Golden Practices Blog

Women and Work; Where We've Been, Where We Are

2013-05-01T12:12:55-05:00

So much chatter about why the percent of women on the earth isn't the same as the percent of women in this business or that industry or the boardroom down the hall.

Reach back and dust off something we were ALL told, probably sometime between ages 3 and 5:

Boys and girls are different.

When we were told this, we were NOT told that one was better. Because one isn't better. Just different. So what.

We can keep making a big deal out of how we are different and why we are different, and how to "fix" or "equalize" it (God help us) or we can accept and embrace the simple fact that boys and girls are different and SHOULD BE. Know why? Because PEOPLE are different. So what.

Love the differences. Work with the differences. Respect the differences. And quit obsessing about HOW & WHY people are different.

In a very vulnerable and real piece by my refreshingly unlawyerly friend Heather Bussing, I think you'll find the reasons to celebrate and love the difference.

"Being a woman is a million different things, and nothing in particular. Labeling work and life questions as women’s issues is at worst, a distortion; at best, a distraction."

Read her story: Personal Questions: Women and Work on HR Examiner.

Set People Up For Success. Be a Bob.

2013-04-01T12:05:48-05:00

Setting people up for success is something of an art.

Bob had it down pat; he was the consummate professional. He’s retired now, but his reputation of wisdom and effectiveness was earned over decades of consistently demonstrating both of these traits. In his role as a senior partner of his midsized CPA firm, he was kind but firm, and always sincere. Bob never said something unless he meant it.

Bob’s exactly the kind of guy you don’t want to disappoint. And exactly the kind of guy people want to hire.

It was almost noon and I stood in his firm’s lobby awaiting my lunch mates. As I waited, I witnessed one of the finest business lessons I’ve seen.

A somewhat shy new guy—a bright young auditor right out of college—stood near me. Let’s call him Dan. It was Dan’s first day so he’d been hurriedly introduced to everyone in the office. Now he was waiting for some of his team members to take him to lunch.

Bob entered the lobby from the interior offices right as a couple people came in the front door. Bob warmly greeted the clients who appeared to be meeting him for lunch. Always thoughtful, Bob turned and introduced the receptionist, then me. Then, he did something pretty extraordinary.

Without missing a beat, Bob took a couple steps positioning himself beside Dan and, in a fatherly sort of way, put his hand on Dan’s back, kind of behind his shoulder. Smiling, he announced proudly:

“And this is Dan! He is going to be on your audit team this year and you’ll be in excellent hands with him.”

Several great things had just happened.

First, Dan stood tall. He shook hands and learned the clients’ names. Running through his mind was something like: I’d better do a great job…Bob just personally endorsed me and made me look really good!

Through the clients’ minds went something like: If Bob says this guy is good, then by golly, he is.

Bob created both the strong desire in Dan to excel, and a reason for the clients to feel confident about Dan being on their team.

The introduction could have gone so differently and in most firms it would have. Dan had only met Bob that morning. It’s kinda remarkable that Bob even remembered his name. In some firms, the partner would have just left with the clients, introductions skipped. A huge opportunity missed.

Otherwise, a probable scene would have been for the partner to greet the clients, and indicate toward Dan: “This is our new guy. He’ll be on your audit this year.” In this scenario, you can almost feel Dan shrinking back a little. And clients might be thinking, Oh, great, another new auditor we get to train.

But Bob knew exactly what he was doing.

In a single moment, Bob created the perfect environment for a positive experience on both sides. He inspired Dan to want to impress the client and make the partners proud, to live up to his words, and to earn Bob’s advance expression of trust. Bob put his reputation on the line and Dan did not want to let him down.

A company’s reputation is always on the line when employees represent it, right?

To inspire the very best from people, we have to believe in them. Bob’s way is is the most effective way to get what we need from others. Conversely, when we hire someone and think, well, I sure hope she can do the job, or I hope he doesn’t embarrass me, it seeps through in our demeanor and we’re much more likely to create the very result that we fear.

Bob understood something that most of us never consider. What he knew was that people actually want to do great work. In fact, until or unless we give someone a reason not to, they will continue to want to. Anyone worth their salt, anyway. (This is intrinsic motivation, discussed in the book Drive by Dan Pink.) Bob got great results from people because he knew they would want to do their best not just for him and clients, but for themselves, too.

It’s our job, as owners and managers, to expect their success and to keep that spirit alive in them. If that spirit was there once and died, it’s probable that we somehow squelched it (certainly without meaning to).

In other words, if we believe people will achieve, we foster their success. And if we watch for them to fail, they will. Initially it's fairly easy. But over time, the key is in handling mistakes. Don’t give up on people when they make mistakes. Continue to know that they’ll master it after a few tries.

Think of your baby learning to walk. When he takes those first steps, teeters, and falls, you clap in celebration and encourage him to try again. He grins in glee, pulls himself up, and repeats until he's a walker. When he falls, what you don’t do is declare: “Gee, walking is obviously not your thing. You should probably just stick with crawling." This is because you absolutely know that he’ll master walking. And your trust in this urges him on. This applies all through the parenting years.

And it applies just as much in business, too.

To make this work, trust has to be paid forward. And it has to be sincere. Words of trust must be heartfelt, they can't be faked. People can sense when you don’t trust them. Little things like eye contact, tone, and body language convey the truth. The small but meaningful detail of Bob standing beside his newest team member, literally “backing him” with the gesture of support on his shoulder, spoke volumes to everyone in the room.

It’s a lucky few who have a Bob around as they start their careers. But even for those of us who did not, it’s never too late to take a cue from this wise and successful nurturer of good employees and future leaders.

Whether you’re a man or woman, aspire to be a Bob.

*Bob's name has not been changed for this story. How can you do better than Bob??

(beautiful child image from flickr)

Guilt. Honesty. Starting over.

2013-03-08T12:40:44-06:00

I don't post here often enough. I know that.

