Retour
 
 
 
 

The CTRL Group, one difference at a time

10 janvier 2024 00:02

The CTRL Group, one difference at a time

January 10th 2024

centraide-2023-(pas-resume).png
pixel
pixel

The CTRL group is proud to donate a record $12,478 to the Centraide 2023 campaign, 6% more than the amount raised in 2022.

We would also like to thank all our employees, who have been helping the Centraide Québec et Chaudière-Appalaches cause for over ten years now.

To find out more about the cause, or to make a donation, visit the Centraide Québec and Chaudière-Appalaches website.

Catégorie : Tous
Lire la suite

 

Counteract Fraud: Transactional Rigour and Financial Information Rectitude

26 août 2021 00:02

Counteract Fraud: Transactional Rigour and Financial Information Rectitude

pixel
Financial Information Rectitude
pixel

Who hasn't heard of fraud in recent years? The regulatory weaknesses of the stock exchange system combined with the creativity of the financiers of large listed companies have given rise to sad awakenings for small investors.

Like any organization that processes a large flow of information and money every day, unfortunately, not every business is immune to fraud.

How to better protect ourselves against this crime? In this article, I will limit myself to the protection that well-designed management software can give you against internal fraud. Indeed, your management software can play a strategic role against fraud in two ways:

  • By its transactional rigour, it ensures the correctness of your financial information through appropriate validations at the source of information, therefore, upstream of its creation.
  • By its control functions, it can establish periodic management validation points. In other words, downstream of the financial information created.

Indeed, there is a direct link between the degree of the rectitude of your financial information and the degree of exposure to fraud. So your software's ability to prove that your financial information is correct and that it truly matches your business depends entirely on its thoroughness in creating and manipulating financial data.

Management software that is said to be robust in terms of financial reporting should respect, for example, the basic concepts of GAAP (generally accepted accounting principles) defined by the CICA (Canadian Institute of Chartered Accountants). I leave it to the accountants to explain to you how these principles work to increase the rigour of your financial operations. But, to put you here, here's a typical situation that is not allowed under GAAP:

It is not allowed to destroy or modify an accounting entry (e.g., an invoice) without leaving a trace. Thus, any change entry must first be reversed (that is, reversed by posting a reverse entry) and then posted again.

I chose this example because it is a principle frequently bypassed by software on the pretext that we must simplify the user's task.

Indeed, destroying an entry directly instead of reversing it and then recording a new one is much simpler. It is also true that directly modifying a client's receivable balance on their record without adjusting the journal entry is also much easier.

However, doing this significantly reduces the degree of correctness of financial reporting that you are entitled to demand from a management software. In fact, it is the door open to fraud; If an entry is not traceable (Who? What? When?), it becomes challenging, if not impossible, to trace the source of inconsistency, which most of the time appears a few months later in your financial statements or at the end of your fiscal year.

Consequently, the transactional rigour of your management software should not be seen as an irritant but rather as a protection against the degradation of the quality of your financial information and the risks of fraud.

Regarding the control functions of your management software, it is strongly recommended, as a manager, to maintain some degree of control over the financial information that circulates there. And this is done through periodic validations. Obviously, what each manager can invest in time and effort depends on the size of their company, the time they have available and their interest in financial matters. If you cannot do periodic validations yourself, at least monthly, I suggest that you delegate this task to an accounting specialist, for example.

In concrete terms, does your computerized management solution allow you to perform simple and rapid checks periodically? Here are some examples of features to look for:

  • A function that allows you to check whether there is a perfect match between the content of your schedule and your billing for a given day or period. This task can be completed quickly, and any anomalies found should allow you to spot a questionable case immediately.
  • An integrated accounting module. The simple function of "bank reconciliation" becomes a very effective weapon to detect any inconsistency between billing and accounting (payment) receipts. The "full integration" aspect between the invoicing and accounting sides of your solution is a crucial element. Because there is an automatic accounting entry and not a manual entry (two different software), bank reconciliation acts effectively as a means of control.

Of course, the subject could be explored further. However, in conclusion, I remind you of two fundamental principles:

  • With your current software, can your staff destroy or modify an accounting transaction without leaving a trace? Yes. The risk of you being the victim of fraud is higher.
  • Do you personally validate specific key management indicators on a monthly basis? No. You are more exposed to unpleasant surprises in the medium term.

We can undoubtedly say that CTRL management solutions are among the most rigorous and efficient information management regarding the legal criteria of confidentiality, authenticity, inalterability, and traceability. To learn more on the subject or discover the protection our CTRL management solution offers you, do not hesitate to contact a CTRL advisor.

Catégorie : Tous
Lire la suite

 

Choosing a Management Software: Simplicity or Flexibility?

19 août 2021 00:02

Choosing a Management Software: Simplicity or Flexibility?

pixel
Management Software | CTRL
pixel

For a manager, the process of analyzing and selecting a management software is no simple task. This is even more true if you are not already computerized. It is hard to choose between the simplicity of use of the software and its flexibility, i.e., its ability to adapt to different, constantly changing needs. Unfortunately, the second criterion is often rejected much too quickly.

Obviously, if you intend to acquire management software, you can rely on the opinion of a colleague who has already computerized his operation to make your choice. This approach is not wrong if the colleague you ask has been using the software for a long time and is still satisfied in terms of the latest management needs of the company.

On the other hand, if you wish to use a systematic approach, the issue of ease of learning versus the flexibility of the software has to be faced.

If the software has to actually be as simple as possible to use—just how simple is that? Einstein said: “Everything must be as simple as possible but not one bit simpler.” In other words, you must distinguish “simple” from “simplistic.”

In fact, the concept of simplicity is much more subtle than might appear at first glance. Concretely, it may sometimes hide inadequacies and shortcomings in the software. That is why it is a decisive element in the selection process. In fact, it is very likely that once informed of the limits of a management software package, you may well decide not to buy it, even if it is the simplest one on the market. It is normal that you would want to get the maximum from your investment in the short and long terms as a buyer!

In the area of computerized management, simplicity is a quality that must be taken into consideration because it plays a strategic role during the start-up period. Most likely, in the first few months, you mainly want to become familiar with your new tool and satisfy the basic management needs of your business, such as billing.

However, management expectations and needs evolve enormously during the first year that you use such systems. And, after a year, you will have mastered this new platform and will want to define new objectives to achieve. At this stage, the depth of management of the selected software will make it a high-performance, stimulating tool. Its flexibility is thus the best guarantee of its capacity to evolve with your company, i.e., adapt to management needs that appear gradually in a normal computerization process.

If the simplicity of your software has hidden weaknesses in its operation or the ergonomics of its interface, you will quickly find yourself forced to either limit the development of your business or change your software, two prospects that you want to avoid.

In conclusion, while simplicity plays a key role in learning how to use computer systems, make sure that you have a long-term view in selecting software by also evaluating its capacity to keep up with or even promote the future development of your practice.

As in lasting personal relationships, the dating period is much shorter than the time you spend living together. It’s better to make the right choice from the start! Do not hesitate to contact a CTRL advisor if you wish to be supported in your selection process to obtain the ERP management solution that suits your needs, your budget, and your reality.

Catégorie : Tous
Lire la suite

 

Reinventing Ourselves to Last!

8 octobre 2020 00:02

Reinventing Ourselves to Last!

pixel
Reinventing Ourselves to Last
pixel
pixel

The current global pandemic is disrupting our social, economic, and personal environment. I am proposing to you today a reflection that aims to support your managerial approach in this imposed step back.

First, the diversity of economic activities and the intrinsic nature of each industry results in variations in the goals that each company can set for itself during this turbulent period. Far be it from me to think the vision I share with you is a panacea for everyone’s challenges.

We first find two business situations quite polarized in the current economic context:

• Those whose priority is to guarantee the viability and sustainability of the company
• Those who are to take maximum advantage of the opportunities that emerge in their sector

Two diametrically opposed positions; a “Survival” situation and a “Growth” situation.

