and urgent! Of course! Suddenly, the core task of modern marketing became a lot clearer.

    We don’t best communicate information when we want to convey it. Instead, communication is most effective when we ensure that what we have to offer is accessible and useful right at the point when someone in need starts looking for it.

    We tend to assume that people will search for what we have to offer. They will, but only if we make it really easy for them to find things!

    For me, as for organizations of all kinds, the single most important marketing topic that exists is understanding, implementing and taking advantage of new Internet search tools that enable clients, customers and other audience members to seek out our information and materials.

    And the topic extends much more deeply than the much-discussed “search engine optimization” which attempts to ensure that people seeking information find our websites.

    I learned through STRESSLIMITDESIGN (the company that designs and implements my online presence) that having a well-indexed and navigable search system within a website not only helps people find what they were seeking once they were on a site, but is also one of the essential ingredients in attracting traffic to the site through external search engines.

    I discovered that I had work to do here. I have always been averse to ‘pushing’ things on to people, so I had not wanted to try to ‘cross-sell’ my various offerings. However, it was now clear that I had leaned way too far in the opposite direction.

    STRESSLIMITDESIGN had argued forcefully that I should invest in a sophisticated “traffic tracking system,” which allowed them to monitor activity on my site in fine, granular detail. I’m glad I approved this investment, because it proved invaluable.

    (Website traffic systems can deliver a range of information, including: how many unique visitors your site receives per day, where they come from, and how often they visit; which keywords people use to find your site through search engines; and which external websites refer visitors to your site. By monitoring, for example, which links readers click on, and where they exit the site, we are able to identify the most popular site areas, and the under-used pages that need more support from navigation, indexing, and cross-promotions.)

    Among other things, my traffic statistics showed that many people who visited my blog, never ventured to the rest of my site and were unaware that the site also contains, for example, related videos or audio podcasts. The same was true in reverse: my podcast audience was not necessarily aware of my other materials.

    I also had not quite appreciated what a high percentage of executives, professionals and other business people are barely active in accessing the web as part of doing business.

    Even long-term clients, who had opted in to receive regular email communications from me, had never been to my website (or hadn’t done so in six months or more) and had no idea what I had on offer there.

    I realized that if I was to serve my community, I needed to make it easier for people to discover other relevant materials.

    When I actually did change my website to allow people to navigate and search by topic, even avid fans told me they discovered things on my website they had never known existed.

    In all of this, I had to make sure that my team understood that even though they were working for me, their task was to make things easier for my audience.
    Since I was their client they sometimes (especially at the beginning of our relationship) slipped into a thought process of “Let’s make David look good here.” I, too, had to beware of the same trap (“Let me show off a little here.”)
    We all had to keep each other honest and remind ourselves (and it took conscious effort and vigilance) that it would only serve the business if it served the audience first!

    Next, I had to make it easy for people to subscribe to my various offerings. This wasn’t just about ‘cross-selling.’ It was about trying to remove the frustrations of having to register three times to sign up for my articles, blog or podcasts.

    Why not make it easy for people to choose how much of my material they want to receive, and in what format?

    Right now, my site presents the following options to readers and listeners:

    1. They can come to my site, making use of the resources there, including listening to the podcasts right on my podcast page.
    2. They can “save materials for later,” by printing out blog posts and articles, or downloading articles or podcast episodes s — so they can use materials later, disconnected from the website.
    3. They can sign up to receive articles and blog posts by email, so that information can be delivered to their inbox without returning to the website. They can also sign up to receive email notification of new comments on a blog post discussion that they want to follow.
1. They can subscribe to my blog and podcast RSS feeds so that information can be delivered to their desktop without needing to return to the website.

   (RSS feeds allow you to see when sites from all over the internet have added new content, so you can get the latest headlines and articles (or even audio files, photographs or video) in one place, as soon as they are published, without having to remember to visit each site every day. Subscribing to your favorite RSS feeds takes the hassle out of staying up-to-date, and can be a real time-saver and productivity-booster.)

   The goal is to make it easier for a broad range of readers to enjoy content in the way that they like best, removing readership obstacles, and thereby reaching a broader audience.

   Putting all of the subscription options in one place is important but is quite a complex technical task. As of the time of writing is still a work in progress, but I began to get my technical team working on it as a high priority.

   Nurturing the Community

   Many of my correspondents reminded me of the same marketing principles I have long advocated in the “real” world: begin by working on current relationships, avoid the temptation to reach for “quick hits” and implement a strategy of patiently building new relationships and reputation by a focus on helping.

   For example, Joseph Thornley (ProPR.ca), a leading PR counselor in Canada and an active blogger, had this to say: “A passionate core community can help you achieve your objective. For example, I recommend your books to others, buy them for my employees and frequently link to your blog.”

   Charles Tippett went further. He said, “You should ask us (on a regular basis) whom we’ve shared your work with. You provide a lot of material on your site for free and we, as subscribers, should feel some obligation to give back. We just need to be told what’s expected of us. This is a slower growth strategy but, like your books that never hit the best seller list, it might be the better approach in the long term.”

   Karen Love (pkftexas.com) suggested that some people would consider it a privilege to be a part of an inner circle (she used the term ‘Maister Advocates’) and that I should think of ways of formalizing (or at least structuring) membership in my community.

   Now, I’m not so foolish as to think that everyone who knows me and my work feels this way, or even perhaps a majority, but it finally sunk in that some people feel this way, and that the core of my ‘marketing’ (or whatever word you want to use) would need to be nurturing this group.

   The notion that many people would welcome the feeling of association that comes from being part of a community is not new. Decades ago, American Express ran a hugely successful campaign using the slogan “Membership has its benefits.” Many marketing authors have commented on (and suggested that other businesses learn from) the loyalty of Harley-Davidson owners.

   However, what was becoming clear to me, was that I did not appreciate enough before, was that it could apply to me. It turned, out, to my wonderment, that there were people out there who wanted to help me!

   The power of community (and the power of blogging in creating it) was further noted by Duncan Bucknell (DuncanBucknell.com) who asked: “Isn’t it interesting that of all of the interesting, thoughtful (amazingly useful) blogs you have posted, the one which attracted the most comments and dialogue is the one in which you asked for help?”

   He’s spotted something that I wrote about in my article Young Professionals: Cultivate the Habits of Friendship. As I reported there, my wife, Kathy, has found that people are often friendlier when you ask them for help than when you are trying to help them!

   Some of my long-standing clients are regular volunteers who read and critique the early drafts of my articles. I always feel like they are doing me a huge favor, but apparently, some of them do not see it as a burden, but as a compliment (or more) that I give them the chance to influence my work.

   I am still working on developing additional ways to ‘reward’ my most loyal readers, blog contributors and subscribers. I do try to thank readers publicly for their comments and trackbacks, but now realize I must go further. I am contemplating such approaches as special advance access to materials, invitations to private meetings and conferences, and honored guest memberships.

   While I must be careful to do things in this area with some taste, I must not take for granted those who are (or are willing to be) evangelists for my work. I must figue out some way to recognize their support.

   Gordon Gray (gordongray.info) pointed out that, with today’s technology tools, it is possible to make it much easier for people to help me (and help their friends) by passing on the word about my work.

   It wasn’t just a matter of using links and hints like “print this,” “email to a friend,” “tag in del.icio.us,” and so on. I also needed to provide options to provide feedback, to rate my podcasts, and to help evangelize for me.

   (del.icio.us is a free, web-based system for storing and sharing bookmarks for individual web pages, including comments. By saving and ‘tagging’ links to your favorite websites / articles / podcasts in del.icio.us or other social bookmark systems, you are helping bring that material to the attention of other people looking for the same kinds of information — a great way to help out your favorite authors and websites.)

   Gathering Input

   In order to preserve, nurture and build my community, Joe Thornley urged me to “be even more proactive in understanding your community.” He recommended that I conduct regular and systematic surveys of the current subscribers to my articles, blog and podcast series, which, as I have learned, are not always the same people.

   Joe suggested that I needed to work to understand better why they subscribed, what they are looking for and how they would like me to evolve and adapt my content and the features of my website.

   Once again, this is not new news. The tools for collecting information on those who access and use my material may have been transformed by the development of Internet tools, but it still comes down to the simple statement about clients’ needs that I have fervently preached for years: never speculate when you can ask!

   The feedback I had asked for was so helpful, and people were so generous, that I vowed to find more ways to do this.

   Becoming More Valuable

   Bill Peper suggested that I could serve my community by expanding the materials on my website beyond those I had authored myself. For example, if I really wanted to serve the audience’s interests, I could usefully review other people’s books in related fields and provide guidance and links to other websites and blogs that I thought my audience would like.

   What Bill and others were saying was that with a little more thought and effort, I could truly be more useful as a guide through the disorganized mess that is the Internet and the blogosphere.

   I have plans under way to implement his advice, but it’s really nothing more than what we all should be doing in the real world.

   If you want the world to think you or your organization is a helpful expert in your subject, then you must always try to act as a filter, facilitator and advisor on the best, most relevant and most timely information of value to your audience. In fact, I seem to remember co-authoring a book on this very topic: how to be a Trusted Advisor (!).

   What the Internet allows us to do, with its links and search capabilities, is to work toward this goal more easily, more thoroughly and at a cheaper cost.

   Word of Mouth

   Many of my correspondents referred to the first time they had discovered my work. Some had first seen a book, an article, a blog post, an in-house speech or a public seminar. But by far, most people had first encountered me and my work by being told about it by another person. “Word-of-mouth marketing” may be a hot topic right now, but the phenomenon itself is not new.