I'm lucky that I started my blog so long ago (has it really been 8 years?) that it was fairly "established" before a gazillion blogs populated the Interwebs, fighting for everyone's thinning online attention.

I'm luckier that fine folks like you still read it. And that this blog still draws a lot of traffic.

I have about 400 posts here and sometimes I discover one that makes me think: "I wrote THAT? Huh. I should read some of this to remember what I know." :)

I feel guilty that I don't write here more. That I'm not GIVING enough anymore. And I thank you for sticking with me.

Why don't I post more?

Probably much like you, my online time is simply more spread out than it was 8 years ago. I'm most frequently on my personal Facebook page keeping up with my kids and grandson, far-flung friends, and business people whom I've come to adore—even some of whom I've never met IRL (Joel Ungar) but would welcome in my home like family if the opportunity arose.

And I'm on Twitter a bit, not nearly as much as I was before Google+ came on the scene.

Funny, I almost never use Google+ (hate it, actually) but its very emergence caused me to pare back from Twitter as I realized Facebook—where I have more real relationships—was my priority for online social. Have you made similar choices between platforms to try to control your life a bit?

So now, instead of short posts here to share cool articles and links, I mostly use Twitter and my Golden Practices Facebook page or Social Media Strategies Facebook page for that stuff.

As for the longer stuff, I divert some of my writing time of bloggy-sized articles to publications like CPA Practice Advisor magazine for whom I'm a regular columnist.

If you'd like to see any of those articles, have a complete list with links to all my publications on this page, newest articles on the top (just under the books).

Oh. The. Guilt.

Do you have a blog? Or another content hub where you mean to share your brain more often than you end up doing? You are so not alone.

My dear friend Debra Helwig has been living the guilt hardcore. For two years, five months, 14 days.

Can you make a comeback after that. Hellz yes. But probably not without a battle inside yourself. Just like Debra's.

I thought about starting to write again. But it had been SOOOOOOOO LONG. “Who would care anymore?” whispered my inner demons. I had started something good and let it die. I was embarrassed, so I pretended it didn’t matter anymore. But it still tied my guts in knots every time I thought about it.

I am just so thankful that she couldn't find her login until after she'd realized she shouldn't hit "delete" stealing her wisdom from us forever. Because of damn guilt.

Debra's Starting Over post is one of the best "I'm back" posts I've ever seen. Honesty is so precious. And rare. We thirst for it, don't we?

Never too late.

If you've left your word garden somewhat untended, it's not too late.

Just. Come. Back.

Give us what you can when you can. We all understand. Really.

It's Time to Stop Talking About "Women's Issues" in Business

2012-11-05T17:43:14-06:00

Law and accounting grads are consistently over 50% female, yet the percentage of female firm owners has just reached 20%, up from 19% several years ago.

It's easy to blame the mommy track for high female turnover. Or maybe discrimination. As a fix, firm owners and consultants strive to "retain women" and to make women more "promotable." To this end, they create women's support groups and development programs, both centered on the "unique issues that women face."

Despite the good intentions, I believe these women-oriented programs miss the mark. In fact, they hurt more than help. I'll explain why I think that, explore what it is that firms are actually trying to accomplish, and offer up some alternate solutions.

The Women's-Issue Myth

When you look at the topics of these women-only programs, you'll see that every issue or situation they address exists for men, too.

All the issues named as "women's issues"—save one—are actually just people issues.

The one unique-to-women issue? Nursing moms need a comfortable, private room at work in which to pump. Otherwise, men and dads today face the same difficulties—and the same balancing-act challenges—as women and moms.

Please name any other need that only women have in the workplace that they cannot capably see to themselves.

If you'd say that woman aren't as promotable, I'd say hogwash. Women's advancement potential is now no different from men's. Maybe you'd say that partnership isn't very desirable to women. But I know plenty of men who don't want to be owners either.

Both men and women defect from firms at an alarming rate—nearly 85% exit law and public accounting by their fifth year.

And of those who stay, do women actually need different professional skills than men?

Lawyers and accountants of both sexes generally lack management skills. It makes sense since they went to school to learn law or accounting, not management or business development—the themes of most women-oriented education.

Both men and women need additional skills and support. Every entrant into these professions now needs marketing skills. Most need management skills. And some need to become leaders.

Focusing on women's issues in the business world is actually divisive.

Since women's skill needs and life-work balance accommodations aren't unique, claiming they are unique is inaccurate and exclusionary to men. Especially to single dads. And it's insulting to women—as if we're incapable of succeeding without special accommodation or tailored skill development.

To make matters worse, some of these formal programs include wardrobe advice and shopping excursions. As a woman—even one who enjoys fashion—this horrifies me. People are supposed to take such a program seriously?

Yet firm owners feel obligated to support women's or diversity programs or they could appear insensitive. It's why these programs increase in number; a trend that doesn't solve the problem.

These programs widen the gap rather than close it. Divisive indeed.

What Problem Are We Trying to Fix?

We fret over fewer female employees and partners than male so, naturally, we seek to balance the proportion. What's our purpose in having more female leaders? Have we identified the right cause?

Are we worried about discrimination in promoting women?

I'm inside a lot of firms and I don't think that's it. I've not yet encountered a firm that failed to see the strengths that women can bring to the boardroom.

And discrimination isn't just a female problem—it occurs based on all sorts of impressions and biases from appearance (sloppy or sophisticated), personality and style (abrupt or shy), communication ability, education, age, size, race, and religion.

Besides, isn't promoting women primarily to equalize the numbers discrimination, too?

Are we seeking to correct too little diversity?

We know that firms pursue "diversity" to appear more attractive to current employees, certain clients, or future recruits as if to say: "See? Women can advance here!"

Sadly, this, too, misses the mark. When we seek diversity, the purpose should be to achieve diversity of mind—of thought—not quotas related to a person's color or body parts.

Diversity of thinking has to be supported or it ceases.