I will not dwell on the so-called “growth” management contexts as it is clear that their commercial offer, their methods and ways of doing things respond favourably to the constraints and specificities of the current economic context in their sector of activity. We need only think of companies such as Amazon and Netflix that already had all the ingredients to take advantage of the current situation, or even of Shopify, which was just waiting for the spark to explode.

Let us focus instead on all the companies that find themselves in a management vacuum, in the unknown and ambiguity, that force them to reinvent themselves in the face of a new business environment.

The term “forced” takes on all its significance in the fact that “whether or not they like it”, these companies struggle with complex reflections on significant adjustments to their way of working, adjustments intended for some of them to guarantee their viability for the coming months or years.

If your business is in this situation, let’s try to see how to optimize a strong comeback, how to develop the best possible strategies and action plans based on a few work streams.

Inhale…Exhale…

My first intervention is to raise a flag on the trap of short-term decision-making hyperactivity. Although some business situations currently require quick and possibly drastic actions, I suggest controlled breathing—at least good and deep breathing before making any short-term decisions.

If needed, create management space by temporarily reducing your operating costs to give yourself leeway, the time required, for a quality reflection.

A successful entrepreneur is often the one who quickly knows how to take advantage of opportunities. He has a personality and an “opportunistic” profile by default. Let’s say that the reflex of “let’s act, and we’ll cross that bridge when we come to it” is not uncommon for the entrepreneur who loves action and who is passionate about their business.

A profile that is definitely a “plus” for starting and developing your business, but which can be a “minus” when the decision-making context becomes more ambiguous and complex, as the current situation may become.

If the pandemic sufficiently shakes up the parameters of your business environment to the point of introducing or even imposing a so-called paradigm change, your company’s sustainability and growth may no longer depend on your strategies, processes, and historical operational structures.

And if so, it is unlikely that a 15-minute action plan on the napkin of a restaurant will be optimal and that it contains all the key ingredients of a 180-degree turn necessary for your future success. I have not found the source of this management expression, which has always been of great relevance to me:

“If you don’t know why everything works well when everything is going well, you cannot understand what goes wrong when everything is wrong. The motto “Know thyself” immortalized by Socrates is a premise of success that also applies to business management.

If your business historical evolution has never forced you to deepen and master the key dynamics in your organization, the current episode is an excellent time to take stock and to start afresh on new steadier management foundations.

Paradigm Shift, Business Model Change

The “Business paradigm” or “Business model” expressions always work very well in a conference or a managerial conversation, but what are we talking about? Philosophy has studied the thing (Thomas Kuhn), but in simple business terms, we can talk about the representation of a context, of a coherent model of operation that we can associate with certain rules or technical logics intrinsic to the product and the behaviour of a target consumer.

We can then propose the notion of “business model” as composed of two aspects:

  • The commercial choices (technical characteristics and target sectors) that gave life to your offering of products and services.
  • A set of behavioural characteristics of your target buyer

The two aspects are strongly linked, of course, by a simple sacred principle of the business world, which is your aim as a business manager to constantly maximize the match between your commercial “Offering” and the “Demand” of your target customers. When people bore us to death with the notions of “paradigm shift”, “business model change”, etc., what is actually happening and what are the impacts for your business:

  1. First, probably a major change in the needs and/or purchasing behaviours of your potential buyer.
  2. Your obligation to adapt the characteristics of your offer to meet these additional needs and behaviours of your potential buyer.
  3. Your obligation to then bring down, deliver and implement, the conclusions of 1. and 2. in your ways of doing things for all the organizational poles of your company (marketing, sales, production, administration, customer services, R&D, HR, etc.) in an integrated and fluid manner.

As a specialist in your field and company, I have no doubts about your abilities and your expertise for the analysis and the conclusions required in point 2. Concerning point 3, at most, I redirect you to one of my previous posts, “Managing Resistance to Change“, which is still relevant today. Because if you are struggling with a shift to make in your business model, it is a safe bet that change management will be at the center of your concerns.

I would therefore like to draw your attention to point 1; “a possible change, even radical, in the needs and purchasing behaviours of your consumer”.

Why would you tell me how obvious it is that if my potential client’s needs change, my offer must change as well? It may be obvious for many managers, but it may also be very complex to apply.

The causal link is indeed simple and straightforward, but the issue is not to understand this semantic evidence. It is rather whether you can quickly detect a paradigm shift unfolding before your eyes to develop rapidly the action plan required next.

In times of social and economic reassessment, market upheavals can not only alter your customer’s purchasing decisions in terms of the types of products they buy (technical features) but also how they want to buy them (customer experience). It is in these two aspects that major and insidious upheavals can occur.

In the climate of uncertainty and instability of a pandemic, a competitor, new or old, takes advantage of a very fertile ground, psychologically speaking, to convince your usual target customer to change the way they meet their needs, and convince them they have found the recipe for guaranteed satisfaction.

My point here is that if your management analyzes are carried out within a usual historical framework, you may miss out on new competition on your radar. We cannot see and identify something where we are not looking, and we cannot quickly recognize and identify something that we have never seen. A new competitor may have developed a new product or a new way of doing things based on disruptive technology (“disruptive innovation”). A technology that fundamentally changes the ways of functioning, manufacturing, and delivering to consumers. It is a simple definition of disruptive technology.

The history of industrialization reminds us of this. Disruptive technologies are those that constantly change social behaviour and helps to create or dissolve sectors of economic activity. For example, the arrival of a clear first intention of a steam-powered motor vehicle around 1770 radically altered the horse-breeding and carriage-making industries.

Disruptive technologies are, therefore, historically the basis of major changes in business models and paradigms. Artificial intelligence (AI), already in our discussions since a few years, is certainly fertile ground for the emergence of the next disruptive technologies that will further profoundly change our current habits and ways of doing things.

When a competitor finds a new way to address a need in an existing market or creates a new need that replaces another, if he or she is operating in your industry, he or she may likely appear at the last minute in your rearview mirror at 200 km/h. If your business finds itself in this situation, your action plan must be quick, and the investments possibly massive.

Consequently, in the current context, your reflections must be done in a 360-degree vision of your business universe to validate all the blind spots of your current management vision to avoid unpleasant surprises.

How to Reinvent Ourselves and Evolve

My first two suggestions, therefore, can be summarized as follows:

  • Take the time to think carefully, do not rush your decisions, do not act in panic.
  • Do a 360-degree reflection on all aspects of your organization (strengths/weaknesses) and your target markets. Analyze all your possible blind spots.

What remains for me to suggest are a few working avenues to move from “what” to “how”. Here are some work streams:

  1. The marketing angle: vision and major trend

    Push the marketing envelope on the evolution of the market, by asking you a question such as “If I wanted to increase the comfort (product delivered/purchasing experience) of my target customer, under the assumption that I do not have technical or financial constraint, what would I deliver as a product and how would I deliver it to my customer?” Browse the web and do what is commonly called a onetime marketing intelligence.

    Make sure you focus on the need of your target customer and not a product. Example: You can provide lighting and power with electricity, gas, fuel oil, candle light, etc. To validate your blind spots and the possible arrival of new business models, you have to analyze the need to “light up” here, not the specific candle market.

  2. The productivity angle: ways of doing things and lean management

    Identify each critical process in your business and analyze each step of these processes to validate opportunities for improvement with new technologies available. Try to reduce the number of steps, the flexibility of each step, and the time and quality of each step.

    At a minimum, this exercise will allow you to identify the major bottlenecks in your organization and identify what is slowing you down or reducing your flexibility to adapt. What you are looking for through this analysis process is to identify improvements that can increase the “mechanical” agility of your business relative to your competition. Perhaps new disruptive technologies can completely transform your manufacturing process. For example, with the constant influx of new manageable and resilient materials, 3D printers will continue to disrupt the manufacturing processes of many manufacturing companies.