   One marketing director in a UK law firm reported that my materials were already “successfully being passed from one person to another without too much effort on your part, it seems. I don’t think there is a better way than word of mouth and doing all the things you are already doing.”

   David Lorenzo (careerintensity.com) offered the similar view that “positive word of mouth — is the most effective and powerful form of advertising a business or a person will ever have.”

   He was careful to stress, however, that word of mouth derives principally from offering a service or product that users can and do feel passionate about and are moved to tell others about because of the value they derive from it. No amount of marketing (ancient or modern) can substitute for the reality of serving one’s audience.

   Word-of-Mouth marketing may actually not be a marketing concept at all, but an operational one. Word of mouth occurs when you give your clients, customers or audience such a good experience that they go away and talk about you. The outcome may be a marketing benefit, but the activity is operational — enhance the experience!

   What’s the Message?

   One of the biggest (and most embarrassing) lessons to come from asking for the feedback was receiving some candid opinions about how I appeared to others.

   Lou Brothers (LouBrothers.com) said: “Your marketing message is somewhat lacking. The overall site structure of your website really doesn’t lead a reader to any particular theme or message. You cover a lot of ground in your writing, and there are ways to handle that effectively, but unfortunately you don’t do it so well.”

   Shaula Evans, a member of my tech team, brought the message home to me, when she said: “Mr. Brothers’ point is valid. The website has been designed to (generously) share a huge amount of free resources with readers. But ultimately, the focus of your website is still about you and your work. We need to make it about your audience. What does the website do for them?”

   (Why does the shoemaker’s child always go unshod? Why did it take the web technical expert to have to instruct the management consultant on these ideas?)

   What these comments made me realize was that, even if I wasn’t trying to sell anything, I still lacked a “customer focus.” I write about a variety of topics, but I had not paused to think about the different needs and interests of the different people who encountered my work. As individuals, each of them would probably be interested in parts of what I had to offer. Sad to say, but maybe only I was likely to be interested in all of it.

   As a result of all this, we redesigned the search and navigation system around my website (and associated materials) so that a person interested in just one perspective would find it easier to follow that thread and line of enquiry.

   We have begun to put ourselves in the shoes of different audience members and ask, “What kinds of needs would they have, and what specific kind of information might they be looking for?”

   It all seems so basic in retrospect, but originally I had organized my materials by type of media, as in “Go here for my articles, go here for my videos.” We changed that to “Go here if you’re interested in marketing, go here if you’re interested in managing.”

   As the subsequent tracking of the site statistics showed, the resulting topic-driven resource libraries were immediately popular and intensely used.

   Getting Out and About

   Many of my contributors reaffirmed the advice I had received when I interviewed Steve Rubel (Setting Knowledge Free, 2006). He, and many others, had pointed out that in today’s blogging world, the way you build attention is not just to focus on your own materials (e.g., your own blog) but to seek out other hyperspace conversations that are taking place, and join in those other conversations.

   One more time, this turns out to be merely a minor translation of a real-world lesson: if you want people to be interested in you, you don’t succeed best by trying to force them to come to you. (“Yoo-hoo! I’m over here!”) Instead, you first go where they are, get to meet them, and join in their conversations.

   By making it easier for people to converse across the Internet about your topic, using trackbacks and linking you in, you’ll draw their traffic, in part, when they find you interesting. That’s a sure way to broaden an audience.

   (Trackbacks are a courteous practice peculiar to the blog world that makes a conversational link between blogs, similar to comments. When bloggers link to another blog, they can send that blog an alert saying, “Look! I’m talking about your ideas and linking to your site.” The blogger who receives the trackback can publish it on his or her site so readers can follow a conversation as it moves from one blog to another.)

   On simple reflection, this is nothing more than the real-world tactic of attending a client’s industry meeting and finding out what they are already talking about. The effectiveness of the tactic hasn’t changed. It’s just that nowadays, attending a client meeting can be as simple as finding other people’s blogs and joining in their conversation, letting people judge your worth and merit by the quality of what you have to say. My tech advisor has been trying to get me to do more of that from the beginning, and she’s right!

   Other Recommendations

   My readers made many other intriguing, specific marketing suggestions worth passing on to others.

   Duncan Bucknell (DuncanBucknell.com) said: “My suggestion is to look for high-quality channels, online and offline, that will distribute your content to the audience you want to reach. You may have to pay for some of this distribution, but I strongly suspect it will be worthwhile.”

   There is great wisdom in this. When I have been asked how start-up companies can attract people to their ‘real-world’ seminars, I have always recommended that they find established organizations that hold regular meetings and offer your services. They are usually hungry for speakers, and as long as you don’t engage in a hard-sell, they would be delighted to offer their platform if you can provide value to their audience.

   It is clearly cheaper and more effective to use established channels than build from scratch. Using other channels lends the credibility of a third-party endorsement to readers finding your work for the first time. So, as always, I have to apply my own lessons to myself here in hyperspace!

   Many people extended this thought and suggested I apply the marketing concept of “co-branding” — joining in with others to help each other and take advantage of each other’s network. This could be as simple as inviting another blogger to “guest” for me when I am away, or teaming up with a client to distribute an article of mine to their audience in such a way that it serves all concerned.

   As other people do, I am considering hosting webinars (online seminars) or conducting interviews with other prominent people in my field, so that I can serve my audience by bringing additional insights to them.

   Lou Brothers had an intriguing and powerful idea: “By offering PDF downloadable books as well as providing excerpts and related articles on your site you reinforce your ideas. ‘Here’s an article on XYZ — and here’s a 100-page treatment for $10 on the same topic that brings together several articles with additional commentary and detail — click here to buy it right now.’ By providing context and immediacy you allow your readers who want more information to get it (and to your benefit).”

   (PDF stands for “portable document format.” Unlike other file formats, PDF files preserve layout and formatting information so that a document looks exactly the same no matter what computer you view it on, or where you print it. Therefore, it has become a popular format for downloadable books, also called “e-books.” For example, I always make articles like this one available on my website in a downloadable, PDF version.)

   Among many other ideas, Bill Peper recommended that I help readers find their way through the plentiful handouts and questionnaires already on my website by highlighting a different form (or video) every week, and providing a “leader’s guide” — an explanation of what purpose it serves and how to use it effectively.

   The marketing director of an elite UK law firm stressed the importance of ‘repackaging’ material to serve the needs of different, specific audiences.

   To a large extent, this is what I have tried to do with my new resource libraries discussed earlier, as well as with my podcasts. So far, I have completed two multipart series of 20-minute podcasts (one on marketing, one on managing) and am in the middle of releasing my third series on strategy.

   These podcasts are, in the main, derived from chapters of my books and my articles. For me, part of the challenge and the fun of putting my podcast series together has been the chance to reorganize material into what I hope is an internally consistent sequence of thoughts and advice. It’s kind of like creating a record album of “David’s best dance tracks” or “David’s best slow ballads.”

   So, in addition to serving those who like to listen rather than read, the new podcast series also create a new way, not previously available, of obtaining all my ideas on a related subject all in one package. My tracking statistics (and feedback devices) are letting me know that the material has found a new, much broader audience.

   Going Offline

   Many of my readers reminded me that no amount of online marketing can exist in a vacuum. If my goal was, for example, to drive people to visit my website so that they could sample my wares, I had to include in my targeting people who did not regularly use or visit the web, and try and tempt them to do so.

   Mark Gould said, “The best way to communicate the message (that your thoughts and materials are available to top executives) is surely to step into their world – the journals that they read and the conferences they attend.”

   Jean-Claude Brunner made a similar point: “Your core audience of CEOs or managing partners has, in my opinion, not really discovered the value of the Internet. (You should) enlist quality print media by writing op-ed columns with a blog byline.”

   These remarks reminded me that no one marketing approach ever works in marketing and creating awareness. There are many online and offline actions that must be managed as a portfolio, all working together. I’ve been including in my speeches and consulting for literally decades the metaphor that you build relationships by inviting people to take one small, next step toward you. This can be both effective and tasteful — “If you like what you’ve seen so far, here’s a low-risk next thing you can do.”

   Of course, figuring out the sequence of activities can be a little frustrating if one’s thinking is too linear.

   When I wrote a book and asked “How to I promote it?” the answer came back, “Build a website.” But then I had to ask, “How do I get people to my website?” They said: “Give lots of speeches.” “But how do I get on the speakers’ circuit?” “Write a book, of course!”

   While annoyance at the interconnections is understandable, it has always been the case in creating awareness (as in all relationship building) that impatiently aiming for an immediate home run with only one approach will almost certainly fail. What was, is, and always will be needed will be a well-balanced, interconnected package of activities.

   In my 1993 book Managing the Professional Service Firm, I offered the view that the best single ‘broadcasting’ tactics included collecting and publishing data of interest to your audience, seminars, speeches and article writing. The relative effectiveness of these broadcasting tactics remains roughly the same. It’s just that, nowadays, you can and should do BOTH the online and real world versions as part of your mix.

   Moving Forward

   As will have been seen, many of the sensible, powerful initiatives recommended to me are merely translations of old concepts into a new world: you succeed by patiently building relationships, focusing first on serving the interests and needs of those you hope to attract to you, soliciting feedback from your loyalist customers and acting on it, and keeping the faith that you will attract a response from that subset of the world that likes what you have to offer.

   You may not appeal to everybody — not even everybody you would have liked to form a relationship with — but when your community forms, it can be an immensely powerful (and gratifying) outcome. It certainly has been so far in my case.