Interestingly, most firms aren't even prepared to support diversity of thought. To nurture diversity, firms must act on the ideas (the thinking) of their people. But firm leaders tend react defensively to new and different thinking, and often stifle it.

It's a lot easier to "look" diverse in a photo or statistically than to actually be diverse. Diversity is cultural, and we aren't there yet. Even when we fill quotas. (This will need to be another blog post.)

Diversity will occur organically when we empower people.

What Makes People Powerful?

These are very sensitive subjects and I've been pondering this post for years.

I'm publishing it now because something really nice happened this month. I was named among 25 accomplished people as "Most Powerful Women in Accounting" by CPA Practice Advisor magazine.

It's truly an honor to be recognized among peers for thought leadership, and as a role model. I owe an extra debt of gratitude to CPA Practice Advisor for pulling these people together because reading the award recipients' insights has inspired me and I see important themes.

But I'll let you in on a secret. I feel squeamish about the "women" part of this recognition. Imagine the uproar if we recognized "Most Powerful Men in Accounting."

"Powerful" is a pretty amazing word, and I think herein lies a key to success for men and women alike.

Powerful—to me—is the sense that nothing can hold us back from what we want to accomplish.

Some of the other Most Powerful Women honorees seem to agree with this perspective (not necessarily the rest of my post).

Stacy Kildal, Michelle Golden, Geni Whitehouse, and Dawn Brolin

CPA Practice Advisor posed questions to the honorees about perceived limitations to women in advancement and opportunity. Their answers unapologetically reflect their power.

Dawn Brolin, to the question, "Do you think being a woman in the accounting profession has made career advancement more challenging than it might have been for a male in the same situation?" answered: "As a strong woman, I would have to say no."

Stacy Kildal says: "I have honestly, not for one minute of my life, ever considered that being a woman would ever make advancement in my career more challenging. My gender doesn’t have anything to do with my ability..."

Geni Whitehouse said: "I didn’t feel that I was given unequal treatment at any time in my career. The accounting profession rewards hard work and results."

And honoree Gail Perry tells firm leaders: "...my advice would be that the firm regard its female employees just as it would any employee—judge on merit, not gender. Don't provide preferential treatment based on gender..."

Is it coincidence that "powerful" women don't see femaleness as a limitation? I think not.

What they all have in common is personal drive. Personal drive is power.

To those who say women face advancement limitations, I say nonsense. Being a business woman in no way hinders me if I don't let it. Similarly, being a parent in no way hinders me unless I let it.

Of course it wasn't always this way. Initially, it was indisputably difficult for women to advance. But due to the courageous first, the promotion path is well-forged. I commend and thank those brave women. Their efforts paid off.

And the pendulum has now swung. With the increasing number of dual-income families and single-parent households, men have significant responsibilities at home and face the same struggles as their female counterparts. We're all in the same boat.

Women simply don't need special treatment to be successful in business. To be successful requires personal drive.

If women (or men) want advancement, then advance!

If women (or men) don't like the culture in their firm, then change it. Or leave.

If women (or men) don't want to be owners in a predominantly male firm, then start a new one. It's easier than ever to do, and many people are.

Perpetuating the Myth

"Women's issues" are falsely named. Certainly everyone benefits from support and skill development.

We mustn't keep the "women's issue" mantra going. Things that we continually call attention to become our realities, even if they aren't real.

Morgan Freeman's interview with Mike Wallace provides perspective on the problem of paying too much attention to distinctions between people:

It's time to neutralize the entire discussion of gender in the workplace. How do we end women's issues?

How about we just stop talking about it.

Podcast Interview with RainToday Won Readers' Choice Award

2012-10-10T08:38:45-05:00

I had a chance to speak with Michelle Davidson, editor of RainToday.com a little over a week ago for a podcast on what's new with social media for professionals.

Check it out: Social Media is Not a Strategy; It's a Channel

In the discussion, I shared my issues with LinkedIn's usability, my beliefs about whether blogging is still important compared to 5-10 years ago, and why cross-posting sucks.

It's an easy listen... and please laugh with me at my Rick Perry moment.

The podcast is 19 min and is getting lots of good feedback. Even won RainToday's 10/3 Readers' Choice Award!

Ironically, I discussed how LI would be so much better with a notifications feature, and almost on queue, a couple days later, they pushed one out. Ask and ye shall receive.

Have you checked out LI's notification feature yet? What do you think of the functionality? Will it make LI more social for you?

Selling Profitable Work When the Fee-Squeeze is On

2012-10-01T12:16:23-05:00

The chatter everywhere in the accounting world surrounds what a hostile selling environment we're in. It was bad 2-3 years ago and it isn't any better today. Hand-wringing CPAs are convinced there's nothing they can do.

But there is.

You really can break free of the low-price wars. But there are a few things you'll need to do. And they take practice. To get started, check out this article (shared with AAM's permission).

PDF: Selling Profitable Work When the Fee-Squeeze is On

It's the Oct feature article for Association for Accounting Marketing's Growth Strategies magazine, and it is a nod to the type of content in my next book: Pricing to Win. Landing the Right Work at the Right Price.

Would really love your feedback and your questions. They'll help me know what to address within the pages of the book! Thanks!!

Top 10 Marketing & Sales FAQs for CPA and Law Firm Partners

2012-09-18T13:58:53-05:00

I wrote these FAQs several years ago for my original website and, when renovating that site, I posted it on a magazine site I used to contribute to. But I just discovered this content is no longer online. Yikes!

It's evergreen material and lots of partners and marketing professionals have said that it's useful so I'm happy to share it again for your reference.

Top 10 Marketing and Sales FAQs

Why do we need to market when we can barely staff the work we have?
What is the difference between “marketing” and “selling?”
Can I expect a marketer to generate new business leads?
How should sales and marketing functions be aligned?
What does a marketing person do?
How can I tell if our firm needs an in-house marketing person?
What level of marketer does my firm need?
To whom should the marketer report?
When can we expect to see marketing results?
How might marketing’s cultural changes affect my firm?