    This exercise will also allow you to identify opportunities to optimize your cost structure, which automatically makes your business more competitive by making it more profitable.

  3. The strategic angle: knowing what we want and what can be

    The previous two steps may have placed you in front of a somewhat harsh, even sometimes discouraging, picture. But rest assured, no organization is perfect, and it all comes down to the ability to implement a continuous improvement process in your business.

    That said, the key remains in defining an action plan that prioritizes actions with the greater lever for improvement (what we want), but which also aligns with actions that the company can put in place and successfully completed (what can be), its ability to move from theory to practice.

    Any project, internal improvement or other types, has its starting point A and its ending point B. Between the two is a set of resources (time, dollars, tools, methods, itinerary, etc.) placed in an integrated and well-thought-out logistic to move from A to B.

    An important trap to avoid here is to know where the most common mistake in business is.

    Regarding point A! A majority of companies design game plans based on a wrong starting point that does not correspond to the reality of their company in terms of its ability, both in expertise and time, to achieve their action plan.

    To make you grasp the indirectly apparent trap here, let’s take a caricature: you are being asked to go to Boston. Nothing complicated for you. You go by car to make two or three intermediate stops, you plan your route, you plan the money needed, you pack your bags, etc., everything is beautiful.

    Do you realize that all your preparations (your action plan) could be very wrong without a precise and fixed starting point? Driving from Montreal to Boston is one thing, but if you’re planning a trip to Vancouver before your trip to Boston, the game plan has changed!

    In short, the simplistic analogy must be seen in all the importance of fully grasping and understanding where one is starting from when tackling an organizational change project.

    Humans love to dream and plan for the future, and that’s delighting. But since it is often difficult, not instinctive, to properly evaluate ourselves, think of the adage “We don’t know what we don’t know”, it is very easy to overestimate our ability to achieve a project by underestimating our starting point.

    Sometimes, the organizational gap between the “Will” and the “Can” of a project can be large enough that its realization is almost impossible, if not unless you have colossal financial means to compensate for the gaps present.

    In short, to make a business shift, make sure you select projects that meet the organizational capabilities of your business by carefully assessing your starting point.

    As it is always a pleasure to share and discuss management with all of you, please send me your comments or suggestions for subjects that you would like me to discuss in the future.

Good management!

Catégorie : Tous
Lire la suite

 

Shift to 'Lean' Management with CTRL

13 septembre 2019 00:02

Shift to 'Lean' Management with CTRL

pixel
BanNouLEANCTRL_EN.png
pixel

Lean management, formalized in the 1990s in the United States, was first introduced in Japan through the Toyota production system (1962) for the automotive industry.

Lean philosophy is in no way synonymous with fixed mechanics; instead, it is a management approach based on simple principles aimed at increasing the productivity and quality of a business.

In recent years, several other industries adopted the concept, including the construction, health, and professional services sectors.

The migration of this philosophy to other business lines is strongly associated with three basic principles, the « Muda – Muri – Mura »:

  • Muda: Eliminating anything that is without value
  • Muri: Eliminating excess of any kind
  • Mura: Eliminating enforcement irregularities in processes


The link between the computerized management of your operations and the principles of Lean management lies in key features in your solution and your operating ERP software. First and foremost, let us delve a little deeper into each of the principles outlined above.

Muda – Eliminating Waste

The approach combines the concept of “waste” with seven so-called “classic” business management activities. This does not mean that these seven activities are automatically present in your business:

  • Transportation
  • Inventory management
  • Ergonomics of work in action
  • Waiting periods or delay in the deliverables (client or supplier)
  • Overproduction (volume of goods or services)
  • The process in its overspecialization
  • Non-quality


A progression towards Lean management will address waste as a priority and therefore seek to identify the largest source of waste for quick and efficient processing.

If this source is not already apparent to you or your organizational context is involved, then VSM – Value-Stream Mapping is an effective methodology that can support you in identifying key sources to be prioritized.

Muri – Eliminating Excess

By “excess” we can understand different management phenomena such as:

  • Oversized or overspecialized work equipment for the task at hand
  • Resources overqualified for the task at hand
  • Excessive pressure on a work schedule well beyond regular hours
  • A pace (volume, speed) of production that goes beyond the specifications of existing equipment


In the first two examples, you can see a reasonably strong link to the concept of “Muda” when you look at it from another perspective, which is the underutilization of available resources. This is a waste of the “potential” of the resources available within the company in terms of its number, capacity, and expertise.

For this reason, the notion of “underutilization of skills” sometimes appears in the “Muda” box in the literature.

Our last two examples, however, have the more distinctive features of the “Muri” in terms of negative impact on value creation.

Seemingly, working harder and producing more naturally goes hand in hand with notions like “making more revenues,” “making more profits,” or “making more clients happy.” Difficult to contradict a common sense that relies on “1+1 = 2” in the Cartesian domain.

The experienced manager knows full well that it may make sense to experience temporary work overload, to deliver a large order, for example. However, a pace substantially exceeding the company’s human and equipment capacity continuously will eventually lead to disaster.

The systematic elimination of excesses is, therefore, more of an approach based on the optimum continuous quality of the goods and services produced by the business and not on the volume it generates. So the “Muri” is an approach focused fundamentally on client satisfaction and quality. A key and strategic concept of 21st-century trade.

So, there are two types of detectable excess, but very different in terms of treatment:

  • Punctual excess that may be commercially justified but must be monitored very carefully as to remain “punctual.”
  • Systemic excess, the one that has become entrenched in our operations and our day-to-day management to become a work standard. That’s the kind of excess we’re talking about when we talk about “Muri.”


For managers who may have difficulty identifying the “bad” excesses in their business, here is a simple thought that can be raised frequently in the daily life of a business:

“Does working overtime or implementing new state-of-the-art tools always equate to “good management,” optimal management, or do you sometimes feel that overtime could have been avoided by working differently and that the new tool was not ultimately essential to the desired productivity lever?”

Humm… If the manager in you never experienced any discomfort in approving overtime over and over again, I tip my hat to you!

Here the “Muri” is therefore closely linked with the concept of proactive management versus reactive management. Another interesting topic to explore in the future.

Mura – Variability in the Application of Processes

In short, if you have eliminated waste (Muda) and excess (Muri) then… all that’s left to do is work properly.

The “Mura” therefore targets the notion of consistency in applying the right ways of doing things to control and make predictable the behavior of your management machine, your business.

Here we seek to optimize the flow and quality of the company’s goods and services for the benefit of our clients and our growth.

The complexity behind a simple concept is that, regularity in the application of methodologies, and rigorous monitoring of standards, protocols, and processes are not necessarily easy things in the context of the highly unpredictable business environment in which a company operates.

All managers are in favor of virtue, but our business environment sometimes forces us to compromise management principles in which we strongly believe.

An effective strategy to work on “Mura” is to identify processes that create the highest value in the business.

By working on the regularity of one, two, or three major company processes, you will find that the intervention and improvements made to these processes can have a substantial impact on other related secondary processes.

In the medium and long term, you will be able to measure and see an overall improvement in the whole company, the operating machine, in terms of its ability to deliver what you want, when you want, at the quality level you want.

And when your business becomes predictable, there are no limits to your growth and expansion plans.

In conclusion, when you approach a potential purchase or take a step back on your computerized management platform, it becomes imperative to ensure that this management platform can track your movement and your improvement strategy towards Lean management.

The first feature to validate will be the ability of this platform to fit into your business vision and processes, as you can work on the “Muda,” the “Muri” and the “Mura” if your business and information platform doesn’t follow… you’re going to stay in the same place.

The customization of your ERP software provider’s application platform is, therefore, key to the success of your Lean approach.