   The good news is that this ‘conversational marketing’ works very well on the web, in the sense that there are many tools to support it. The less great news is that it doesn’t scale up very quickly, and it takes a significant investment of time and energy to nurture those relationships.

   None of that is new. What’s newly emerging are the tools to be able to pull it all off! These new tools may appear simple, but making them work effectively has proven to be a matter not only of creativity, but of hard work and finely-judged timing.

   The online culture is truly a ‘culture’ and my support team has invested a great deal of research time in understanding the optimum form and appearance of my website, and the right moment to use various web marketing tools to try and catch the attention of a fast-moving and busy audience.

   I am also pleased to report that I am seeing the implementation of these strategies pay off.

   Since renewing and committing to my web presence in January 2006, site traffic and downloads have been growing and the results have been quite exciting. For example, by the end of July 2006 (i.e. in six months) visitors will have downloaded a terabyte (1000 gigabytes) of resources from my site.

   In plain, non-jargon English, that’s the equivalent of 42,000 videos, or 74,898 podcast episodes, or 6,168,094 PDF articles (although, realistically, it’s actually a mix of each of those).

   I appreciate the contribution of my blog readers and their generous advice to this success.

   It’s all a work-in-progress, but that’s the report so far. I hope you got something out of it! Watch this space!

   ]]> http://davidmaister.com/articles/2/89/ http://davidmaister.com/articles/2/89/ Sat, 01 Jan 2005 12:00:00 -0500 Client Relations Articles david@davidmaister.com (David Maister and Lois Kelly) http://davidmaister.com/articles/2/89/ As the authors of The Cluetrain Manifesto (Perseus Publishing, 2000) suggest, it’s time we stopped thinking of marketing as a one-way propaganda campaign.

   Being talked to, preached at, or lectured to by those trying to win our business is generally felt as annoying, not persuasive. As clients, we don’t respond to conventional, one-way, “packaged” marketing because it doesn’t answer the questions we have when we are trying to buy, nor tell us what we need to know.

   If you want to win my business, give me the chance to talk to you, person-to-person, about my needs, wishes, and wants. Make it easy and comfortable for me to share my secrets. In short, if you really want my business, let’s talk; let’s have a conversation.

   There’s nothing conceptual or special in our use of the term “conversation.” We mean it literally, the way we all use the word in everyday speech.

   A conversation’s characteristics include:

   • It’s person to person; not role to role. People use normal language, not “corporate-speak.”
   • Both sides talk, and what one says is dependent upon what the other has just said.
   • Both parties are engaged in joint problem solving; neither is trying to win or prevail.
   • It’s designed to allow people with different views to learn from one another.

     Marketing (and selling) begin to work when a conversation moves away from being a role-to-role exchange of capabilities, contracts, and costs, and becomes a person-to-person interactive dialogue about ideas, beliefs, and perspectives. Only then can it build the chemistry, confidence, and commitment that lead to new revenues.

     An Example

     To illustrate the power of conversations versus one-way communications, consider how you might maximize your marketing effectiveness if you were invited to give a presentation at a client’s industry meeting.

     Being invited to give the plenary speech provides you with an opportunity to impress the audience with your great insights and personal style! But consider how much more effective you could be if you asked the conference organizers to let you also run a breakout discussion session, in competition with other simultaneous sessions, later in the day.

     Here are some of the reasons why the small-group conversation would be the superior marketing activity:

   • You get to talk to someone who, by choosing to participate, is admitting that he or she has a need (and you don’t waste time or money on people who haven’t).
   • You can now not only naturally share your thoughts but also get these potential clients to tell you how they see the issue you discussed and how it relates to them and their firms.
   • You can better tailor your comments to their questions and needs rather than, as in the plenary speech, guess which topics might have the broadest appeal
   • You have a chance to discover what your client thinks are his or her most troublesome issues.
   • You can let your potential buyer meet, understand, and get comfortable with the individual who will serve him or her.
   • It provides both a reason and permission for you to make a follow-up call (“I’ve thought some more about the issues you raised last week and have put some ideas together. May I come by and share them with you?”).

     Both the one-way speech and the small-group discussion can be parts of your marketing package. But while it sometimes feels that being the featured speaker is high-impact, the truth is that you usually earn a higher return on your time by engaging in a real dialogue with people who have chosen to talk with you.

     In professional services, the measure of marketing effectiveness is not the number of people who hear your message but rather how effectively and quickly you can get a client to share his or her problems with you.

     This applies equally to both prospects and existing clients. Despite firms throwing around terms such as ‘customer relationship management’ and ‘cross-selling,’ there is no more certain way to deepen an existing business relationship (and generate additional business) than by having regular, ongoing conversations with your clients, person-to-person, about the things going on in their business and how you might help them address any emerging threats and/or opportunities.

     Note the eternal paradox: the less you try to sell in any one of these ongoing conversations, the more comfortable your clients are likely to feel about sharing their concerns, issues, and needs—and hence the more likely it is that you will attract added revenue.

     Turning traditional marketing approaches into conversations

     In stressing the need to create conversations to improve your marketing effectiveness, we do not mean to imply that all traditional marketing approaches should be discarded. Rather, they need to be restructured into conversational activities. Here are some ideas that work:

     1. Instead of commissioning market research, hold a “salon” with a small group of clients.

     People are increasingly numbed and inured to the various forms of data collection used in market research. When was the last time you filled out the hotel’s “please tell us how we are doing” form, or agreed to participate in the market research company’s late-evening unsolicited telephone survey?

     Why don’t you make it more personal and real by inviting some people whom you really like and admire to come and discuss important issues of mutual interest? Be sure to invite interesting people, not just those from your biggest and most profitable accounts.

     A number of consulting and accounting firms discovered long ago that to make a seminar effective, it wasn’t necessary or even desirable for firm members to “hog the podium” and make all the presentations.

     The mere fact of organizing and running regular get-togethers for clients and prospects allowed the firm to learn what was on clients’ minds and, not coincidentally, demonstrate that the firm’s people were in the flow of what people in the client’s industry were thinking. That’s what hosting a “salon” is all about.

     You can kick things off by posing a what-if question that challenges a key assumption, and let the conversation unfold. You will intervene with a prompt only when the attendees can’t think of the next thing to talk about.

     To promote real discussion, ban presentations. Instead, use themes that center around “Why?” and “Why Not?” questions; and debate new ways of understanding client issues.

     Then you can wrap up by asking your clients if they think your firm should spend time around one or more of the ideas that emerged. Ask whether that would be of value to them.

     Meetings do not have to be in person. You could make your top professionals available for live “call-in” sessions for interested clients, so that they can “Ask the Experts.” Then, you could record each session and offer them as podcasts or as rebroadcast programs from your website.

     One of our clients does this superbly: a group of their clients meets monthly by phone around lunchtime, so they can eat sandwiches at their own desks while still participating in a 45-minute conversation moderated by an advisor from the firm. Clients describe it as unobtrusive, personal, effective, and free – and as a solid means of winning their business and earning their loyalty.

     2. Instead of focus groups, satisfaction, and other qualitative research, create private online communities for clients.

     The salon concept can be extended to cyberspace. Today’s on-line technology not only facilitates this old idea but perhaps even requires it.

     The Internet, including blogs, chat rooms, and forums, has changed how people get ideas, share information, communicate in a human voice, ask questions, and respond. Its two-way style has been embraced, changing how people want to learn, connect, and build relationships. Conversations, once key, are now crucial.
     Hosting and moderating such a private online community site (or forum) allows clients (and possibly prospects) to pose questions to peers, to provide input on developing industry issues and, yes, to comment on your new or enhanced services. Clients will be able to find new ideas not only from you, but also from their peers.

     If someone is going to provide the place for people to chat on-line about the issues your firm serves, shouldn’t it be your firm?

     3. Instead of developing a capabilities brochure (including making your website an electronic brochure), turn your website into an interactive location offering advice, ideas, and commentary on trends.

     The Internet offers many ways to invite visitors to your site to interact and participate. You can, for example, use “how valuable was this” buttons to get people to tell you what types and formats of information are most useful to both clients and prospects.

     You can get visitors, viewers, and listeners to suggest topics for future content. You can use interactivity to find out which means of communication each client prefers: video, audio, or the written word, and let them select their preference. You can help each individual client experience your people and their thinking in the manner that they prefer, instead of treating all clients as an undifferentiated part of a mass audience.

     4. Instead of a newsletter, create and maintain a blog (a regular journal posted on the web), sharing your ideas on topics relating to your clients’ sectors.

     Blogging forces you (for better or for worse) to think about your ideas, beliefs, and opinions, and how they are relevant to your marketplace.

     Critical to a blog’s success is a feature that not only allows but encourages people to post replies. Reply to the repliers. Analyze what topics are being read the most. Pay attention to data about where you’re drawing people from, and factor that into your marketing planning.

     It’s really hard to sustain a conversation, especially on a blog, when you don’t have anything interesting to say. Should you find you are getting stuck and are groping for something to write, it may be a signal that you, individually or as a firm, have a lot less to contribute than you thought.

     And if your clients don’t find what you are saying to be interesting, your problem is more than a marketing challenge!

     5. Instead of having a set of slides for sales presentation talking about your capabilities or your philosophies, talk about things that people like to listen to: stories!

     Stories help you make meaning and decipher complexity. They present points in a way that allows the listener to accept their truth without ego or ownership getting in the way.

     They are memorable and repeatable, thereby helping employees and clients tell others about your firm.