Why do we need to market when we can barely staff the work we have?

Perhaps you don’t.

Marketing to increase business volume so you can work harder doesn’t sound appealing if you’re already at capacity. However, even if you don’t want more work, if you want to increase your firm’s health and improve morale, beefing up the marketing function can still help you.

One way to tell if marketing will benefit your firm is to ask yourself these questions:

Are we meeting our profitability goals?
Are we in heaviest demand by our ideal clients?
Do we receive frequent referrals from our clients?
Is the work we do stimulating and enjoyable?
Is our personnel retention above average?
Are we attracting personnel whom we trust to succeed us?
Are we attractively positioned for acquisition?

If you answered “no” to any of the above, marketing can help.

Do we serve too many problem clients?
Are we doing too much low-profit work and not enough high-profit work?
Do we ever set (or reduce) the price after we’ve done the work?
Are some partners eager to market while others are content, or even complacent?

If you answered “yes” to any of the above, marketing can help.

What is the difference between “marketing” and “selling?”

Marketing is the on-going process of appealing to potential clients and ensuring repeat business from existing clients.

Marketing:

identifies appropriate prospects
effectively communicates image and capabilities of the firm
creates/emphasizes an appeal—a differentiation factor—about the firm
perfects customer service
requests feedback from clients on a regular basis
anticipates and meets needs

Marketing often necessitates cultural changes at every level in the firm. Ultimately, marketing strives to make all interactions with your firm (aka “moments of truth”) into positive experiences.

Selling is:

proactive seeking of prospects
interacting to qualify prospects
effective acknowledgment of the prospect’s concerns
closing the sale—getting hired
following up and staying in contact when not hired

Successful sellers use active listening skills and demonstrate the ability to meet the prospect’s needs by conveying competence and confidence.

Sellers rely on public perception of expertise and excellence—a product of marketing; therefore, they feel obligated to meet these expectations and to follow through impeccably. As with marketers, successful sellers also create positive moments of truth, even if they are not hired, by representing the firm well.

Marketing and sales overlap slightly, and depend on each other, but they are distinctly different.

Can I expect a marketer to generate new business leads?

Some marketers are skilled in “sales,” but most are not. Selling requires a unique skill set—some marketing professionals possess it and some do not—just the same as accounting or legal professionals.

All marketers should be able to identify ideal prospects and introduce them to the capabilities of the firm. Many marketers are adept at coaching partners/team members on conducting sales calls and critiquing sales techniques. Some marketers can handle sales calls personally, but most don’t want to do this full time—it usually isn’t their core competency or deepest desire.

If you want a person to focus on delivering qualified leads to you, closing the leads, or teaching you how to close the leads, you will probably want a sales professional instead of or in addition to a marketer.

Many firms hire both marketing and sales professionals.

How should sales and marketing functions be aligned?

If you hire both a marketing professional and a sales professional, involve the first hire in the process of selecting the second. Structuring them as laterals works best.

Though effective salespersons often to receive higher overall compensation (base plus commissions), don’t assume you must structure according to pay level. One reason to avoid positioning the sales person over marketing (aside from the difference in skill sets) is that the sales person should not be spending time managing the marketing function—s/he should dedicate full-time to securing new business.

Partners tend to get very excited about the rapid bottom-line impact a salesperson promises and they sometimes glamorize this position. Be careful not to alienate an existing marketer in the process of bringing in a salesperson.

Recognize that rather than contributing to bottom-line profits overnight, the marketing professional’s initiatives usually take 18 months or more to affect revenues. In the meantime, whether there is a salesperson or not, marketers can receive intense and undue pressure from partners to justify their presence in the firm.

Since the sales and marketing functions rely heavily on each other, it is critical to cultivate a strong rapport between the two. Discourage an adversarial or competitive atmosphere; do everything you can to create a team.

An effective way to align the roles could be to provide a split incentive for new business generated by the team. Since the sales person is probably a commission arrangement, perhaps the marketer could receive a 1/2 percent for their involvement in the sale. This arrangement creates a cooperative team.

Even at the height of success, marketers can rarely take sole credit for specific sales (and seldom bear sole blame for non-sales) because others are involved in the sales process. Be sensitive to this and factor it in when measuring the marketer’s performance.

What does a marketing person do?

Marketers do all kinds of interesting things, but their job descriptions vary substantially by level and by firm. Job titles alone are insufficient for gauging the skill level of a marketer.

Here's a general guideline of duties by level:

Chief Marketing Officer

A key member of the firm’s management group, may become a partner
Lead creation of firm’s vision & strategic plan
Ensure all marketing initiatives are in line with vision/plans
Secure all resources necessary to achieve vision/plans
Account for and present results
Strong community presence
May consult with firm’s clients (yes, chargeable)
Facilitate retreats and meetings
Orchestrate internal and external communication
Oversee all functions below

Marketing Director

Assist with strategic planning
Create industry specific or service specific marketing plans
Provide/outsource team member training
Perform/outsource market research, summarize findings
Handle/outsource advertising and PR: plan, launch, evaluate campaigns
Develop proposal strategy, pricing issues, etc.
Edit collateral materials, supervise/outsource design
Client satisfaction program: audit or interview clients, evaluate quality of all “points of contact”
Develop/outsource surveys, interpret findings
May consult with firm’s clients (billable services)
Oversee all functions below

Marketing Manager

Write/edit copy (may even ghost write articles for technical persons)
Guide industry or service teams
Prepare/monitor marketing budgets, foresee problems
Draft and edit proposals
Place articles and advertisements
Implement client surveys and resulting action plans
Oversee all functions below

Marketing Coordinator

Research and draft copy
Support industry or service teams
Desktop publishing
Proposal preparation and tracking
Database creation, reporting
Event planning: facilities, materials coordination
Internal newsletters
Web maintenance

Marketing Assistant

Distribute press-releases
Some desk-top publishing
Finishing touches to proposals (production and bindery)
Execute mailings
Database maintenance
Tabulate survey results
Event planning: RSVPs, name badges, other details

Marketing is complex and different initiatives require very different skill sets.