Good management!

Catégorie : Tous
Lire la suite

 

Managing Resistance to Change

4 avril 2016 00:02

Managing Resistance to Change

Everyone knows the theory, everyone knows what to do, but the subject is constantly brought to the table when deploying IT projects.

Have you ever had the impression that you were being told anything when faced with a simple prerogative in the progress of a project? That you were being served illogical comments about your structured approach? Comments that were not fundamentally focused on constructive dynamics and advancement of the project? If so, rest assured, you are not the only manager in this situation.

Our experience as ERP specialists invariably leads us to the following observation: at least 50% of the ERP project manager’s challenges comprise psychological aspects (change management), the remaining proportion addressing operational issues (processes).

The phenomenon has been known for a long time: resistance to change.

Forms of Resistance to Change

  1. Confrontation
    Represents a rejection to comply when facing change
  2. Reject
    Represents a feeling of anxiety when facing change
  3. Avoidance
    Represents a lack of motivation when facing change
  4. Feint
    Represents a pretence to commit when facing change

To properly target what we are talking about here, note that everyone may make mistakes. Seeing that you are wrong and adjusting accordingly does not make up resistance to change. It is simply current project management.

Also, it is not the aim to review the forms of resistance to change (regarding the four bullet points above) but to highlight the fundamental causes of the phenomenon.

A good understanding of the psychological dynamics related to it will allow you to define a deployment approach that reduces its impacts. The deployment of your IT projects, and your business, will only become more optimal in terms of costs and delivery times.

The Human, the Human … Still the Human

Many are convinced of the absolute superiority of the man over animals. Yet, we share significant commonalities with our friends. Let’s just think of the fear which is closely linked to the instinct for survival.

Human psychology is complex. In this regard, I invite you to read Maslow‘s famous pyramid of needs as a basic reference.

pixel
Maslow's Pyramid
pixel
pixel

To remain grounded, first let’s try to define the process of creation, of the progressive rising of resistance to change. To this end, I suggest the following reflection:

  • Every human being needs a meaning, to feel useful. It is a question of mental well-being, therefore, of survival.
  • To feel useful, to see meaning in our work, comes in large part with the feeling of competence.
  • But not knowing what to say or what to do triggers a feeling of incompetence.
  • No one can accept that they are not good, that they feel incompetent and useless for a long time.
  • The envisaged consequences of their incompetence, such as possibly losing their job or their power, generate uncertainty.
  • However, uncertainty in the face of the unknown, the new technology, the new way of doing things, generates fear.
  • Intense fear triggers defensive or aggressive behaviour.
  • A person who is afraid seeks to suppress the stimuli that cause their discomfort (question of survival).
  • The reflex becomes more instinctive and emotional than Cartesian, the reactions, the gestures then become incoherent.
  • There is then a phenomenon of acute resistance.

Take this reflection pattern and apply it to your resistance issues in ongoing projects. You are very likely to ultimately identify a “fear” component in the most problematic resources.

Fear of disappointment, fear of falling short, fear of being seen as incompetent, fear of saying we haven’t understood, fear of losing power and credibility, etc. Here is a set of reasons that can be expressed.

A person who finds himself in a situation of great uncertainty, or fear, may experience what is called a phenomenon of cognitive dissonance. It is about the behaviour of a person going against what they are expressing. For example, the fact of taking actions that contradict a thought confirmed in a project management meeting. An illogical reaction… at least in appearance.

Not all people automatically enter into a phenomenon of cognitive dissonance in a situation of great uncertainty. It depends on several factors, including the self-confidence present at the start.

But when the phenomenon appears, it is a matter of more complex situations to manage and which require more skill. It is, therefore, important to understand what is happening at the basis among the concerned stakeholders.

I suggest you relate this piece of the puzzle to the theory of the triune brain, a three-parted brain inherited from the progressive evolution of man.

pixel
The Three-Parted Brain
pixel
pixel

Contested by some scientists, this model allows me to introduce the supremacy of reaction by instinct, by emotion and not by the rational of the human being when he experiences a strong feeling of fear.

The key here is to understand that there is a hierarchy in the layer that controls the behaviour of a human being depending on the situation being experienced. For example, you are hungry, instinct will take over. You are going through great pain, no need to tell yourself to take charge and be logical, it is the limbic and the emotion that dictate your behaviour.

In short, when a person is uncertain, insecure, and afraid, it is no longer the rational, the Cartesian logic that leads. The instinct and emotion then dictate their actions and words, hence the illogical reactions sometimes perceived as a project manager.

How to take this dynamic into account in project management?

The previous theoretical explanations were necessary to support my recommendations to the project manager facing critical situations of resistance to change. Here are my suggestions:

  • Quickly realize that your main issue in the project’s course has shifted from a technical/operational aspect to a psychological one. Develop tips to rapidly detect that the path of the project has just shifted into another universe, that of emotion.

    Example: When in doubt, increase the frequency and reduce the duration of the meetings. By targeting small advances for each meeting, you will find much earlier that there is a demobilization of a person or a team if the small advances in question are not made.

  • Do not insist on dealing with an emotional situation using Cartesian method. Do not use a Gantt or Pert chart to insist on adjustments to resolve a blockage. Don’t talk about project engineering to solve a human issue.


As the main issue in a project shifts to the human side, work instead on understanding the origins of the dissonance you are measuring. Most likely there are people afraid of something. Identify these people, identify the source of their fears. Chat with them, not directly related to the progress of the project, but rather about what worries them personally and prevents them from actively taking part in a great adventure. If necessary, in more acute cases, get support from the HR department or a psychologist.

  • Your patience can be very limited during times of intense and critical project management. You can become quickly frustrated with a behaviour illogical to you. However, remain calm and collected in the tone you take with the affected stakeholders. Understand that the more you adopt an aggressive, dictatorial or very pragmatic behaviour, the more you will confirm to your interlocutor they are right to feel uncertain, to be afraid of something, something that they may not even have considered. Your goal is not to amplify a problem, but to solve it.

  • If this turns out to be possible depending on the nature and stage of the project, use the most problematic stakeholders to turn them into an operational hub, by reference, to turn them into informal leaders in your project.


The people who are the most resistant to change are usually the more expressive, the most emotional and outgoing, those who often or could be in informal leadership within their team. The reason is simple: it is their leadership or their power that can be threatened by a new technology or a new way of doing things. By giving them the chance to influence the progress of the project, by giving them relevant power, these actors often turn into a real engine of reaction that propels the project forward.

As I reiterate whenever I can, technology is a means and not a solution. The best technology in the world cannot improve your business productivity if your team has not made full use of it. In this perceptual, the key is to ensure the positive participation of all and, therefore, to deal quickly and effectively with any issue of resistance that may arise during the project.

Good management.

Catégorie : Tous
Lire la suite

 

DEPLOYMENT OF "OBJECT" SYSTEMS, SOA IN MANAGEMENT MODE

7 septembre 2015 00:02

DEPLOYMENT OF "OBJECT" SYSTEMS, SOA IN MANAGEMENT MODE

pixel
Rubik's Cube
pixel
pixel

The web and mobility multiply the operational dimensions of an ERP computerization project. Classical methodologies for deploying systems that were already producing mixed success are now facing an augmented reality, a Rubik's cube of 10 by 10 in terms of the variables to be managed.

This multiplication of variables can more than ever lead a company to significant issues if the computerization project's management is not adapted to the new operational paradigms introduced by web and mobile technologies.

It should also be remembered that this methodological adjustment must continue to be carried out within the framework of the fundamental objectives, which do not change: to meet the delivery deadlines and the planned budgets.

In light of the historical average success rate of ERP projects, it may be natural to feel closer to utopia than to paradigm shift.

In short, traditional deployment approaches must be reinvented. Otherwise, the new projects addressed in this approach will generate more isolated siled systems, which basically disintegrate a company's operations.