     They are the soul of conversational marketing. “Here’s a story that’s interesting…”

     Anytime you can get the other person to say ”...and then what happened?” you will be making great progress in connections, relationships, and creating the desire in that person to talk with you more and to work with you. You need to be ready to not only describe key principles, but also to give interesting anecdotes that illustrate your ability to offer innovative ideas and solutions.

     But don’t keep it just one way. Make it easy for clients to tell you their stories. You’ll learn a great deal about what needs they have, what issues they are prepared to tackle, what past experiences they have had with others in your profession, and even what new projects they are prepared to launch and pay for.

     *6. Find ways to see the client’s perspective of what you are communicating.
     By definition, we professionals, when we write or speak, are doing so for clients who are not necessarily trained in our field. We must write for the intelligent layperson, communicating our expertise clearly without condescension.*

     One rule that works effectively for us is that no article (or any document of any length) leaves the office until both one’s spouse and one’s secretary have read it, said it makes sense, and that it flows reasonably well. Both “checkers” are intelligent laypersons with no formal business training; yet they prove exactly the right audience to test our language, tone, and sense.
     How else are you going to make sure that what you say and intend to communicate is truly being heard as you wish it to be? Writing (or speaking) to be easily understood, and not just to impress, is a skill that can take a great deal of conscious effort to develop.

     7. Instead of developing presentations and proposals, conduct sales and proposal meetings as “joint problem definition and option generating” sessions.

     When you force clients to sit through pre-packaged presentations, you often create dynamics destructive to the chances of establishing connections that win business. Formal, prepared presentations force clients into passive listening roles, and make presenters appear pompous and more concerned about talking about themselves than about helping the client.

     If you doubt this, think back to the last time you had to sit through a PowerPoint presentation. How engaged were you? Most of us sit through such presentations, patiently or impatiently, silently asking ourselves, “When is this person going to shut up, so that I can ask about the real issues on my mind?”

     So, what should you do? Simple. Start a conversation. Sit down at eye-level with your client or prospect, and say: “I’ve brought along all the materials and information you suggested—it’s in this set of handouts I’m giving you now—but rather than my starting talking, perhaps I can ask what it is that you’d most like to find out in this meeting?”

     You’ll waste less time, and your clients will be grateful that you are treating them with respect. And you’ll win more business by getting quickly to the issues on their minds.

     This analysis can be taken further. As David pointed out in “Negotiating Quality,” a chapter in True Professionalism (Free Press, 1997), you can’t really write a proposal until you find out which version of success a client wants with this project. Does the client want the version with the least up-front cost, or the biggest long-run impact? The quickest impact, or the one that requires the least involvement by their people? Any of these are valid client requirements, but you can’t write a proposal until you have had an in-depth conversation about the alternatives. Saying “Here’s our firm’s approach” is a gamble at best, and most likely suicidal. Proposals should be developed and written together with the client as a joint activity.

     8. Instead of worrying about your logos and the appearance of your written materials, pay attention to your physical space ensuring that it is designed to encourage true conversation.

     For example, you can take the tables out of some of your conference rooms. You can turn one wall into a white board on which participants can write as ideas emerge. You can make another wall a cork board for sticky notes so that ideas can be attached as conversations unfold. If you want clients to engage, create an environment that facilitates this!

     9. Instead of spending their time planning and strategizing, get your firm’s leaders to conduct a series of key “royalty to royalty” meetings outside of formal presentations.

     Clients are skeptical about powerful CEOs or managing partners who show up for key sales presentations or “beauty parades,” never to be heard from or seen again. It’s an old idea, but still an underutilized one: use your senior officers to have meetings with senior client officers, talking to each other about issues in a way that the mere mortals serving clients day-to-day may not be able to do. The goal of good marketing is not only to create more conversations. It is to create more kinds of conversations that will lead to new insights, stronger relationships and better ways of working together.

     Some guidelines for creating and conducting effective conversations

     So far, we have discussed some of the opportunities that professionals and their firms have to create conversations. Now let’s turn to the topic of how you ensure that you are skilled, engaging conversationalists in all of your marketing activities.

     Think of a dinner party conversation. What makes a good conversationalist at a dinner party? He or she:

   • Has a fresh point of view, but does not try to thrust it upon everyone else
   • Speaks politely and respectfully
   • Tells good stories to illustrate key points
   • Is good at drawing other people’s views out and drawing them into the conversation
   • Speaks intelligently on a variety of subjects, but is not afraid to admit areas of ignorance
   • Avoids trotting out well-worn arguments that have been made time and time again
   • Listens with genuine interest
   • Is light-hearted in style, but always respectful of other’s views

     All of these conversational skills also apply in effective marketing. You may remember to behave this way at a dinner party, but do your sales meetings really meet these criteria? What about your seminars, speeches, articles, blogs, and websites?

     The tone of the experience you provide clients in your marketing efforts should be friendly; it should invite people in to chat and to think about ideas; and it should encourage both sides to get to know each other as people.

     This, of course, requires that you are comfortable in your own skin, and that you are who you are. Much of traditional marketing is designed so that people aren’t required to put their own humanity on display. They hide behind formal, corporate language and tactics. Not only are such approaches ineffective, but they create the impression that the professional or the firm is afraid to let its hair down.

     One of us (Lois Kelly) recently advised a major corporation that was reviewing its relationships with five outside PR firms. All five of the established firms explained their credentials and relevant case studies, all of which sounded remarkably the same. They all stressed how results- and client-focused they were, again sounding remarkably the same. They all asked the right questions. It was difficult to distinguish one from another. None was trying to engage the client in a dialogue. Each firm’s style was more report-like than rapport-like.

     The company finally called in two underdog firms that didn’t fit what they had previously thought should be the criteria for selecting an agency. Because these agencies didn’t think they had much of a chance of getting the business, they were frank, funny, provided unusual insights, challenged the company’s assumptions, and were blunt about what it would take to improve the company’s reputation.

     “Those guys are great,” was the overwhelming company response after the first meeting, and again through all subsequent meetings. The company hired both of the underdog agencies instead of the established firms.

     The traditional marketing (or sales) approach had failed miserably because it took the safe road, presenting capabilities and talking “at” the prospect rather than beginning a conversation that made the other side want to continue the dialogue.

     If you want to impress your prospects, you can’t afford to make arguments and points that are commonly made. You must have a fresh point of view – and it’s rarely effective if it’s just another claim about you, your firm, or “your philosophy.”

     Summary

     In discussing these thoughts with our clients, we often hear the view expressed that “This all sounds nice, but we are often only given a small amount of a client’s (or prospect’s) attention. There’s no time for a real conversation. Shouldn’t we use that brief amount of time to communicate what’s special about us?”

     This reasoning is flawed for many reasons, most importantly because when your initial time with a client is brief, the main success goal is make the client want to have another meeting, to continue the conversation. And talking about yourself (or your ideas) is an unlikely way to make this happen.

     Far better to use your limited time to get the client or prospect thinking about things in a new way, and hence eager to schedule a follow-up meeting and continue the conversation. For example, why not do what a good dinner-table conversationalist would do. Offer a provocative or counterintuitive hypothesis and begin to ask: “What if we looked at this in a different way?” “That might be interesting.” “I wonder what the reaction of others might be.”

     The goals of initiating and deepening relationships are vastly more important than conventional marketing’s goals of “building “awareness” and generating “leads.” And nothing—nothing—builds relationships better than regular, meaningful conversations.

     To have these interesting, meaningful conversations, you must have something new to say. Developing fresh points of view means reframing issues, and creating new metaphors and language to talk about them. (See the chapters on framing and envisioning in The Trusted Advisor.)

     However, the message itself is only the beginning of marketing. Its value exists only if it leads to a dialogue with clients: “That was interesting, tell me more!”

     And if your clients aren’t asking for more, then they aren’t finding value in your message. Let’s never forget: if it’s not a conversation, then it’s not effective marketing.

     ]]> http://davidmaister.com/articles/2/80/ http://davidmaister.com/articles/2/80/ Sat, 01 Jan 2005 12:00:00 -0500 Client Relations Articles david@davidmaister.com (David Maister) http://davidmaister.com/articles/2/80/ In The Trusted Advisor (Free Press, 2000), my coauthors and I pointed out that building trusting relationships with clients leads to many benefits: less fee resistance, more future work, more referrals to new clients, and more effective and harmonious work relationships with the clients.

     However, many people have built their past success on having a transactional view of their clients, not a relationship one, and it is not clear that they really want to change. Stated bluntly, professionals say that they want the benefits of romance, yet they still act in ways that suggest that what they are really interested in is a one-night stand.

     In romance, both sides work at building a mutually supportive, mutually beneficial relationship. They work hard to create a sense of togetherness, a feeling of “US.”

     Each tries to truly listen to what the other is saying and feeling. The emphasis in discussions is less on the immediate topic at hand, and more about preserving the emotional bond and the mutual commitment.

     Rather than seeking immediate short-term gratification and reward, romance relies on making investments in the relationship in order to obtain long-term, future benefits.

     This is all seemingly attractive, but it is not an accurate description of the way most professionals deal with their clients, nor how many clients deal with their professional providers.

     Most professional-to-client interactions involve little if any commitment to each other beyond the current deal. The prevailing principle is “buyer beware.” Mutual guardedness and suspicion exist, and the interaction is full of negotiation, bargaining, and adversarial activity. Both sides focus on the terms, conditions, and costs of temporary contact. Each side treats THEM as “different,” as “other.”

     This is the way many professionals and their clients want it to be. They want a transaction, and may not yet (if ever) be ready for relationships. Rather than acting to build relationships, both sides might initially have the brakes on.