No single person is an expert in every aspect of marketing. This should be expected and understood by partners, and not held against the marketer. One person can certainly do (or oversee) many of these things but, if you have a fairly high-level person, be certain that he or she has authority to obtain additional resources (temporary or permanent) when needed.

It's highly likely that every marketer will need to outsource some projects, at one time or another, to round out his or her talents; especially if your marketer is a lone soldier in your firm. Outsourcing is an efficient way to maximize your solo marketer.

If you have a diverse marketer who can do most everything listed above, count yourself lucky and appreciate your marketer even more!

How can I tell if our firm needs an in-house marketing person?

Marketing has been formalized in some CPA firms for upwards of 20 years.

Those early experiences weren't all good ones for the firms or the ground-breaking marketers brave enough to step into firms never before exposed to marketing.

Yet it's still far too often that I hear horror stories about “the marketing person we used to have.” Partners still say, “We had a marketer and it just didn’t work,” or “We didn’t get any results after a whole year!” They sometimes confess they weren’t sure what the marketer was supposed to do and that there has been no formal marketing plan or budget.

This is the fault of the firm, not the marketer!

Marketers can only succeed to the degree that the partners and firm dynamics enable them. Partners often squelch their own marketing success and usually don’t even realize it. Marketing on the fly (without distinct intentions and goals) is not much more effective with a marketing person than without it.

The key to increasing results when adding a marketer is to be committed to planning, hiring the right person for the level of sophistication of your plan, and allocating the budget to support the plan—in advance…not on a piecemeal basis.

If you want your marketing to choke, just skip the above steps. Hiring the RIGHT person is critical.

Firms will bring in somebody with heavy desktop publishing skills and become annoyed the person doesn’t go out and find leads. This is sort of misalignment between expectations and skill sets is something that we see ALL THE TIME.

Don't make this common mistake. Your firm is only ready to employ a marketer if your firm understands the differences in levels of skill and what your marketer should be expected to achieve—and if your firm is willing and able to support the marketing function properly.

To guarantee a successful experience, your firm must be committed to each of these:

provide a clear job description, including mutually agreed-upon evaluation criteria
seek the best level and fit for your firm
make sure your marketer reports to the right person (seldom is this a “committee”)
provide guidance, direction and prompt feedback regarding proposed initiatives
unfailingly support your marketing person and your marketing plan through the stages of acceptance and culture change (resolve any disagreements privately)
require everyone’s participation in marketing activities and compensate accordingly
undergo formalized training programs for all professionals
budget at least 3-5% of gross revenues (3% for maint. level, and 5% or more if you're serious about growth) for funding your marketing initiatives (not counting marketing salaries/consulting fees)
hire and allocate appropriate support personnel for the marketer

These elements ensure an experience with minimum frustration and maximum results. Anything less spells trouble.

Be realistic about who you are and what you will and will not do. Know what you want, and be committed to participating in marketing initiatives—the marketer will not be able to market in lieu of you.

What level of “marketer” does my firm need?

A match between skill sets of the marketer and agreed-upon expectations of the firm is imperative. Polling comparably sized firms and firms whose success you admire might be a good idea to get a sense of the number and level of their marketing personnel.

Of course, firm culture is a huge factor behind success or lack thereof—a more progressive firm will need more, and higher-level, marketers. A firm with politics that limit a strategic go-getter ought to find a more task oriented person.

A cost-effective solution for a firm starting a formal marketing process is to outsource the strategic and other high-level marketing functions, while providing the support to carry out resulting initiatives from within the firm.

Officer/Director

Some firms simply don’t need of a full-time Chief Marketing Officer or even a Marketing Director; this doesn’t mean the firm isn’t healthy or growing. First, this level of expertise does not come cheaply. The salary is just the beginning.

A seasoned marketer will expect to launch and/or oversee a full-fledged marketing program. The marketer, by the act of the firm hiring him or her, should be safe in assuming that the firm is committed to moving forward aggressively and willing to monetarily support such a plan.

Beyond the marketer’s salary, the firm should expect to establish a minimum marketing budget of at least 2-3% of gross revenue. When firms hire a high-level marketer and subsequently realize they are not prepared to act upon the marketer’s recommendations, the under-utilized director becomes discouraged and leaves. Such an experience can leave a firm with a bad perception of marketing in general. But the firm is at fault for misleading themselves and the person they hired.

Manager

A Marketing Manager will be a good fit for a firm that wants to give the marketer a good amount of authority and autonomy, and will respect the Manager’s budgetary, personnel, and procedural recommendations. A firm that won’t micromanage their marketer will be pleased with a manager-level hire.

Coordinator/Assistant

Most firms with 30 or more people need, at minimum, a Marketing Coordinator or Marketing Assistant. A Coordinator will be somewhat proactive in making suggestions and recommendations to the partners and practice groups of a firm, and will meet deadlines without being reminded. A Marketing Assistant will be mostly "responsive" to partners' direction and requests and will need guidance with regard to prioritization and should not be relied upon to make recommendations about the firm’s marketing plans. If you have an Assistant who is on top of projects, has many new ideas, and adds value to the firm’s programs, he or she needs a promotion—this person is a Coordinator!

To whom should the marketer report?

Your marketer should report to the managing partner or the most influential partner. The role of the person to whom the marketing person reports is important to the success or failure of the marketer and greatly impacts the results the marketing department can produce. The partner should have the ultimate authority to be able to solely approve or decline any particular initiative.

