Showing posts with label democracy. Show all posts
Showing posts with label democracy. Show all posts

Wednesday, November 05, 2008

John Quelch on Obama's marketing triumph

Harvard's John Quelch knows a thing or two about marketing and politics, having co-written the recent book Greater Good: How Good Marketing Makes for Better Democracy, a detailed examination of the similarities and differences between commercial marketing and political marketing.

In this post, he efficiently and clearly dissects the many ways in which Obama's marketing superiority contributed to his victory (while acknowledging the stacked deck McCain competed against). It's a terrific, timely analysis.

Related posts:
On "Greater Good"
Podcast with John Quelch on Marketing and Democracy

Tags:
, ,

Wednesday, October 01, 2008

Why company story-listening is democratic

I'm beginning to spend a lot of time listening to stories within companies, and between companies and their customers. Listening to and understanding these stories can help companies adapt to changing markets and competitors, and help their employees work together better.

It's democratic, too. What does that mean? you may be wondering. Traci Fenton, head of WorldBlu and the leader of the corporate-democracy movement, asked me the same question a few months ago. I was trying to explain to her the connection between my work helping companies gather and act on stories and her work promoting the creation of democratic processes and institutions within companies.

To me, it makes all the sense in the world.

To be a participant in a democratic venture, you need to be informed. Lots of information, from different viewpoints, even if it can be contradictory or confusing, is essential to you doing your job, which is to participate in your own governance and direction.

You must also have a voice. Sometimes that voice is a statement at the voting booth. Other times, it is the ability to stand up at the borough council meeting and tell the council they need to approve the school-building project once and for all.

Gathering stories from employees and customers gives them a voice. Sharing them throughout the company provides critical information for employees to act on. Training folks to make sense out of them can root out complacency and provide a platform for action.

If you're a corporate leader who wants your company to be democratic, you better institutionalize the gathering and sharing of stories. From the inside and the outside.

[If you're interested in corporate democracy, you should consider attending WorldBlu Live this month in New York.]

Related Posts:
A Sense of Urgency
Corporate Change Series
Competitive Advantage: Customer-facing Employees

Tags:
, , ,

Wednesday, June 04, 2008

Shop Talk Podcast #10 - John Quelch on Democracy and Marketing

This time we talk with Harvard Business School Professor John Quelch, co-author with Katherine Jocz of "Greater Good: How Good Marketing Makes For Better Democracy" (Harvard Business Press, 2008).

John talks about how marketing and democracy share many goals, and how each can learn from the strengths of the other--including how democracy's lessons on acting based on altruism rather than self-interest has echoes in the corporate social responsibility movement.

One of John's welcome themes is that marketing on the whole benefits society greatly--which leads into a detour about why people--even marketers themselves--often view the profession as unseemly.

It was a fun discussion. I learned a lot, and I hope you like it.

The podcast is here (right-click to download).

You can learn more about John Quelch's research and thinking on his blog.

Other resources:
Interview with John Quelch from Personal Branding Blog
My review of "Greater Good"

(Theme music: "Up the Coast," from West Indian Girl's latest album 4th and Wall.)

Tags:
, , , ,

Friday, April 25, 2008

WorldBlu 2008 List of Democratic Workplaces released

WorldBlu, the organization headed by friend of this blog Traci Fenton, has unveiled its second annual list of democratic workplaces.

Workplace democracy is still a rare concept, but a growing number of companies are allowing workers a voice in their company, encouraging dissent, and otherwise involving the entire employee base in shaping and running the organization. WorldBlu evaluates companies on these factors:

1. PURPOSE AND VISION
A democratic organization is clear about why it exists (its purpose) and where it is headed and what it hopes to achieve (its vision). These act as its true North, offering guidance and discipline to the organization's direction.

2. TRANSPARENCY
Say goodbye to the "secret society" mentality. Democratic organizations are transparent and open with employees about the financial health, strategy, and agenda of the organization.

3. DIALOGUE + LISTENING
Instead of the top-down monologue or dysfunctional silence that characterizes most workplaces, democratic organizations are committed to having conversations that bring out new levels of meaning and connection.

4. FAIRNESS + DIGNITY
Democratic organizations are committed to fairness and dignity, not treating some people like "somebodies" and other people like "nobodies."

5. ACCOUNTABILITY
Democratic organizations point fingers, not in a blaming way but in a liberating way! Democratic organizations are crystal clear about who is accountable and responsible for what.

6. INDIVIDUAL + COLLECTIVE
In democratic organizations, the individual is just as important as the whole, meaning employees are valued for their individual contribution as well as for what they do to help achieve the collective goals of the organization.

7. CHOICE
Democratic organizations thrive on giving employees meaningful choices.

8. INTEGRITY
Integrity is the name of the game, and democratic companies have a lot of it. They understand that freedom takes discipline and also doing whatÕs morally and ethically right.

9. DECENTRALIZATION
Democratic organizations distribute leadership and power across their enterprise.

10. REFLECTION + EVALUATION
Democratic organizations are committed to looking in the mirror and asking, "How can we be better?" -- not just quarterly or annually, but daily.