In the traditional context, more isolated silos are synonymous with loss of overall operating leverage. What makes the situation subtle is that on the surface, in the age of the web and mobility, the magic of aesthetic interfaces can lead one to believe otherwise and, therefore, even justify a flawed deployment strategy at the grassroots.

This is a critical issue, namely that of not going back to square one in terms of deployment methodologies under the justified cover, but to qualify, of a clientele, internal or external, conquered by more beautiful and simplified interfaces.

My last statement gave you a rational spasm? How can we be against a more satisfied clientele? The nuance: of course, always “Yes” to a more satisfied clientele, but… it is also necessary to validate at what cost.

Suppose your customer base is extremely satisfied, but your business is losing monthly. In that case, you may have to close your doors eventually. Understand that they will no longer be satisfied by your business and that they will undoubtedly find a competitor very happy to welcome them. There is only one loser in this situation: your business!

I often observe this kind of management distortion with astonishment, which practically creates a direct link between a "Satisfied clientele" and a "Profitable company" within the framework of strategic reflection.

To close this loop on customer satisfaction as the sole potential indicator of the success of an ERP project, let us conclude that it can be a decoy giving a false reading because what must be measured on the merits is the final operational lever, the overall productivity gain of the project, i.e. its measurable impact, immediate or in the long term, on the increase in the company's profitability.

This contextualization of subtle influence vectors is necessary to highlight that systems deployment approaches must now address a much higher level of complexity of resistance to change in projects. The magnitude and complexity of the "human" side are now so high that they can present an ERP project's real challenge on their own.

pixel
pixel
Service Oriented Management
pixel

To address this new complexity in a renewed system deployment approach, I, therefore, propose to adopt the technological concepts of “SOA” (Service Oriented Architecture) as global principles of a renewed implementation methodology.

It is first known that with a complex problem, it is effective to break it down into its key components and address them individually at first.

In the vision that I am proposing, understand here that it is not a question of cutting to isolate, but cutting according to three specific rules and objectives:

  • Understand the nature and functional dimensions of an operational component (role, function, task, criticality, complexity, targeted result, etc.) as part of a business process.
  • Evaluate the potential level of resistance of the stakeholders directly involved on the functional level (expectations, attitude, training, etc.)
  • Analyze and describe the communication and exchange points of the operational component with its predecessors and successors within the framework of the business processes in which it intervenes.

In this adjusted slicing approach and, more particularly, in the third objective, the parallel with the SOA approach appears.

In a simplified way, my proposal is as follows:

"Let's isolate the operational components to understand them better and reduce the functional and human complexity, but rigorously tackle from the start the question of the links and the intervention of the operational component with any business process of the company."

In other words, let's isolate to facilitate and substantially increase the probabilities of ERP deployment success but by constantly ensuring the full operational integration of the component throughout the progressive deployment of the system.

There would be several additional explanations for the mechanisms and positive natural levers of the approach I am proposing. However, I will come back to them following questions or in a future article.

What matters here is to see the suitability and similarity with the SOA approach, which is based on principles such as the following:

  • Maximum independence and autonomy of services;
  • Maximum interoperability of services;
  • Unification of inter-service exchange protocols.

The notion of "Service" of the SOA approach is ultimately simply transferred to the notion of "Operational component" of the renewed approach to systems deployment.

Therefore, the application and transfer of fundamental principles of the SOA approach to the field of ERP system implementation methodologies change the classic paradigm by applying a local working approach but always addressed in a global analytical vision of the operational component.

The classic approach targets the modelling and full support of an overall business process as the only logical objective for the project's success, even if it means forcing major operational changes in the process's components.

The main idea of ​​the newly suggested approach is to make it possible to tackle operational components in isolation without changing their nature and internal mechanisms while respecting a single fundamental rule: either to ensure standardized exchanges and communications with the other components involved in a global business process.

In terms of systems deployment, it is, therefore, a question of integrating from the outset the analysis of information exchanges, for example, between a given department and another, in the process of setting up a local tool dedicated to a given department.

One of the strategic levers for this new vision's success is that it is based on a natural phenomenon in business: the director or head of department always wishes to control the choice and deployment of a new computerized management tool in his operations. Their responsibilities dictate this way of thinking.

This manager cannot be in constant conflict with moving the company forward globally even if they wish to manage any change within their department.

When he is convinced that the new tool can improve the performance of their department, all that remains is to work on the two central aspects for each operational component (Service) involved in their department:

  • What information is required at the input of the component?
  • What information must the component provide externally (output)?

By working the global business processes targeted by an ERP project from this new methodological perspective, overall efficiency and effectiveness are constantly at the center of deployment concerns through the natural mechanism of constant validation of intercomponent exchanges' integrity.

Also, the deployment team's focus and attention tackle reduced problems on the operational and human plan, which reduces the risk of slippage and automatically increases the probability of success of the ERP project.

Good management.

Catégorie : Tous
Lire la suite

 

CRM – XRM, Back to the Future!

23 janvier 2013 00:02

CRM – XRM, Back to the Future!

pixel
BanNouNotProCTRL_EN-(1).png
pixel


During the past few years, I have had the opportunity to be invited to present the operational concepts behind CRMs (Customer Relationship Management), a conference during which I was asked to introduce the less familiar concept of XRMs (Extended Relationship Management).

It is very much intrigued that I had to answer basic questions relating to the operationalization of the tool instead of questions that focused, for example, on a vision, such as “What more could I do in the future with a CRM, what would be my next step?”.

Here are some conclusions based on these rewarding encounters, hoping that my remarks may be helpful within the framework of your current or future projects with CRMs/XRMs.

A Little History

The quest for business relationship management, as well as tools to support it, is not new. It is the extent and the importance of relationship management that has increased over time. Very briefly, here is the evolution of tools in this field in four key moments:

1980: The area of research known as CSCW (Computer Supported Cooperative Work) emerges simultaneously as the term "Groupware", associated more closely with the technology supporting the CSCW concepts.

1990: Structured commercial offers concretely take hold of the market with the promise to optimize communication in a work team. The "Lotus Notes" software is an ambassador from this period.

2000: The introduction of a clear CRM offer in the software world with the arrival, amongst others, of the now well-known company "Sales Force". The main goal expressed is to provide companies with a tool supporting the automation and optimization of the sales force. We see notions of the automation concepts of the sales force (SFA – Sales Force Automation) and the "360-degree" vision beginning to emerge, aimed at maximizing customer potential.

2007: The concept of the XRM platform appears. More commonly associated with a way of doing things rather than a specific technology, the main objective pursued becomes the automation and optimization of a company's business processes as a whole. New corporate performance perspectives are discovered and continue to be to this day.

We now live in an age where managing challenges and efficient exploitation of unstructured information are the optimal support strategy for our internal and external business relationships.

An Observation

It is no coincidence that the concepts of CSCW have first materialized in tools dedicated to the sales force. Sales are the sinews of war, as the saying goes. Naturally, it also goes to say that sales are primarily about relationship management. Therefore, it is not surprising that we have rapidly steered the communicational management possibilities of CRM tools toward this strategic component of any company.

Sales are also a fairly controlled management enclave, isolated, with a very clear objective. It is a human resources team relying on processes, a methodology, and a well-established marketing theory. I mean here that operational ambiguity is, in principle, less present.

I distinguish the “Marketing” component, where it is more a question of analysis, positioning, differentiation, and business strategy, and the “Sales Force” component that deploys the action plan in the field. In short, when you’re a part of a sales team, you must constantly remind yourself of the “Just do it!” mantra.

Therefore, concepts and tools in a controlled environment and yet, returning to my lectures, users express their will and their difficulties and reluctance to move forward with a CRM project even if it is limited to the sales team.