This is what an effective partner will be able to accomplish:

Successfully influence the other owners to support important ideas for the firm’s progress
Be able to, when the other partners undermine or fail to cooperate with initiatives, stand firm that the behavior is inappropriate and sabotages the firm’s progress
Convince partners to realize when they are blaming marketing for failure when in fact they should be blaming themselves (such as failing to make decisions, approve plans/budgets, or cooperate timely when initiatives require their involvement to stay on schedule).

If the person to whom the marketer reports cannot do these things—if politics are such that no one can—then you can expect to burn through marketers every three years or so because your environment is too hostile for them to thrive or succeed.

I'll talk below about what a huge problem this is in the accounting industry.

When can we expect to see marketing results?

Marketing takes time. Influencing the public and building a reputation can occur more quickly now than ever before, but still isn't achieved overnight. Remember, it takes a lot longer to convince people you are good than to convince them you are not.

The marketing professional’s initiatives usually take a minimum of 18-24 months to affect revenues. Most initiatives take two to three years to reap results. Be patient and don’t go “back to the drawing board” for a new marketing plan, or a new marketer, too soon.

Marketers in CPA firms are often under pressure by partners to constantly justify their existence. Yet their success hinges significantly (see above) on partner support and participation—frequently inadequate.

Frustration mounts quickly on both sides: on the partner side when results aren't promptly visible, and on the marketer's side when partners fail to plan, support (monetarily or philosophically, or both) and implement appropriate initiatives.

[Warning: old stats. But they haven't changed much.] According to Association for Accounting Marketing’s (AAM) 2004 Member Survey, only 49% of responding marketers have been with their current firms for over 3 years. 56% of the marketers indicate they are not their firm’s first marketer.

Fallout of marketers across all professions is far too high and the benefits a firm should reap from longevity—consistency in applied marketing techniques—suffers.

What you can do to make your marketing program successful:

Work with the marketer to determine the best ways to measure the ROI (return on investment) of marketing initiatives so you can help to position your marketer for success in the early years.
Guide your marketer to tackle some high-visibility projects early on, even if the projects aren’t the highest-priority goals of the firm. This will help satisfy impatient partners allowing the marketer to focus on building infrastructure to achieve the firm’s long-term goals.
Managing partner should promote the less tangible results of marketing such as increased morale, feelings of progress, improved community recognition, etc.
Be sensitive to pressures the firm puts upon the marketer for rapid results.
Read the sections above and take heed.

The keys are to work with your marketer and to be a part of your own marketing plan.

How might marketing’s “cultural changes” affect my firm?

No matter what the firm’s size, certain changes will begin to occur when a firm implements a defined and structured approach approach to marketing. With an experienced marketer’s influence, some of the things a firm might expect to see are:

Increased information sharing among partners and team members.
A feeling of unified direction, giving everyone confidence in the firm’s future.
More confidence in communication skills and marketing abilities
Improved accountability for customer service and managing expectations
A more loyal and higher-quality client base.
A change in people's obession with being today's work versus tomorrow's opportunities.

Slowly but surely, let people see how their roles in developing business and that marketing in general is an essential skill set—not just for the firm's benefit, but also for each professional's career and future success.

Trusted Advisors Don't "Surprise Bill" if They Want to Stay Trusted Advisors

2012-09-05T11:54:03-05:00

Just had an interesting experience with my daughter and my "very highly trusted" dentist.

My phrase is in quotes because CPAs and lawyers frequently tell me their clients don't mind their surprise after-the-fact hourly bills because their "clients trust them." I'm sure they do. Just like I have always trusted my dentist.

I've trusted my dentist because a) he's a really good guy, b) his office staff is nice, and c) he has always priced me fairly. Sound familiar?

He's not the cheapest in town, but he's reasonable, especially in light of my being a private-pay patient whereas other dentists sometimes charge inflated (as they would for insurance) prices even for private pays.

This recent experience has caused my past unquestioned level of trust to shift to a more skeptical trust. It's because I was surprised with a post-treatment bill that was about 50% higher than I thought the visit was worth.

I don't want this to be seen as one of those gripey, sour-grapes posts. Rather, I want to illustrate how someone whose bill I've never, ever questioned became someone whose prices I will now inquire about in advance—how someone who hasn't been a price-sensitive buyer, is now going to behave like one.

The dental appointment was for a non-emergency—my daughter's baby tooth, loose for a couple months, was still not coming out. I inquired whether it was something they needed to check out and they said to come on in, they'd take a look...

I trusted them to advise us well so I didn't ask obvious questions like, "is there any reason we can't just let nature take its course?" and, once she was in the chair, they rapidly took action to remove the baby tooth. They numbed her and she wiggled her own tooth out.

Presented with the sizable bill at the end, I had that awful, awkward feeling you have when you know that if you'd had alternatives, you would have chosen one. In other words: trapped. I had to write a check for something I'm pretty sure I would not have bought if I'd had the price in advance.

As a result, my dentist has lost some of my trust. Not enough to make me switch today. But enough that I will now be asking how much things will cost before I commit. And they'll probably begin to view me as one of those annoying fee-sensitive clients.

And the irony is that this check was the smallest one I've ever written to them.

At the root of the problem (sorry, couldn't resist) is that I disagreed about the "worth" and I had reason to question the "need."

A simple conversation with me before proceeding would have prevented my shift from very trusting to skeptical. Discussion could have clarified need, created context for me and my daughter (risk, comfort, peace of mind, convenience), and solidified the worth to me of his price. Or it would have given me the ability to choose: "not today...let's give it a week or two and we might be back."

CPAs and lawyers, it's the same for you! Just because clients seem to trust you even though you've surprise billed them in the past, it can all change on a dime.

Have you ever quickly jumped in and fixed a problem, and then decided to bill your client later for the fix, confident it'll be obvious to them it was worth it? Don't be so sure. It's pretty high-risk behavior.

Think: what's the right thing to do here?

