Are
You Driving Too Much Change, Too Fast???
Image credit : Shyam's imagination Library
Pity Ron Johnson. The
charismatic Apple Store retailer turned JC Penney CEO announced far
worse-than-expected quarterly results. Same-store sales declined 26% and the company's stock dropped to a three year
low. The congealing critical consensus is that Johnson's bold overhaul of the
sagging American retailing icon went too far too fast.
Pity Meg Whitman. The
failed California gubernatorial candidate and former eBay CEO is attempting to
lead a turnaround at Hewlett-Packard. The struggling high-tech titan is still
bleeding from self-inflicted wounds from a fractious board. She's outlined a
long-term recovery strategy but the congealing critical consensus is that she's simply not moving fast enough.
GE's Jack Welch was
inordinately fond of emphasizing that his biggest leadership regret was that he
didn't move fast enough to make fundamental changes. By stark contrast,
IBM's Lou Gerstnerpracticed a cultivated deliberateness in his successful turnaround:
Slow and steady won his leadership race. Durk Jager's tumultuous 17-month
effort to inflict hard and fast change at P&G led to the steadier tempo of
A.G. Lafley's "game-changing" stewardship. Of course, the congealing
critical consensus is that current P&G CEO Bob McDonald isn't moving fast
enough.
This "too fast/too
slow" leadership conundrum reeks of "Goldilocks" management —
transformations and turnarounds should be neither too fast nor too slow; they
must be "just right." That's a mug's game. When "reckless"
moves succeed, they're retrospectively rebranded as "bold." When
"timidity" triumphs, it's celebrated as "patient" and
"safe." Failure simply means leadership went too fast or didn't go
fast enough. That's rationalization, not insight.
The issue is less about
how fast CEOs are willing to move than how quickly their most reliable
customers are prepared to change. The most effective and important diagnostic I've observed for
assessing organizational speed and tempo appears obvious but underappreciated:
How fast are your customers willing to change? Your own rate of change is
determined less by the quality or price/performance of your offerings than the
measurable readiness of your customers and clients. Their internal readiness
matters more than yours. Their inertia matters more than your momentum.
In some industries,
customers have been successfully trained to turn on a dime. Look at mobile
phones, personal computers and social media. For over twenty five years now —
and with a tip of the cap to Moore's Law — consumers have been trained to
expect something faster, better and (cost-effectively) cheaper on a
faster-than-annual basis. Readiness to change is now an everyday part of their
rational expectations. That doesn't mean they will change or even that they are
predisposed to change; it simply means that competitors in those industries
will likely lose if they can't change at least as fast as their customers. The
folks at Dell and Nokia have learned this the hard way.
At Electrolux, for
example, the company has implemented a new "70% rule" for testing its new product innovations to make sure it's
not getting too far ahead or falling too quickly behind either its customers or
competitors. Electrolux CEO Keith McLoughlin has declared that new product
prototypes have to enjoy at least a 70% customer preference rate in blind
competition with best-selling rival products. "Speed to market" isn't
what's driving the change. The goal is assuring that the firm's ability to
innovate is effectively aligned with the customers' willingness to value them.
The 70% rule helps identify and clarify their customers' readiness for change.
The clear exception
occurs when your innovations effectively create a new kind of customer or
client. That is, your innovation offer is so compelling or valuable that your
customers willingly to adapt themselves to it (these themes are developed more
explicitly in my Harvard Business Review Pressebook). Ron Johnson certainly enjoyed that innovation environment at
Apple where his shoppers paid a premium to have their digital lifestyles
transformed by iPhones and iPads. By contrast, JC Penney shoppers don't yet
appear as ready, able or willing to change into the kinds of shoppers he
envisions for his next-generation stores.
More often than not, the
real "speed" challenge most leaderships face is quickly determining
whether they're trying to better follow, lead or transform the customers and
clients they have. Being a "fast follower" is much easier to manage
than being a "fast transformer." But whether you're seeking to
innovatively serve or transform your customers, their openness to change is
more revealing than your own.
Put your product or
service offering aside: Do you know along what dimensions your most important
customers are changing fastest? Can you tell when your customers feel that
they're not going fast enough? Start paying less attention to your own
innovation speed limits and more attention to theirs.
No comments:
Post a Comment