The fundamental reason is simple, and participants have expressed it very clearly. Obviously, each of them did so in their own way, in their own context, and according to the objectives, each of them pursuing their project. Even with a clear and precise marketing action plan, a sales force does not operate in a vacuum.

Some here will return to the concept of “360-degree vision”. If we limit ourselves only to the sales force, I say “not quite”. I say “okay”. However, if we talk about “Client” issues noticeable in all business interactions, regardless of the department, with its existing and potential customers.

In this latter approach, we can easily perceive the management complexity issued from interdepartmental momentum. Indeed, each department has its responsibilities and precise role, so, naturally, the respective visions of each department collide.

Here is an in-depth observation summarised by the participants regarding the difficulties they encounter in their current CRM project: the complexity of reaching interdepartmental consensus on a given method to achieve set objectives.

The Choice of Tool

Each CRM software abounds, and you, therefore, have a wide selection at your disposal. It is not the goal of this post to make a comparative analysis of the top products available on the market. For those interested, you can view a list of known CRMs online. Of course, remain cautious of the interpretation of rankings.

Beyond the usual functional characteristics, I suggest two in-depth validations if you plan to evolve towards an extended XRM platform gradually. Your CRM software should adhere to two principles:

1. A high customizability and information processing capacity based on your strategic challenges. You must be able to reconcile, analyze, and quickly exploit strategic information for each department.

2. A great configuration capability of access to information. I am not addressing the security aspect here, which must, of course, be present, but rather your technological tool’s capacity to modulate the access to information based on the operational needs of each department.

In other words, if you want to maximize the leverage of your configurations, make sure that each department can access the information it needs, but only the required information. Otherwise, you could reduce the operational focus of every department and instead generate a loss of productivity, obviously an effect to avoid.

Centralization of Information

When it comes to implementing a CRM, a majority of the failed attempts, or efforts attaining limited success, come from the difficulty to define centralized reference information. Of course, if you opt for a ''Cloud'' solution, there is no need to go any further as, de facto, you would typically operate in a centralized mode.

For those who currently have or would consider a local solution, remember that it is imperative to create a centralized informational reference. You must lose the reflex of accessing information locally (on a given workstation) for any information related to a client. Otherwise, your CRM project is in jeopardy from its first days of existence.

As minimal as this information may be at first, for example, customer contact information, to quickly generate a reflex to adhere to the centralized information is paramount.

This step will enable you, amongst others things, to raise and live the whole issue of standardization of the codification of crucial information. This standardization is strategic to stimulate ownership of the tool by its users and generate analysis leverage and decisional leverage after that. Consequently, if necessary, do not neglect the mobilization efforts of your team on the issue of centralization of information.

The Hidden Face of Success

Whether you wish to limit your CRM project to your sales team only or want to expand the use of your software to form an XRM platform, the whole question of the analysis of the management processes involved remains a critical issue.

As with any other computerized management project, implementing a CRM-XRM solution is a privileged moment to improve the efficiency of your existing processes without denaturing and losing sight of the methods that have created your success. With this in mind, you should never forget that rigorous project management is always your best ally.

Now, there is an additional aspect that I wish to bring to your attention at the deployment and operationalization stage of your CRM-XRM tool.

Based on the concept of CSCW, some fundamental operational principles must be respected and implemented to ensure the generation of the leverage you are seeking. Unfortunately, they are often forgotten or neglected.

pixel
pixel
Time-space-matrix-Johansen-1988
pixel

I will first refer to Johansen’s (1988) “Time-Space” matrix, a historical, theoretical reference for Groupware. This matrix shows the communications and interactions in a work team based on the possible combinations of two parameters, space and time.

I will not go into further detail about the underlying operational theory. For the theorist in you, I suggest an additional 2007 publication endorsed by Elsevier (http://www.elsevier.com/) and titled "A Classification Method for CSCW Systems".

The structural principle to grasp here is that a CRM-XRM tool acts as a management differential. Think of it instead as the role played by your car's differential when taking a curve and having to manage the rotation difference between the inner wheel and the outer wheel.

In fact, the key to CRM-XRM is that they manage the differences in availability, speed of execution, processes, etc., which represent challenges that a company's resources face daily throughout their internal and external interrelations. All deviations or operational desynchronizations to be managed here always being linked to notions of time and space.

To activate the magic of CRM-XRM's, I draw your attention to the simplified structure of an interrelation between two resources:

pixel
trigger-transmitter-doer.png
pixel


We are always in the presence of a “Trigger” who requests a “Doer”, a “Transmitter” who ensures that the request is forwarded to the right person at the right time (your CRM-XRM tool) and, finally, the “Doer” himself. Note the feedback loop that highlights the possibility of an iterative process if necessary to complete a task.

So that’s the mechanics based on the operational magic of CRM-XRM’s. Now, here are the fundamental principles that are frequently forgotten, unknown or neglected in the framework of the use of these tools according to each participant in the process:

The Trigger’s Responsibilities

1. He must make sure that the request is clear and precise. Otherwise, he automatically increases the processing and implementation time because the doer will automatically ask for specifications on the action to be taken. A widespread shortcoming related to the fact that the requester always feels that what he wrote, or dictated, is perfectly clear. It is indeed clear for him but not necessarily always so for the doer.

We well perceive here the importance of establishing codification standards for requests.

2. Send the request to the right doer, implying it is the right resource possessing the qualifications, skills and responsibilities to meet the demand. Otherwise, it is clear that processing delays will be introduced in the implementation times.

3. He must precisely indicate the processing priority that must be granted to his request. Remember here that when everything is urgent, the possibility to prioritize no longer exists; there is no effective emergency management anymore. What is implied here is to pay special attention to the definition of what constitutes an emergency as a prerequisite.

The Transmitter’s Responsibilities

The transmission medium is the management differential as such. The reliability and performance of the technological tool are critical parameters. Otherwise, the credibility of the system is automatically attacked.

The Doer’s Responsibilities

1. Immediately validate that he represents the necessary player to meet the demand in terms of his role and functions and his skills and knowledge. We quickly see here the effectiveness of a CRM to detect the possible continued training needs of a team.

2. Take an immediate decision concerning the request as to whether it must be fulfilled now or later. If the action can or should be postponed, its execution or follow-up must immediately be planned in the work schedule.

The greatest shortcoming encountered in the context of the implementation of CRM-XRM tools is the absence of a decision on a request. For there to be effective management of a situation, an informed decision must be taken and, since an informed decision is no mere coincidence, a minimum analysis process must therefore take place in the treatment of any given request.

Note that you must distinguish “taking a decision” from “meeting the demand”. These are two completely different things. A decision may be to do nothing now, but in this case, I repeat, a follow-up or intervention date must immediately be scheduled in the work calendar.

Therefore, the classic mistake is to leave requests pending without having subjected them to a minimal management assessment. In addition to not being in action, you accumulate potential problems in the future.
Take a few moments to think about this principle. It is the keystone for generating leverage with a CRM. Everything lies solely in this principle.

If each request received is not subject to an immediate minimal analysis, you do not manage, even if you think you do and think you are very busy!

Let us now take this principle the other way around to reveal the other classic problematic situation. As we can well imagine, if not leaving anything pending is the idea here, then we must satisfy all requests immediately

And so, a reactive management mode is now amplified by a tool that was initially dedicated to more accurate and efficient management.

Assuming we are operating at finite operational capacity, the informed decision process is greatly affected in responsive management mode if not inexistent. For example, we no longer ponder on which request requires priority treatment when facing two demands of equivalent priority.

As odd as it may seem, by wanting to do everything immediately, a work team can reduce its effectiveness simply because it does not do the right things at the right time.

3. Upon satisfying the demand, to respond adequately, the doer must make sure to document his actions with clarity and precision since he represents the last link in the process and, even more so, if he must return the summary of his intervention to the trigger.

Therefore, the doer is faced with the same responsibility as the trigger to produce clear and precise documentation.