Buyers deserve control of their purchases. Very key is that we, as buyers, also need context to gain a sense of true value—to decide "is it worth $x?" My daughter's visit might have been worth even more than they charged if they'd discussed it with me. But that's not what happened. I felt held captive. And underinformed.

A really awesome example of context is found in this little story "What a Dead Squirrel Taught Me About Premium Pricing" from Fast Company today. (Paying $125 sounds awfully good next to $20K, or next to not using your beloved porch.)

Keep the trust high. Provide information. Provide context. Provide choice. Giving the gifts of personal control and sense of worth to your buyers will keep them trusting you forever.

(Image courtesy of waldenpond on flickr. And hat tip to Chris Farmand for the dead-squirrel story)

Reaching Gen Y: How DIY, Web Research & Social Media Factor In

2012-08-18T11:43:30-05:00

I found this article about Gen Y and financial planning (and social media and web research) pretty interesting: "Firms Must Embrace Social Media to Reach Gen Y."

I don't know that I agree that financial advisory firms (or other businesses) MUST embrace social media, per se, to reach Gen Y. But it's a wise approach for exposure since social media dramatically increases your ability to be found online, and Gen Y peeps most definitely turn to the web to find ideas and solutions. And as the article's author Hannah Wu points out, the ability to communicate with your advisors using alternative channels can be perceived as an added benefit.

I think my friends (and past clients) Michael Goodman and Annette Clearwaters, when they co-founded Clarity a few years ago, created a brilliant approach with their DIY-and-as-needed-assist approach geared for exactly the folks Hannah describes. Check out their Glossary, for instance. For beginning investors, the ability to quickly define terms that are new to them is extra comforting.

Annette worked with Michael in his wealth-management practice Wealthstream Advisors which, like most financial-advisory practices, serves people of high-net worth and has higher investment miminums than most people who are starting out will have. Wanting to also help beginning investors who aren't a match for Wealthstream (yet) and both understanding and appreciating the DIY approach that Hannah describes, they launched Clarity.

How helpful might a DIY or start-with-research person find your website or blog?

Back to Hannah's article, using social-media channels to get the word out about financial-advisory (or any other) services is beneficial, but the bigger issue is making sure the service offerings are matched to the people who use a given channel.

High-net-worth Boomers are definitely online, but they tend to run in different web circles than Gen Y, wealthy or not. Boomers are on Facebook to see pics of their grandkids and reconnect with their childhood and college friends. Gen Y are also on Facebook, but Tweet a lot as well. Boomers and Gen X are on LinkedIn, Gen Y not so much.

Facebook has amazing advertising potential when you know the demographics (education level, career, social, political, geographical) of your audience. LinkedIn, too. Twitter is not so great for isolating any group, but has massive viral power. LinkedIn is sort of in the middle.

Where do you start?

Most important is to simply be online at all. Then, to be most effective:

Make sure your service offerings are described very clearly so people can easily tell when they are a fit with you, and you with them.
Help people know what your culture is and isn't. If you or your firm come across snooty, too formal, or jargony, you'd probably alienate or intimidate more down-to-earth types or less sophisticated investors. This isn't just an age thing, maybe you're in a rural community. Or a beach community. Can someone tell if it's okay to meet with you in jeans or shorts? Scrutinize everything you convey—visually and verbally—with your eyes wide open to all possible external perceptions. Country-club fonts and stock photos of crisp white shirts with gold cuff-links? Will this resonate with the clientele you seek? Would it put them off?
Find the places where your target buyers are already hanging out and become more visible in a helpful, friendly way, not a self-promoting way.

Be found, be relevant

If you want people to trust your financial advice, they have to feel comfortable with you. Not intimidated, not overwhelmed, not underwhelmed. Conveying confidence without arrogance, and listening thoughtfully and respectfully are as important online as offline.

Marketing by Teaching

2012-08-13T10:10:11-05:00

Since 2005 (for years and years) I've raved about the effectiveness and amazing coolness of sharing your intellectual capital in order to build business.

It's still one of the most effective and affordable means of marketing out there for professional firms. Today I came upon a recent(ish) post on Mack Collier's blog called "5 Reasons Why You Need to Stop Marketing and Start Teaching." Couldn't agree more.

To take Mack's post a step further, there are a handful of problems or missed considerations I see in execution, or things that I am asked about when professionals want to know how to get started. Here goes:

Let go of the fear of sharing. This is a tough one for CPAs and lawyers. You can't get away with semi-sharing. Hinting that you know something doesn't gain you any cred. Gotta demonstrate it. "Giving it away" isn't going to hurt you and the best business developers have always been the most generous ones. I implore you to watch Jason Fried's video at the bottom of Mack Collier's post. Even if you watch only the first 5 minutes...
Know who you're teaching. You cannot overthink when it comes to defining your ideal audience. What you share is going to depend on whose interest you want to catch and hold. If you don't know who your buyers and referrers really are or what they care about, you'll miss the mark. I go into how to define your audience deeply in my book.
Engage with others who create content that relates to yours. One of the best ways to build an audience is to interact with others who have similar interests. Engaging is another word for building relationships. Compare this to referral-source marketing. It's critically important.
Don't talk down. This ties in to "know who you're teaching." Good teaching involves clarity and simplicity, but this doesn't mean that you should assume that your audience knows nothing at all. Just be really careful to keep the level appropriate to your readers. I see too many firms err on the side of dumbing it down. Better to err on the side of too-high-level content.
Jealousy of the "teachers" among colleagues is dumb. Stop it. Rock stars are good for everyone associated with the record label, right? Your company is the label. Your other people are the emerging artists and your rock stars bring attention to you all.
Don't be pitchy. You don't see Emeril blatently hawking his cookware on his cooking show. But he might be using it. Subtlety, people. Nuff said.

Stop Billing and Ducking, Start Pricing With Options

2012-06-08T18:39:15-05:00

"Bill and duck" is a term I coined a few years ago.

