Copyright 2007 Dennis S. Vogel All rights reserved.
This blog post was transferred from another service.
In case you want the full context, you can use this URL http://www.inc.com/magazine/20061201/make-a-mess.html
After you read the article ("Go Ahead, Make A Mess" By: David H. Freedman)you may understand what I wrote below.
Some of what David wrote about success from a mess, should be attributed to randomness. It's a corollary of "If you always do the same thing in the same context, you'll always get the same result." It's not exactly true though. If you practice the same thing, you may get a better result by doing it better.
As Chet Holmes & others contend, what makes the difference between highly successful businesses & also-rans are systems: policies, plans & procedures.
My corollary is: If you don't track what happened, you won't know, for sure, which parts worked or didn't work. You'll only know the result of the whole effort. You won't have a firm enough idea of what to do again in the same way or what you should change & what to eliminate.
Apparently, Strymish "organized" books by publishers' names, so it wasn't total chaos.
Too many consulting prospects are quick to say, "I tried it, it didn't work." They don't like it when I ask, "What exactly didn't work? Was the problem the medium, headline or offer? Of course, they won't know if they don't try other versions - limited randomness.
Some randomness brings success accidentally; many times we need to determine what to make different.
I realize multivariate testing can be used, but many small businesses can't afford to use it. My example is set in a limited context. In psychology & marketing, we can try totally varied methods--at first--to test a wider variety. But until we narrow the difference to 1 variation in each version, we can only guess what made the project work or fail.
Step by step formulas aren't always practical, especially when designed by somebody who isn't familiar with the situation. This is applicable in customer service & handling products.
We'll never be able to eliminate every possible variable beyond our control. If we test ads, we need to put them in the medium & vehicle (a specific newspaper or station) & change one element like the headline with the same copy.
If more than 1 person does the same kind of task, each person (or team) can do it in a different way. But don't make the Wal-Mart mistake. Continual tinkering may be good in theory, but you shouldn't keep changing procedures, after people have figured out how to make them work. It doesn't give them any incentive to make procedures work, unless they want variety.
A big reason for McDonald's success is the systems. People get trained to do things the same way, so supervisors know what's going wrong. People can moved from one task to another as needed. Customers know what to expect from franchisee.
As David wrote, people may file things, but forget where those are. The answer though isn't giving up on neatness. The answer is to have a system, so things can be stored/filed quickly, then retrieved quickly. Purchase orders shouldn't be filed with maintenance manuals.
David found the same fault, as I, in the dictum of scheduling phone calls at a specific time. But if the calls are from same people, they can be told when the best time to call is. But it may still be best to call customers, or respond to their email messages, as soon as is practical (when you have answers they need).
The Lesson: A little randomness is good; a little random mess is tolerable.
Thank you for using my blog. Please let me know if I should clarify anything.
Copyright 2007 Dennis S. Vogel All rights reserved.
When you compete against big businesses with big budgets you need powerful marketing strategies & tactics. You'll find them here-
https://thriving-small-businesses.blogspot.com/
http://www.voy.com/31049/
No comments:
Post a Comment