     After all, relationships require making a commitment and incurring obligations. They also mean focusing and being selective: you can’t chase after every opportunity if you want to build relationships. To be good at relationships, you must have patience and know how to trust others.

     Moving from a one-night-stand (transactional) mentality to a romance (relationship) mindset is not about incremental actions, but requires a complete reversal of attitudes and behaviors. One approach is not necessarily “better” than another, but there is a real choice to be made.

     Expert versus Advisor

     Although it is not an identical concept, the difference between transactions and relationships is similar to the distinction between being an expert to one’s client versus being an advisor.

     An expert’s job is to be right—to solve the client’s problems through the application of technical and professional skill. In order to do this, the expert takes responsibility for the work away from the client and acts as if he or she is “in charge” until the project is done.

     The advisor behaves differently. Rather than being in the right, the advisor’s job is to be helpful, providing guidance, input, and counseling to the client’s own thought and decision-making processes. The client retains control and responsibility at all times; the advisor’s role is subordinate to this, not that of a prime mover.

     Viewed this way, it is easy to see why many professionals, while they may pretend to the virtues of being their client’s advisor, actually do not want to be one. They do not want to advise; they want to take charge.

     The asset manager does not want merely to recommend investments to the client; he or she wants to control the client’s funds. The trial litigator, similarly, does not want to provide input on trial strategy. He or she wants the client to cede authority to the warrior to do battle as she or he sees fit.

     Naturally, there is nothing wrong with either role. There are many times when the client is best served by selecting the true expert and putting his or her affairs in their hands. On other occasions, the client may truly want and need an advisor.

     The only mistake, on either side, is to pretend. A practitioner who is wedded to expert ways (“Leave this to me, I’ll get you the result you want”) has every right to practice that way. He or she has no right to complain if some (or many) clients prefer a different approach.

     Of course, what would be foolish would be for someone who really prefers being an expert to pretend that he or she is an advisor. The mentality is different. The personality required is different. The skills required are different. The work experience and the fulfillments are different.

     An expert who wants to be an expert is going to be miserably poor at pretending to be an advisor, and is going to resent the client throughout the entire project. (Which apparently happens a lot!)

     Managing as a Relationship or as a Transaction

     The issue of choosing between transactional and relationship approaches exists not only in dealings with clients but also in dealings with people inside the firm.

     When I conduct seminars and workshops on managerial topics, those who pose questions want to know how to get other people (partners, subordinates, employees) to change their behavior.

     The very questions suggest a transactional viewpoint with the implication that we are just fine, it’s THEM who need to change. When I suggest solutions based on building relationships with these other people, my questioners are often frustrated.

     “Are you saying,” they ask me, “that I need to show an interest in my subordinates as people and care about their career ambitions?”

     “Only if you want them to respond to you,” I reply. “If your subordinates feel that you are prepared to work at a relationship with them, ensuring that both sides benefit, then they will give you more of what you want. That’s human nature, not a political or religious point.

     “But if they think that you, their superior, are just trying to get out of the deal more of what you want from them — harder work, more billable hours, whatever — then they will respond in kind. They will view you as you are viewing them — useful only to the extent that they can get out of it what they want in the short run.

     “There will be no long-term loyalty and no commitment to the larger interests of the firm, because you have set the pattern that this is truly a temporary transaction, not a relationship. If you treat people as THEM, as objects, or as ‘others,’ they in turn will treat you instrumentally. It’s completely predictable and unavoidable.”

     This analysis is not always received well. Managers are always trying to get more from THEM (the subordinates) without having to build relationships with THEM. The reasons are often the same as in the client situation. Developing relationships means creating commitments and obligations that people do not want to create.

     In spite of what they say their goals are, many individuals are just not prepared to do what relationships require—in any context. It’s not just about their views of clients, but also about their entire life choices in dealing with people. It is their beliefs that must change, not just their daily habits.

     The Attractions of Transactions

     We must be wary of romanticizing romance (or the advisory role.) Relationships are not the best answer for all people at all times. There are benefits to both parties in transactions.

     Relationships can be scary, particularly if they rush too quickly into creating obligations that neither side is yet ready to accept. Both client and provider may be reluctant to commit to each other for future activity until significant experience with each other is developed.

     Growing relationships is very personal and intimate. You actually have to be interested in others, listen to what they say and care about, and pay attention to their moods and needs.

     Little of this is required in a transaction. Where it is required, it is only needed for a short period of time, usually during the initial seduction (i.e., negotiating the deal) when people play games pretending to care about each other.

     After that, the transactional approach (focus on the getting the job done, not on the other person) allows you to remain detached and unengaged, which is very attractive to some people. You can emphasize the technical skills in which you trained, and not be stressed by the need for interpersonal, psychological, emotional, or political nuances. For many professionals, this is a great blessing.

     Relationships, by their very nature, are not as clear-cut as the negotiated contract terms of a transaction. On both commercial and psychological grounds, it is easy to see why some individuals might prefer the clarity (and short-term gratification) of a “propose, get hired, deliver, get paid” transaction.

     Transaction skills are very “scalable”: expertise at winning and delivering transactions can be codified and disseminated quickly across an organization. It is less clear that the interpersonal skill of relationship building can be developed as quickly in a business that wants to grow rapidly.

     Transactions are also very appealing to those who find comfort in the rational, the logical, or the analytical approach, which description covers people in most professional and technical businesses. Little in professional training prepares one for the psychological complexities of dealing with clients (or liking it).

     An analysis of just how different transactions and relationships can be (and their relative appeals) is given in the following table.

     Transactions	Relationships
     One-night stand	Romance
     Them	Us
     Opponents	On the same side
     Short-term benefit	Long-term benefit
     Suspicion	Trust
     Goal is to make yourself look attractive	Goal is to understand the other party
     Negotiate and bargain	Give and be helpful
     Preserve options, avoid obligations	Make a commitment
     Focus on the present	Focus on the future
     Develop a detailed contract	Be comfortable with ambiguous understandings about future reciprocity
     Main goal is to prevail	Main goal is to preserve the relationship
     Style can be impersonal, detached	Style must be personal, engaged, intimate
     Preparation and rehearsal of what we’re going to say and do	Adaptability and flexibility to the responses of the other party
     Listen to what they’re saying	Listen to what they’re feeling, why they’re saying it
     Usual feeling during the interaction is tense, enervated	Usual feeling is relaxed, comfortable
     Interactive style is defensive, protective	Interactive style is open, inquisitive

      

     Additional differences exist between the two approaches. In pursuing a one-night stand, a small degree of exaggeration, misrepresentation, and manufactured appearance is normal and even expected. Perhaps people rarely lie, but they rarely tell the whole truth either.

     Clients hide the true objectives and budgets for their projects for fear of giving too much away and being at a disadvantage in the negotiations. Professionals try to create the appearance of greater experience, competence, and capabilities than they truly have.

     In creating a trusting relationship, however, complete integrity is required. Even the smallest example of lying to your spouse will destroy years of relationship building.

     Switching from a transactional to a relationship approach to business requires a revolution of attitudes and behaviors. Gradual change will not take hold, because everything people have learned through their successes in transactions may work against them in learning how to be good at relationships. The most successful Don Juans and Donna Juanitas are unlikely to make the best spouses.

     Which Approach Do People Want?

     It is interesting to speculate what percentage of clients are seeking relationship advisors versus transactional experts, and what percentage of providers want to be relationship advisors rather than transactional experts.

     I don’t have hard data on this point, but I regularly poll my seminar audiences about what they look for when they are trying to buy professional services.

     Fully eighty percent of the typical audience reports that they would prefer to hire a true advisor and, if they could find someone skilled in taking that approach, would be willing to pay a premium for it. Twenty percent would not, preferring to seek out either the best technical expert or the low-cost provider.

     When I ask the same audience which approach they and their firms are currently taking, the numbers are reversed. Eighty percent report that they mostly market themselves as experts (or are currently perceived as such) although many have dreams of changing this and becoming a “trusted advisor firm.”

     These results are not, of course, scientific. But the difference between what people say when they are buyers and what they say when they are providers is striking.

     The Client as Enemy

     While viewing dealings with clients (or employees) as a transaction is normal (and may be the most common form of professional service interaction), there is a danger that continuing to view clients as THEM can degenerate into viewing the client as the enemy. This can breed reactions that spiral into self-defeating behavior for both parties involved.

     All too often, the client becomes a competitor for things the professional wants (money, challenge, or control), not a partner in getting them.

     All this can lead to behavior that worsens the situation. Professionals act in ways that are pompous, patronizing, condescending, or arrogant, and the clients react to that by being (in turn) defensive, more guarded, and even less “relational.” Things begin to spiral.

     As Charles Green (coauthor of The Trusted Advisor) points out in his new book, Trust-Based Selling (McGraw-Hill, 2005), you can tell a professional provider is treating the client as the enemy when he or she prefers to work back at the office rather than at the client’s location. Each side, jealous and insecure about its control of THEM, competes for control of the agenda or outcome of a meeting or phone call.

     Unlike healthy relationships, which surface and deal with problematic issues early, transaction players develop an inability to confront THEM on difficult issues.

     As a result of all this, exaggeration, misrepresentation, selective disclosure of key information, and careful management of appearances are common on both sides. Both sides fight to be right and to prevail, rather than collaborate on finding a solution.

     This all ends up being against the best interests of all parties concerned. By treating providers with suspicion, buyers create an atmosphere that makes providers more reluctant to show a sincere interest in any client need or requirement beyond the terms of the contract.

     In turn, this unresponsive behavior reinforces the buyer’s perception that the provider is not worthy of trust and must be kept at arm’s length, watched like a hawk in case they take advantage of the client.