Note that clarity and precision of the documentation, from both the trigger and the doer, is a safe investment to prepare the future leverage of your CRM-XRM tool. If you wish, this documentation can become the cornerstone of a potential corporate knowledge bank. The latter can then constitute the basis for the business rules supporting the automation process.

Conclusion

It is quite interesting to ascertain that the collaborative management software field once again highlights rules such as that a technological tool cannot correct a bad management process, a wrong way of doing things. As such, a CRM is a tool, not a solution.

Moreover, due to the usually larger number of users, collaborative software further amplifies management shortcomings more than any other type of software. The more effective the tool you will choose, the quicker you will get feedback on your operational deficiencies.

My recommendations made in this post are, in their essence, of course, focused on fieldwork. Unfortunately, it is often at the level of common basic principles that we find the most frequent errors. Therefore, there that CRM-XRM projects are jeopardized even before they took their momentum.

Once these basic principles are mastered, you will effortlessly move on to the subsequent stages, such as BI (Business Intelligence), to extract additional leverage from your CRM platform and progress towards an XRM platform.

Good management!

Catégorie : Tous
Lire la suite

 

CRM, XRM, Deploy Your Magic!

15 juillet 2011 00:02

CRM, XRM, Deploy Your Magic!

pixel
CRM, XRM, deploy your magic!
pixel


CRM (Customer Relationship Management) tools and solutions and, more recently, XRM (Extended Relationship Management) constitute essential levers in customer relationship management.

We seek to optimize contact and communication with our client or a strategic third party for our organization through these tools. The central objective: maximize the positive experience of the customer or the third party in his dealings with our team.

Obviously, the quality of communications with your clients is one of the cornerstones of the sustainability of your business. Who could contradict this evidence?

However, it is vital to consider the possible limitations of CRM-type tools to prevent them from being seen as a panacea for your client issues and disappointing you.

First of all, we often approach the CRM tool as part of a project targeting external communications only when the quality of the client relationship is also dependent on the quality of your internal communications.

Suppose expertise and knowledge do not circulate freely in your organization. In that case, this directly results in a decrease in the quality of the client relationship, whether it is deficient information or an unreasonable response time when the client interacts with your team.

In fact, your client's perception of the quality of his relations with your company is closely linked to the quality of your internal communications.

This axiom placed, what can we identify as potential vectors of management, gestures, and decisions that can allow you to optimize the efficient flow of information within your company?

There are two possible lines of intervention:

  • The human axis, a multidimensional, unpredictable axis but with a strong relational lever.

  • The mechanical axis, that is the axis of processes and tools for better ways of doing things—the productivity lever.

Based on my previous comments, it is clear that your HR department is likely to represent, in certain situations, your best strategic lever for improving the "customer experience" from a marketing perspective.

Simply put, you must be aware that the CRM tool, however hyperforming it may be, will be limited by the degree of communication transparency within your team. Precisely: if an employee with the expertise cannot see and tolerate an employee in your customer service department well, sorry, the internal communication channel is cut, and the client waiting for a smart and quick response to the customer. The other end of the line is very likely to be disappointed with your organization.

So that's the key premise before you jump head-to-head in choosing and implementing a CRM platform.

Now, in terms of technological tools as such, we must also distinguish two approaches to managing internal and external communications:

  • The management of structured communications involving tools such as task and process managers.
  • The management of informal communications involving, for example, chat tools.

A simple example of structured management can be found in planning periodic and predetermined follow-ups with a client. This approach usually calls for the use of structured information in the sense that standardization of information (codification, format, etc.) becomes a key element of management effectiveness and efficiency.

As for the "informal" type of communications, we find ad hoc exchanges such as email communications. Understand here that this information is usually generated as part of a one-off and unplanned management situation. This type of communication is based on what is customarily called unstructured information. However, I agree with purists; some basic structure is in the typical "Message-Reply" format of an email.

Without wanting to start a controversy on the subject, we note a significant polarization of schools of thought to the effect that the future of communication tools and optimal use of information is to be found either totally on the side of structured information or unstructured information.

As far as I'm concerned, structured information should always offer you greater leverage when searching for information and analyzing in terms of speed and accuracy. But this lever will have, in return, a significant upstream cost concerning the standardization efforts that must be deployed.

In addition, Google has demonstrated and continues to do so with its search engine that it is possible to extract exact answers from information that was initially unstructured and with impressive speed. Obviously, not all CRM solution providers have the financial power and development capacity of Google.

When choosing your CRM tool, know that you should be able to find functional characteristics that allow you to work and use information under the two possible approaches, structured and unstructured.

In conclusion, make sure you have healthy communications and the efficient exchange of information on a human level between your company's various divisions and employees before introducing these extremely powerful marketing tools, CRM and XRM software.

Without dwelling on the people and process aspects first, the use of high-performance IT often amplifies organizational problems rather than solving them.

Good management!

Catégorie : Tous
Lire la suite

 

Is Your Customer Better Informed Than You?

7 janvier 2011 00:02

Is Your Customer Better Informed Than You?

The advent of the Internet has revolutionized the way we view and promote the goods we sell. Today, you are undoubtedly more visible than you’ve ever been before and make a point of constantly investing in optimizing your online position. Sales are what counts, and your Internet portal is a strategic tool.

The obvious problem, however, is that you are not the only one with a good idea. And sorry to burst your bubble for anyone who thought they could boost sales tomorrow morning by posting a new website. This is something Internet companies have known for years. I know, I know… But you’re the best in the business!

The Internet, unfortunately, cannot protect us from the competition. In fact, competition can become surreal in the virtual world when you factor in the disinformation element, a potential by-product of the democratization of information.

pixel
pixel
Social Media
pixel

The New Curve

What businesses with a solid online presence may not have contemplated is the fact that due to easy access to information, potential or current customers now probably know more about their products and business reputation than they do themselves.

Thanks to the Internet, a customer has access, which is entirely out of your control, to volumes of information that are unfathomable even by today’s standards. Imagine what it will be like in five years! Think about it… Emails, blogs, discussion forums, social networks (Twitter, Facebook, and others), etc.

In some cases, a customer using a social network and who has just been politely informed by your advisor that he will have to wait six weeks before a parcel can be delivered may decide to let the community know just what he thinks of your service, even if in your opinion the reasons for the delivery time are entirely justified.

One has to understand that human frustration can ignite a firestorm in an instant. In the marketing world of tomorrow, ignoring immediate interconnectivity will be the equivalent of juggling with dynamite, smiling all the while and feigning ignorance; “not to worry, everything is fine, no trouble here”.

What’s that? Are you suddenly feeling uneasy? I can relate to it since I experience a slight twinge every morning when I start my day. Take comfort in knowing that this uneasiness is healthy from a management perspective. In fact, you should develop this natural reflex over time if you hope to make headway in the online marketing world successfully.

You Know Who You Are… or so You Think?

You may have an unequalled online presence, and you may represent the ultimate expression of e-commerce positioning. However, you should immediately focus on the marketing fundamentals: What does my customer think about me and my products? Because if you have maximized your visibility, it can impact your success positively as much as it can be an information fiasco.

On this matter, based on the advances of a marketing theory that attempts to adapt to a fast-growing business environment, in my opinion, it is evident that in today’s world, Market Share is no longer a reliable indicator of the strength of your strategic positioning, but of the Mind Share, which I would interpret as a share of the intention (to purchase), which determines the soundness and effectiveness of your market position.

More specifically, this model of thought leads to the following conclusions: Even if you are a market leader with the most significant number of customers, if most customers would have purchased a competitor’s product if they could repurchase the product, you are then clearly in a tunnel of negative medium to long-term growth, or you will undoubtedly find yourself in a weakened business position.