In the case of CPA firms, billing and ducking is the process of proposing a price (as with an audit), and later billing an extra amount that the client didn't preapprove. The "bill and duck" practice is acting on a temptation to capture result of scope creep combined with a lack of communication.

The scope creep can take a couple forms. Either the original (usually time-based) budget for the work was higher than the price a firm proposed (to get in the door, the firm reduced their price to some amount below budget—probably a number close to the prior-year auditor's fee), or else "other issues arose."

Most commonly, these "other issues" are pinned on the client for not being ready when the job starts. And further blamed on "staff not telling partners before proceeding with the work." (These are actually both the firm's fault, which I discuss in "Retraining Clients When You've Taught Them to Abuse You.")

Billing and ducking is just ugly. So are write-offs. There are better ways.

When a firm wants to get in the door, a low price will often do it. But do yourself a favor and make sure of two things:

Scope better. Be very, very, very, very clear about the scope of work—both with the client and with your team.
Offer options. By offering options, you can show your lowest (walk-away) price, but you can also move most buyers up.

The scope needs to be the specific definition of what is included your work at each price. And even what isn't.

The typical hours budget is internal and inadequate for scoping. What we're looking for in pricing is scope definition that matters to the buyer. The generic "scope" or "approach" section found in most firm's proposals is so canned and vague that it is usually inadequate. Clarity is important, and by presenting options side by side, buyers can easily see what is not part of your lower prices.

This perspective was challenged in a post on Accounting Today written by Edwin Kliegman called "Value Billing versus Low-balling Your Competitors." In it, he refers to an example in a prior article I was quoted in called "What Price is Right?"

In the context of what I've written above about better scoping and offering options, I'm sharing a clarification of the example mentioned in the "What Price is Right?" piece. It expands on detail that space didn't permit in the article. I also posted this as a comment to Mr Kliegman's piece:

My point in the article is that firms are presently just proposing (for example) a $19K fee knowing that, internally, their budget for the audit will be $24K. They are presently low-balling and fully intend to do the $24K (or more) of work. Or worse, they are bidding the work at $19K to get in the door, and then later turning around and billing the client extra for scope creep (partners often say they don't even know about it until they see it on the WIP).

This happens more often than not. I call this "billing and ducking," which significantly destroys your client's trust in you (even when they do pay the surprise bill) and, in many cases, is downright unethical because clients should approve the work before it's done or not be billed for it.

Instead of the firm going in knowing they will be losing money on that work, or practicing a bill-and-duck method of attempted cost recovery, what I am recommending is that firms more wisely scope and price their work--to not take a loss, yet still be able to offer an in-the-door price.

When stripping out value from the original scope (in other words, create an economy-class offering), the firm can prevent a loss on the low-cost work. Value stripped might not even mean less auditing, it might be the timing or the method of payment (pay in advance, for instance, and receive the lower fee).

The firm, side by side with that, can also offer other options. The original scope and terms might become the midrange option, and a premium option might be added as well.

I assure you, clients never "laugh their heads off" at choices. They like them. It puts them in control which is right where they belong. Further, it changes your conversation with them from "will I do business with XYZ firm?" to "how will I do business with XYZ firm?"

And behavioral economics shows that people tend to go with the middle option or up. That's why three options are better than two.

As an aside, in my comment on Edwin's article, I also clarified two other common misunderstandings that I observed reflected in the articles. One is the difference between a "fixed price" and a "value-based price." The other is the use of the term "value billing" which needs to cease because there's no such thing. Here's why:

It's important to note that none of this approach is "value pricing" at all. It's merely "fixed pricing."

Fixed pricing is when you commit to a certain price for a certain scope of work. A "value price" is never based on the seller's inputs that include time, efforts, or costs.

Value prices are based on the tangible and intangible results or outcomes for the buyer, and should only be employed when the buyer agrees that the worth is there for them to pay that price and when the seller agrees that the worth is there for them to do the promised work.

Lastly, some consider this semantics, but we (at VeraSage Institute) never call it "value billing" because billing is done in arrears whereas "pricing" always occurs in advance and is quite intentional.

We believe these definitions provide important distinctions that are helpful in clarifying the obvious confusion surrounding pricing practices.

CPAs in Vegas? You Know You SO Want to Go...

2012-04-18T17:57:16-05:00

OK, tax season is over. You need to rejuvenate!

Sun, fun, and...a solid week of fabulous mind-numbing, practice growth and betterment knowledge, all in ONE PLACE.

In June.

In Vegas.

The registration for rare, public VeraSage (VS) events—June 13-14—is now open!

(Our event is immediately following AICPA's PSTECH+ and AAM conference)

There's a free Meet VeraSage 2012 event on Wed, Jun 13. (Sponsored in part by Avalara!)

And then, a full day of learning on Thurs, Jun 14. VeraSage Vegas is not free, but we guarantee value greater than your investment! Would VeraSage do anything less? Heck, no!

Learn more at this summary explaining what VS is doing and why, and if you want an audio summary of the event, I talked with Ed Kless about it last Friday on this brief podcast (Item #2 at this link).

If you're coming for the AICPA/AAM thing, stay for VeraSage Institute's intimate, public events!

And if you weren't already coming to the AICPA/AAM events, arrive a few days before VeraSage and catch me, Ron Baker, and SO many others, at their huge event, as well. After you register for either or both VeraSage events, you'll receive a discount code good for $$ off the AICPA/AAM show!

You already knew about the AICPA's combined Practitioner's Symposium and Technology + Conference, right? And now they've combined it with the Association for Accounting Marketing Conference. You can get those three great shows—practice management, technology and marketing—for ONE price.

Then round out the week nicely with a day and a half with VeraSage, learning how to price your knowledge, keep your firm highly profitable doing so, and manage your firm in a non-timesheet enviroment.

The future is here. Meet 20+ firms who are doing it.

See ya there, and bring your swimwear. The pools and spa at the Aria are FABULOUS!