     Like some ancient rivalry, or a bad marriage, the origins of the dispute are lost in the mists of time. It is impossible to discover who was first responsible for treating the other badly.

     All that can be observed now is a set of resentments and accusations of being treated poorly by the other side. Each side can point to specific behaviors that show that THEY (the other side) are unfair, unreasonable, and untrustworthy. Each side has concrete evidence of behavior by THEM that proves that “we are justified” in our thinking poorly about THEM.

     As a result, clients become more demanding and controlling in their buying behavior and providers become more insincere and less responsive in their dealings with clients. Both sides end up actively encouraging the adverse reactions from THEM that they are trying to avoid.

     Other examples of dysfunctional “client as enemy” behaviors include:

     • Focus on rehearsing what you are going to say to the client in proposals and presentations rather than how you plan to get a true conversation going.
     • Avoiding conversations with clients because you want either to remain in control or avoid having to treat the client as a person.
     • Avoiding contact with clients unless there is something concrete to talk about.
     • Too obviously trying to sell more work to get what you want rather than serve the client.
     • Requiring that all agreements and decisions be documented and formally approved, rather than trusting each other’s word.

       The most important agenda for most professionals is to ensure that they do not allow their transaction business to spin out of control into “client as enemy” behavior. Among all the outcomes, this is the worst, with no winners.

       Transactions are inevitable. Clients increasingly treat professionals as vendors; they audit bills, they use purchasing departments and consultants in their selection processes, they bargain hard, and they emphasize contractual terms. Once this has begun to happen, it is clear that the client organization has categorized you as THEM and what follows, with immensely high probability, is going to be a transaction.

       That’s not necessarily a tragedy. As long as enmity does not build up, great success can be achieved with this approach. Once you are working with the client on the transaction, you have the opportunity to then take advantage of the client contact to build a relationship for the next time.

       However, firms must be vigilant in identifying where they are engaging in “client as enemy” activities, and discuss ways to eliminate them. In addition, they must identify and eliminate anything they might be doing that causes the clients to view the firm as the enemy.

       As Patrick McKenna, my coauthor on First Among Equals, observes: “The first tangible acknowledgment that many clients get from their professional service provider is a standard retainer agreement that lays out in no uncertain terms ‘what we are going to do for you — and to you — if you don’t pay our bill in a timely fashion.’”

       “How’s that for a terrible way to start?” Patrick asks. “Why not make sure that the firm’s first communication with the client is a letter of thanks for having been chosen, providing a note of reassurance to the client that they have chosen someone with some human sensitivity?”

       If relationships are not always possible, the very least a firm can do is to ensure that it handles its transactions professionally, and does not play the transaction game in such a way as to alienate the very clients it seeks to win and serve.

       Making the Transition to Romance

       Many people believe that individuals, by the time they reach positions of influence in their careers, cannot readily change and that if firms want to build relationships, they must recruit, develop, and retain people who have a predisposition for romance rather than seeking to change transactional people in the middle of their careers.

       There is a great deal of truth to this. In Managing the Professional Service Firm, I wrote about two types of firms: hunters (based on opportunistic individualism) and farmers (based on collaborative teamwork). Many firms have tried to make the transition from the former to the latter, only to discover that it has been extremely difficult to turn individualists into team players.

       Few have pulled it off as institutions and those that did accomplished it not by changing people, but by replacing them. Only when the collaborative team players achieved positions of power and could insist on their approach did firms begin to change.

       Another approach to changes of this kind has been to complement “old style” players with people who have the “new” attitudes and skills. This has been done in firms where technical experts have been explicitly teamed up with “client-friendly” salespeople who work together to win and serve clients, melding their skills.

       The real challenge, however, is for all of us as individuals, not as firms. Transactions are common because they involve less hard work and demand fewer skills. Ultimately, however, they are not in the best long-term interests of either professional or client.

       Mutual trust will allow both sides to get more of what they seek than continued mutual suspicion. Relationships are not more “noble” than transactions, but where they can be created they are much more profitable.

       Accordingly, many professionals will want to make the terrifying and difficult transition from skilled seducers to relationship-minded collaborators.

       Clients can be successfully led into a mutually supportive relationship and away from treating us with suspicion, but only if we throw away the bad habits of viewing them as THEM, and throw ourselves whole-heartedly into developing the new skills of relationships.

       The key first step is to recognize that romance and relationships work by earning and deserving what you want to get back from the other party.

       Whenever a trade-off occurs, the rules of romance require that, instead of acting defensively to protect your own interests, you put the client’s interest first and keep the faith that this relationship-building act will be repaid through future reciprocity. As The Trusted Advisor tried to show, this is not idealism since it leads to higher returns, but it does require an act of faith.

       Accordingly, the course of wisdom for those new to the approach is to be highly selective in choosing a first relationship to experiment with. As in all change efforts, a small-scale first experiment that has a high chance of yielding an early success is the wisest approach, rather than beginning with the most important relationships. If you are going to learn a new skill, it is better to do so in a situation where any initial fumbles will not be costly.

       If they are to capture market premiums, professionals cannot, in the long run, afford to have clients continue to view them as THEM. Professionals need clients (and employees) to think of them as US. And the only way to achieve that is to start thinking of them the same way.

       We must each decide whether, if we truly want the benefits of romance, we have the courage and patience to shake off old ways of viewing other people and are willing to learn new ways of dealing with them.

       ]]> http://davidmaister.com/articles/2/32/ http://davidmaister.com/articles/2/32/ Sat, 01 Jan 2005 12:00:00 -0500 Client Relations Articles david@davidmaister.com (David Maister) http://davidmaister.com/articles/2/32/ It was one of those familiar conversations that I often have:

       “We want to get more of our people involved in business development.”

       “Is this a new idea, or have you been working at it for a while?”

       “Oh, we’ve been working at it a lot. We’ve tried quite a few things.”

       “Such as?”

       “Well, the first thing we did was try to convince them of the wonderful things business development would do for the firm if we were all successful at it.”

       “And?”

       “They all agreed, but only a few were moved to action by things that were good for the firm. Most of the others were more interested in things that were good for them personally.

       “So what did you try next?”

       “We tried to make it personal. We changed our compensation system to put more reward in for business getters”

       “Did that work?”

       “A little, but it mostly just ended up paying more to the people who were already good at it. It turned out that promising to pay you if you got terrific at a completely new skill wasn’t enough to overcome the lack of confidence that many had about whether they could learn it.”

       “What happened next?”

       “Well, we tried using the pay scheme again. We started rumors that we would cut the pay of or fire people who couldn’t generate business.”

       “And how well did that work?”

       “Well, it generated a lot of fear, but even fear and terror didn’t turn non-marketers into marketers. We ended up spending more time fighting about the new reward system and even less time discussing new marketing ideas. It seems as if the minute you discuss money, people can’t think about anything else.”

       “Interesting. What did you try next?”

       “Well, we put all our people through sales training courses.”

       “Were they effective?”

       “They were very useful for those who were already interested in business development. They didn’t have much impact on those who weren’t interested. It was pretty much a waste of time, because it was the ones who weren’t interested that we were trying to reach.”

       “Anything else?”

       “Oh, yes. We designed a process for targeting our key clients with cross-discipline teams and we gave people access to marketing staff specialists, laying out a program of how to make relationship building programs effective.”

       “And what happened?”

       “Well, where individual people or groups did what we planned, it worked fabulously. Some people always wanted to do this in an organized fashion. But many of our supposed teams never did execute the programs they had themselves submitted as plans.”

       “Why not?”

       “The same syndrome, I suppose. Tools, systems and organization are wonderful aids for people who already want to do this stuff, but they seem to have little impact on people who don’t want to. If the underlying problem is attitude, no amount of processes, forms and support is going to change things.”

       “So?”

       “Well, what do you think we ought to try next, David? What’s the latest thinking?

       First, Stop Doing What Doesn’t Work

       Notice the amazing range of things that firms have tried to get people involved in business development. Included in the preceding dialogue are references to:

       • Visions
       • Rewards
       • Punishments
       • Training
       • Processes
       • Support Resources
       • Restructuring of Teams

         And, I’m told, they haven’t worked as well as people hoped they would. There’s still a need to find a way to elicit enthusiastic participation in business-getting.

         The primary reason most of these business development management initiatives tend to deliver poor results is exactly that word: a reason. Firms do not address the central question that those who do not participate have: “Why should I get involved in all this?”

         Firms keep trying to prove to people why their efforts would be good for the firm (“Do it for the glory of the institution; do it to achieve our strategic goals”) or because it will make them rich (“Don’t worry about whether this is interesting stuff—do it for the money!”)

         Not only are these appeals not always effective (if they were, I wouldn’t have been asked to write this article or to constantly speak about this subject) but, perhaps surprisingly, encouraging professionals to put effort into business development for the money turns out to backfire badly—less money is earned, not more.

         There are two reasons for this: the impact of incentives on people’s motivations, and the impact of the “money orientation” on their business development approaches.

         What’s Wrong With “Do it For the Money”

         In 1999, Alfie Kohn published an important book, Punished by Rewards, (Mariner Books) in which he pointed out that all incentive schemes are doomed to failure because they divert people’s attention away from inherent meaning, purpose, fulfillment or fun in the activity. Rather than these things, all motivation is shifted to getting the reward.

         He also argues effectively that the most important things needed to get rewards in any field of endeavor are the energy and dedication created by meaning, purpose, fulfillment and fun.

         He reports an interesting non-business example. An experiment was conducted with two groups of children, each given some toys to play with. One group was left alone to play, while the other group was given rewards for playing with the toys (ice cream, cookies and such.)