Unless you hold a monopoly, you can think what you want about yourself but, if your customer has another opinion, he or she has the final word since the customer speaks the commercial truth where you are concerned. Remember that in marketing, “Perception is reality”.

pixel
Review
pixel
pixel

Relating to a New Generation Customer

Now then, let’s put everything into perspective. Customers can find information online at any time about the type of product you are selling. Customers can take the time they want to gather information or disinformation and ask questions on forums and social networks. They can even create information about your company and products. When they contact you, trust me, this version of “educated” customers has specific expectations, and they are unwavering.

In the online era, the knowledge asymmetry, historically in favour of the seller, is gradually tipping in the other direction to a more balanced position or, in my opinion when it comes to the future, to the point where knowledge is skewed in favour of the buyer. This is a new important business challenge where the Internet is a powerful information tool for consumers.

There will consequently be more situations where your sales representative may not be as well informed as a customer in the field. He will find himself in a situation where he is unable to answer a customer’s questions adequately. In other words, from the information angle that your customer would like to hear. Namely, a summary of the information he has put together following online research.

As a result, your representative may often find himself in a strained customer relations position: loss of control of a conversation, waning credibility during a discussion and deterioration of a relationship of confidence with a customer. Where a secure connection does not exist, there is little chance of a sale. Customers who are in doubt will no longer buy blindly unless they get a solid third-party endorsement, which, by the way, is an old marketing principle that could gain strength with social networks.

The important subtlety in this new business situation with your customers is that a customer who searches for information on your business and products will be doing it increasingly to validate his knowledge and hence the knowledge of your representative. A customer will be contacting you less to get information about your products and the terminology used in your specialty field. This, therefore, places us in an entirely new and unusual relational approach to sales.

Adapting to New Game Rules

Several strategies can be implemented to minimize a loss of control and maximize your ability to deal with this new generation of customers. I have listed a few, and you will note that some suggestions are solutions that have been tried and have been true business practices for some time now. All you need to do is understand that you have to use them more often:

  • A systematic analysis of the most common issues discussed by target customers on credible discussion forums in your field of activity. This means using the Internet to your advantage. You have to become a psychologist and understand your target customer's thinking model or modus operandi, also known as profiling a typical customer. This approach can be analogous to a market watch.

    The minimum aim of this approach is to appear credible by supplying answers to at least 90% of the most frequently asked questions. The main goal is to better understand types of behaviour to, among other things, instantly determine if a customer is engaged in a validation or information gathering process with you.
  • Training, training, training. The ongoing training of your sales team will never be as important and strategic. Think mainly about incorporating the relational aspect, based on profiling of a typical customer, into training meetings since the technique has very likely already been properly covered.
  • Highlight and maximize your CRM tool to structure and reconcile key information about customers and products as a means of support. If possible, automate some aspects of the sales relationship. For example, setting up an information base can become an effective support tool to compensate for a junior representative's lack of technical information. It will also generate a sense of organization and structure with a potential customer if a representative cannot provide an immediate answer.

In short, as always, an exciting business future awaits us in the era of e-commerce. Emotional and experience marketings are at the heart of marketing development now more than ever as they grow more comprehensive and subtle. Listening to a customer with humility is a must. Gone are the days of the traditional jiggery-pokery and ready-to-serve sales.

Here’s to continued management success!

Bonne gestion.

Catégorie : Tous
Lire la suite

 

The Human at the Heart of an IT Project

27 juillet 2009 00:02

The Human at the Heart of an IT Project

pixel
BanImaNouCTRL2012.png
pixel

An article in “Direction informatique” magazine entitled “Implanter les TI avec succès: tenir compte du facteur humain” (Implement It Successfully: Take the Human Factor Into Account) exposed the human challenges that come with an IT project.

Given the constant exuberance that is part of IT advancements, an exuberance centred primarily on novelty and technological progress, the article was an important reminder, a warning that an IT manager must never lose sight if he hopes to reach his destination…arriving at the right port and on time.

I would, therefore, like to add my field experience to that of the writers of the article to confirm that the human element is indeed a key component that must be factored in from the outset before you embark on any IT project to increase its chances of success.

Two other questions immediately come to mind: "Can you determine the impact of the human component beforehand?", "How do you control it and minimize its impact?".

If the theme sounds a bit like a déjà vu, the appalling statistics littering the road of IT projects remind us of just the opposite. Indeed, if one relies on various recent statistics such as the "CHAOS 2009" study of the Standish Group, we are still in a zone, let us not be afraid of words, discouraging.

By determining the general characteristics of a successful project in the following manner:

  • A final system that meets functional needs that are defined during the initial planning phase;
  • A project that is completed within a specific timeframe;
  • A project that is completed on a budget.

Their 2009 study revealed that only one-third (33%) of projects were deemed successful in 2009. Worse yet, cost overruns on projects with problems are regularly in the 100% to 200% range! The very thought that public funds, your tax dollars, are being pumped into major IT projects in this manner no doubt makes your skin crawl.

I suggest reading Frederic Casagrande's blog entitled "Lost in Chaos" to view a chart of the study's findings. A second chart reveals that results have been dismally consistent since 1994.

Now, we keep talking about statistics, but where does the human element enter the equation? Do you simply focus on the first characteristic indicated above, that is, "an end system that meets functional needs", and expect the first connection to hit you over the head?

How can a computer system not meet the functional needs of the end-users for whom an IT project has been specifically implemented and where their needs have been identified and defined? It is simply illogical.

While not downplaying or maligning the importance of efficient project management methods, as the PMI recommends, I believe that by asking the question here, we should answer it: end-users are simply not consistently included in the IT project management and development process enough. Yet everyone is for virtue.

This is where we come to one of the critical elements cited in the Direction Informatique article: management commitment.

Again, you might ask, where is the problem? Do the companies that invest in a promising IT project do so because they firmly believe it offers a crucial edge in their development strategy? I do not believe this is the case, or if they do, they do not always do so with a commitment that is felt, supported, and expressed daily to end-users.

The fundamental problem is that even today, the executives of far too many organizations regard investing in an IT project as little more than purchasing computer equipment. Sorry to burst your bubble, if that is the case, but approaching an IT project based on investing in technological infrastructure is tantamount to buying a hammer and expecting it to come with a house.

But getting back to an active management commitment, it is important to examine new system development approaches that are considered "flexible methods" that target, among other things, involving the end-user in the development process to guarantee a better quality product that is in keeping with their initial expectations, which is very good, since I obviously must endorse the position I am defending.

However, a few obstacles get in the way if we look beyond the principle of working closely together, which bolsters the argument in favour of management making a proactive and firm commitment to an IT project, including:

  • What happens if the end-users are not interested in sharing their demands or, more commonly, if it is always the same users who respond and impose their opinions?
  • Should we allow new project directions to emerge due to the continuous stream of requests for adjustments and improvements from end-users, only to find ourselves with functional features that are not essential to the strategic plan?

In broader interactive settings, freedom of expression can indeed result in a loss of control. Therefore, a flexible management project that is not established based on specific strategic directions and corporate actions is liable to result in a computer system that does meet the needs of end-users, but not necessarily within the scheduled timeframe, on a budget or entirely in keeping with the company's initial strategic goals.

In conclusion, human communication is a variable that is more sensitive than any technology that is part of an IT project. I, therefore, urge all senior executives who are preparing a company IT project to approach the planning phase of their IT project with a management focus and effort on the human component. As a rule of thumb, I suggest doubling the effort that you might first think is initially enough for the time being. I will address methodological specifications and suggestions later to maximize the chances of your IT projects succeeding.

I would like to share the exhilaration I experience, even today, when tackling the complex challenges that come with implementing business management IT projects, the type of project that blends high technologies, operations management and humans, three diametrically opposed specialty fields. These three mismatched components may be contributing factors to the historically poor success rate within the field to date.

Here's to management success!

Catégorie : Tous
Lire la suite

Contact MeGet In Touch With Us