         After a short while, the experiment was halted and the rewards removed. The outcome was (in hindsight) readily understandable. Those children who were playing with the toys for the fun of doing so happily carried on.

         Those who had been rewarded for playing with the toys had transferred their focus of attention from the play to the reward. If they were no longer to be rewarded, they would no longer play, and ceased to do so.

         Doesn’t this sound exactly like a group of professionals? Say “Do it and I’ll pay you” and they will immediately translate it into “I’m not going to do anything you don’t pay me for!”

         What happens if people’s primary (or even exclusive) reason for doing marketing is to get the money?

         In True Professionalism (Free Press, 1997), I first gave the results of a simple survey I have conducted (for more than fifteen years now) among professionals around the world. People tell me that they truly enjoy their work 20 to 30 percent of the time, and can tolerate the rest.

         Similarly, they report that they really like the clients they work for and find the clients’ sector interesting about 30 to 40 percent of the time. Again, the rest is acceptable.

         Notice that this is what people tell me. It is not my judgment about their lives but their own assessment.

         These proportions certainly help us understand why people aren’t all that keen to go out, get active and work passionately on business development. Getting more business just brings in more stuff they can tolerate for clients they don’t particularly care for!

         If you don’t love what you do or those you do it for, why would you want to go out and get more of it?

         The traditional answer is, of course, because they’ll pay me if I do. They’ll pay me to do stuff I have no feelings for, for people I don’t care for! That, of course, is the dictionary definition of prostitution. Which is exactly the way many professionals feel when their firms try to get them to market themselves. No wonder marketing management efforts have such a low success rate!

         If firms wish to get enthusiastic participation in business development, they need to start talking and behaving very differently in their attempts to entice non-participants into the program. The very purpose of being good at business development, the very reason to do it, needs to be reexamined!

         What getting good at marketing can do for the individual is to help him or her find the clients they could care about and be eager to help, and the types of work that would be truly stimulating. The better you are at marketing, the more truly professional you can be, because you are not forced to take money from anyone and everyone just because you need the cash.

         Paradoxically, if one takes this view of marketing (it’s about finding things you really want to work on and people you truly want to help) the energy and involvement in marketing that would be created (in addition to the sincerity and passion immediately evident to clients) would make you much more likely to get the volume and the cash.

         Go for things that turn you on and you’ll get the money. Go for the money and you’ll get less.

         The trouble, of course, is that finding exciting work and enjoyable clients is not the reason that firms give their people to participate in business development. Helping people find more fun, fulfillment and meaning in their practices is not really why firms hire marketing directors, is it? But if firms want increased revenues, it should be!

         Clients and “Do it For the Money” Attitudes

         These survey results also make completely clear why so many people fail at business development. Take a guess at the answer to this question: Do you think that clients can tell when professionals are doing it only for the money and have no special interest in them or their problems?

         When you are the target of some other professional, how easily and quickly can you tell if they are interested in you or just trying to get your business and your cash? How transparent are their underlying motives when they are engaged in selling to you?

         How easily or quickly can you tell if they have a passion for what they do—or whether they view themselves simply as solid, competent people just doing a job?

         If you are able to detect these things when you are the buyer, how do you feel about them? Do such factors affect your decision about whether to hire specific professionals?

         My guess is that you can spot these things almost always and that, most of the time, it significantly influences your desire to work with such professionals. It matters to 95 percent of the people I have asked around the world for more than two decades, and it probably matters to your clients too.

         As it turns out, you and your profession are not unique even though you may think you are (sorry!), and your buyers, when they buy, are not that different from you and me when we buy.

         “I’m doing it for the money” is an attitude most of us can spot a mile away — when we’re the buyer. And nothing is designed to make us less likely to want to hire such a person. Yet that is the number one reason firms give when they try to get their people to go out and generate business.

         The message from management seems to be: “Do it for the money, but try and convince the prospective client that you’re not doing it for the money”

         I have bad news for you. Your people are just not that good at acting. If their real motivation to engage in marketing is for the money, it will inevitably show. And they will succeed less often, no mater how many training courses you provide to them about how to fake sincerity, Motives matter!

         This is not an idealistic “anti-money” argument. When I’m your buyer, knowing that you want the money is nothing to be embarrassed about or to apologize for. We all want the money. But if you truly want me to give you my business, then you will need to be a little more sophisticated about how to actually get it.

         You must win my business by showing me that you are interested in more than just the money. You need to prove that you are prepared to earn and deserve my trust and my business by being interested in me.

         We know all this as buyers. Why do we keep forgetting it when the time comes for us to get hired? And why do so many firm marketing efforts seem to show so little understanding of how people actually buy?

         How Managers and Marketing Directors Make a Difference

         There are other ways in which the way a firm’s management of its marketing efforts actually leads to less marketing success, rather than more.

         In many firms, rewards for marketing success are based upon exactly that: success. There is no credit within the systems or, perhaps more important, the culture of the firm to reward marketing contributions that cannot be linked to a specific piece of business.

         There is no “origination credit” for writing a good article or putting on a good seminar. There is no bonus for contributing a new tax idea that everyone else in the firm got to tell their clients about. Unless you were the one to tell your client and you were the one who got the “here’s a deal” call from the client, you don’t get acknowledged.

         Not surprisingly, this mentality leads everyone to under-invest in articles, seminars, innovative ideas and the like, and instead, rush to “selling” activities. They focus on the final event of trying to get hired, rather than the “romance” of successfully laying the groundwork by tempting the prospective client into wanting a relationship. They start approaching prospective clients with an overeager rush of “Do you want to do it?” — not usually a recipe for success!

         Firms also mismanage marketing by fervently preaching team efforts (such as cross-discipline approaches to key clients) while clearly running reward systems based on individual performance. If you pay me on what I do personally, I’m not going to be silly enough to waste my time on any team efforts that don’t carry my name attached. Make up your mind, management! What do you really want me to do?

         Firms also try to encourage long-term relationship investments by their people while visibly running short-term focused management and reward systems. Again the paradox or contradiction is soon spotted. You say you want us to do all the right things to build long term relationships, but you also want to reserve the right to be short-term decision-makers yourselves? Come on, get real, guys!

         What all these problems have in common is that firms are not only “in it only for the money,” but they want the money now! As a result, while they talk a good game about long-term relationship building marketing efforts, the truth is that these are never really executed well unless they deliver results immediately.

         Managing As If What We Do For a Living Has Meaning

         It should be clear by now that my experience has taught me that most firms’ marketing problems are not marketing problems at all, but “management of marketing” problems.

         Specifically, people are being encouraged into ineffective and counterproductive mindsets and habits by the words and behaviors of firm management and marketing directors as they go about getting their professionals to think about business development.

         It will come as a surprise to many, but if firms wish to be more successful at generating revenues, they need to stop saying, “Do it for the money,” or even “Do it for the firm.”

         They do not need to stop saying these things not because they are immoral, but because they cause many professionals (particularly the novices who need the most help) to profoundly misunderstand what actually works in business development. By saying these things they are, just as Alfie Kohn pointed out, drawing people’s attention away from the true reasons they might want to be enthusiastically involved.

         They need to start saying, “Let’s do it as if we were planning to be in business for a long time. Let’s do it to really be helpful and valuable to people we can care about, and let’s have more fun and fulfillment!” Then they will be able to say: “Oh, and by the way, a wonderful consequence will follow— clients will love it and we will get richer!”

         So how does a marketing director or managing partner help the firm’s professionals get good at being trusted and hence start generating the cash?

         They need to help professionals understand that we don’t get rich by “selling”—we get rich by making people want to hire us and work with us.

         Pulling that off requires a whole new attitude toward why we are doing marketing and selling, and why we work in the profession we chose. It is the job of management and marketing directors to create those attitudes in the firm (and to not generate precisely the opposite attitude, which is all too often the case.)

         You do not need to teach your people how to sell. You need to find out, partner by partner, what kind of work turns each partner on and what kind of clients each partner could actually get interested in.

         Your people can’t love everyone (or everything), but if they can’t learn to really care about some kinds of clients and some kinds of work (or the problems of those certain kinds of clients), they are not going to get a higher percentage of clients to give them business.

         And if your professionals truly are interested in no one and nothing, there are almost certainly bigger issues at stake!

         ]]> http://davidmaister.com/blog/359/ http://davidmaister.com/blog/359/ Wed, 21 Mar 2007 12:00:00 -0500 Client Relations Blog posts david@davidmaister.com (David Maister) http://davidmaister.com/blog/359/ Here’s a question from "Eric":

         I am thinking of writing an article myself about how clients of consultants can create the right relationship with their consultant so that they get more bang for the buck (i.e. more insight from an objective viewpoint then they would normally get via the usually limited "statement of work"). 

         If my company gets called in to help out (with anything from strategy through technical implementations), we end up learning so much about their organization, how they build processes, how things really work and I feel that in some situations, the client puts barriers up that prevent effective communication. 

         If clients knew how to approach their consultants and their relationship with them, they could glean a lot of "insider" information that they would not normally get.  We find out SO much about the inadequacies of client organizational structures, communication breakdowns, lack of effective change management etc. that I think the client management might benefit from if only they knew.  Some know how to get this out of us and some don't. 

         I understand some of the barriers: they might consider their consultants just money grubbing stiffs, may not trust them, are politically boxed in, etc.). Obviously, a bigpiece of a partnering relationship is the responsibility of the consultant lead. However, it does take two to tango, doesn't it?

         ***

         I think it’s a great idea for an article, Eric. But you haven’t really got us started.

         Why don’t we all try and complete the following sentence:

         “To get the most out of us, our clients should…..”

         (Self-serving actions like hire us some more are not allowed! The spirit of this is to avoid reinforcing the perceptions that Eric so readily identified – that if we are not careful, clients will see additional activities by us as the work of untrustworthy, money-grubbing people. Anything we suggest has to avoid reinforcing that, right?)

         So, to get the most out of us/me, clients should:

         1. Help me/us understand, before we get in too deep, the real politics of what’s going on in their organization
         2. Tell us/me the truth, up-front, about what they’re really willing to change and what they are not
         3. Meet with us/me one-on-one informally, so that we/I can pass on “off the record” and informally some of the things we think we have learned.
         4. Allow for informal “what’s going well and what are you learning?” conversations on a regular basis during the work, not just at the end.
         5. Keep us/me informed if their priorities and goals have shifted, so that we/ can adapt along with them.

         Anyone else want to join in? What could clients be doing (specifically) to get the most out of you and your firm?

         ]]> http://davidmaister.com/blog/356/ http://davidmaister.com/blog/356/ Fri, 16 Mar 2007 12:00:00 -0500 Client Relations Blog posts david@davidmaister.com (David Maister) http://davidmaister.com/blog/356/ Rain Today.com has published the Future Of Lead Generation, in which they report on the answers given by over 700 professional service firm leaders about their lead generation activities – what works, what doesn’t, and what they are planning to do in the future in regards to tactics, offers, and budgets.

         There is an excellent 20+ page free summary available and you should check it out. It offers the 6 key insights that come from the study:

         1. Brand Matters. Firms that said they were very well known in their target market were also more likely to say they were good or excellent at generating leads.
         2. It helps (a lot) to know the names of the key decision makers in the organizations you are targeting (and many firms do not.)
         3. Cold calling can work – if you use it to set a meeting to introduce yourself and to learn about the prospect, not to go into a detailed sales pitch.
         4. The most effective mix of tactics reported were ‘warm’ phone calls to existing contacts, speaking at conferences, running the firm’s own in-person events, becoming members of an industry association and (most surprising to me) connecting with the press to gain PR.
         5. Firms reported that 25% of their leads were considered “sales-ready’, 50% required further nurturing and 25% of their leads were disqualified.
         6. Actually, as you’ll see when you look at the free summary, insight number 6 is a well-designed ‘teaser’ entitled “Indicators of the Future of Lead generation” which does a good job of making you want to buy the full report.

         Apart from offering substance, Rain Today.com does a superb job of marketing itself. They targeted me as a blogger to mention this report, and kept in touch (politely, but insistently) with helpful reminders until I responded with this blog. They can (and DO) give lessons in how to be effective marketers!

         ]]> http://davidmaister.com/blog/354/ http://davidmaister.com/blog/354/ Wed, 14 Mar 2007 12:00:00 -0500 Client Relations Blog posts david@davidmaister.com (David Maister) http://davidmaister.com/blog/354/ A reader asks:

         In light of some things you teach, ideas from Rob Nixon, and the VeraSage institute; it seems a very bad idea to bill by the hour, especially if you are a new consultant just beginning your practice. Yet, most smaller clients one would probably start with would think in terms of hours. Ultimately, you would want to find some way for them to pay you according to value added, right?  But how is this done?

         The best I can come up with is offer a free consultation (a few hours or whatever) just long enough to show them you are worth your fees and long enough to find out if you want to work with them).  Have in mind what your time is worth to you.  Estimate with them the length of the project.  Come up with a (fixed price) estimate.  If they feel like the price is worth it to them, then you are essentially measuring the value added (maybe lower than value added).  Then if it takes longer or shorter, it was based on their value and not your hours. And in the future, as you get more efficient, you still bill the same for the project.

         Is this the right approach for a beginning consultant?

         *** 

         So, what does everyone think? This seems to be toay's conventional wisdom on pricing, but would anyone else provide different advice?

         ]]> http://davidmaister.com/blog/349/ http://davidmaister.com/blog/349/ Thu, 08 Mar 2007 12:00:00 -0500 Client Relations Blog posts david@davidmaister.com (David Maister) http://davidmaister.com/blog/349/ Plans and reviews ought to be conducted on a once-every-three-month cycle.

         Once a year is, of course, too infrequent. Saying I’ll accomplish something in the next twelve months is like setting New Years’ Resolutions – the pressure for accountability is too little at the beginning of the year, and too intense at the end. Examining whether I did what I promised only after 12 months of effort is unlikely to ensure that I stay on the diligent execution path.

         On the other hand, meeting with me and reviewing plans and activities once every month is micromanaging and doesn’t allow for unforeseen circumstances. I can’t ABSOLUTELY promise I’ll get something done in the next 30 days. Who knows what existing client demands will change, what new client opportunities will arise, what staff emergencies and ill-health will affect output? Or (to be honest) how the ups and downs of personal intensity will flow – as my clients keep telling me, you can’t be a dynamo, learning new skills, every month.

         But three months is ideal. It’s long enough to work around the world’s unpredictabilities both at work and in people’s personal lives. It’s a long enough leash to make me feel that I have a lot of autonomy in allocating my time, while still keeping me accountable in a period of time that won’t let me go off the rails.

         On the other hand, to make it work, the three month-review system mustn’t slip. It must be scheduled, planned for, actionable commitments made and the review actually held. If you want to treat me like a true professional, hold really thorough reviews with strict accountability for action promises made every 3 months – and get off my back in the intervening time period.

         Ban monthly budgets!

         Abolish annual performance appraisals.

         Manage to a 3-month cycle!

         (By the way, this rule works on client relationships , too.)

         ***

         Agree, disagree?

         ]]> http://davidmaister.com/blog/349/ http://davidmaister.com/blog/349/ Thu, 08 Mar 2007 12:00:00 -0500 Client Relations Blog posts david@davidmaister.com (David Maister) http://davidmaister.com/blog/349/ Plans and reviews ought to be conducted on a once-every-three-month cycle.

         Once a year is, of course, too infrequent. Saying I’ll accomplish something in the next twelve months is like setting New Years’ Resolutions – the pressure for accountability is too little at the beginning of the year, and too intense at the end. Examining whether I did what I promised only after 12 months of effort is unlikely to ensure that I stay on the diligent execution path.

         On the other hand, meeting with me and reviewing plans and activities once every month is micromanaging and doesn’t allow for unforeseen circumstances. I can’t ABSOLUTELY promise I’ll get something done in the next 30 days. Who knows what existing client demands will change, what new client opportunities will arise, what staff emergencies and ill-health will affect output? Or (to be honest) how the ups and downs of personal intensity will flow – as my clients keep telling me, you can’t be a dynamo, learning new skills, every month.

         But three months is ideal. It’s long enough to work around the world’s unpredictabilities both at work and in people’s personal lives. It’s a long enough leash to make me feel that I have a lot of autonomy in allocating my time, while still keeping me accountable in a period of time that won’t let me go off the rails.

         On the other hand, to make it work, the three month-review system mustn’t slip. It must be scheduled, planned for, actionable commitments made and the review actually held. If you want to treat me like a true professional, hold really thorough reviews with strict accountability for action promises made every 3 months – and get off my back in the intervening time period.

         Ban monthly budgets!

         Abolish annual performance appraisals.

         Manage to a 3-month cycle!

         (By the way, this rule works on client relationships , too.)

         ***

         Agree, disagree?

         ]]> http://davidmaister.com/podcasts/87/ http://davidmaister.com/podcasts/87/ Mon, 24 Sep 2007 12:00:00 -0500 Client Relations Podcasts david@davidmaister.com (David Maister) http://davidmaister.com/podcasts/87/ Professionals at any given time can be one of three things: dynamos, cruisers or losers. What are the percentages in your organization and how will you as a manager motivate and excite in order help under-performers and create dynamos?
         ]]> http://davidmaister.com/podcasts/85/ http://davidmaister.com/podcasts/85/ Mon, 27 Aug 2007 12:00:00 -0500 Client Relations Podcasts david@davidmaister.com (David Maister) http://davidmaister.com/podcasts/85/ sides of the fence. We will discuss how to thwart this cycle at the root by demonstrating your capabilities first and building a reputation as a trustworthy provider.
         ]]> http://davidmaister.com/podcasts/84/ http://davidmaister.com/podcasts/84/ Mon, 13 Aug 2007 12:00:00 -0500 Client Relations Podcasts david@davidmaister.com (David Maister) http://davidmaister.com/podcasts/84/ In the marketing of professional services, you can come across in one of two ways to the buyer. You are either interested in them, or you are interested in their cash. We will show why the former is the key to successful business marketing.
         ]]> http://davidmaister.com/podcasts/83/ http://davidmaister.com/podcasts/83/ Mon, 30 Jul 2007 12:00:00 -0500 Client Relations Podcasts david@davidmaister.com (David Maister) http://davidmaister.com/podcasts/83/ Most professional organizations spend the overwhelming majority of their non-billable, business generating hours on chasing new clients even though it has the least probable R.O.I. We will examine the alternatives and their relative effectiveness.
         ]]> http://davidmaister.com/podcasts/82/ http://davidmaister.com/podcasts/82/ Mon, 23 Jul 2007 12:00:00 -0500 Client Relations Podcasts david@davidmaister.com (David Maister) http://davidmaister.com/podcasts/82/ There is far more to building a relationship than the point of any given conversation and there is no “going through the motions” or baseline communications. Learn two of the most important aspects of communication in relationships.
         ]]>