Notable new names on the list this year include Pandora, the personalized internet radio site; BzzAgent, which creates viral marketing programs; and DaVita--the first Fortune 500 corporation that's made the list. Holdovers include 1-800-GOT-JUNK and Linden Lab (with a brand-new CEO, will they be able to maintain their democratic principles?).

You can check out the whole list here.

Related:
Shop Talk Podcast #3 - Traci Fenton on democratic workplaces
Free information -> lateral networks -> less authoritarianism
The Utopian Company

Tags:
, , , ,

Monday, April 21, 2008

"Greater Good": a good, but not great, book on marketing and democracy

"Greater Good: How Good Marketing Makes For Better Democracy" is a book that promises a lot. Inside the front flap it charges that "marketing is more democratic than politics." Its co-author John Quelch is a renowned expert on consumer marketing and professor at Harvard Business School, the author of a thoughtful and incisive blog on marketing. By aiming at dissecting and improving democracy, Quelch and co-author Katherine Jocz seek to elevate marketing to a level currently held by economics--i.e, a discipline that can drive progress of entire nations.

And, while it has many virtues, the book doesn't deliver on that promise. Partially this is because of the very broad topic it takes on. Its scope is the strength and weakness of the book. The book's first part, "Marketing as Democracy" is as good a survey of consumer marketing--its aims, faults and practice--as you could fit into 150 pages. But this means that there's four pages on fairness, six on advertising. As a result, it's a great book if you want to teach people all about marketing at a high level, but not so great if you want to galvanize readers to make their democracies more effective and citizen-focused.

There are sections of the book (for example, the chapter on consumer engagement or the one on marketing government and NGO programs) that could become strong books themselves if they dove more deeply. There are also some important insights, such as this:

...Coke and Pepsi don't sling mud at each other, because if they did, consumer purchases would eventually shift away from both of them to alternative colas and beverages. Both brands want to enlarge the market, not reduce it. However, in politics, market share, and not market size, matters. Negative campaigning may turn off a sizable number of the electorate, but if George Bush sicceeds in making John Kerry marginally less acceptable to the voters who show up on Election Day, Bush comes out ahead. (p.171)

Quelch and Jocz are onto something in terms of using what marketing's good at to improve democracy. While "Greater Good" isn't a home run, I hope they don't give up on the topic. There's more there to study, and, even more interesting, to try out.

If you want a comprehensive introduction to consumer marketing, buy "Greater Good" and read the first 150 pages. If you want to fix what's wrong with democracy, you'll have to wait for another book.

, ,

Thursday, April 10, 2008

"The Breakthrough Company"--wise advice for the emerging entity

I was prepared to dislike "The Breakthrough Company." The dust jacket is a garish silver. The author photograph reminded me of Svengali, and the first line of his bio read, "At the age of twenty-six, Keith R. McFarland was named associate dean of one of the nation's leading business schools." And continued, "He and his family live just downhill from the ski lifts at Snowbird, Utah."

This was a cover that screamed at you: THIS IS IMPORTANT, VITAL, DON'T MISS IT. (I mean, how could you not listen to someone who lives just downhill from the ski lifts at Snowbird?)

But you can't judge a book by its cover, nor its author bio, and "The Breakthrough Company" is a serious, substantial and useful effort. McFarland and his colleagues at McFarland Strategy Partners set out to give the "Good to Great" treatment to a different segment of companies--those that graduated from entrepreneurial status (around $10 million in revenue) to substantial size ($250 million to upwards of $1 billion).

They surveyed 1500 companies and from those picked the nine best performers, then reverse-engineered these companies to settle on six characteristics that stood out. And while I've posted before on the limitations of this type of "best practice" approach, it's to McFarland's credit that he also plays down the value of copying the template: "This is not intended to be a recipe book."

Also, the companies he is aiming at helping are still in their formative stages. A company with 250 people can still be shaped. One with 5,000 is much harder to reorient.

And with that, the characteristics McFarland highlights--e.g., "crowning the company," or putting the company's needs and priorities above the founder's--are important, and rare in companies big and small.

My favorite chapter is titled, "Enlisting Insultants," in which McFarland discusses how vital it is for growing companies to have people who can give voice to the minority opinion--either critiquing the conventional wisdom or championing an unpopular initiative. This view echoes those of Gary Hamel in "The Future of Management" as well as Traci Fenton's efforts to promote organizational democracy.

As might be apparent, McFarland can also turn a phrase. The book is well-written, with lots of great stories from the companies' leaders. And from its prominent position in my local Barnes & Noble's business section, it's probably selling a few copies.

In sum, there's a lot to learn from on an important subject. And don't let the cover bug you--the dust jacket is easily removed.

Related:
On Gary Hamel's "The Future of Management"
Shop Talk Podcast #3 - Traci Fenton on democratic workplaces

, , , , ,

Wednesday, November 14, 2007

Marketing for good--and for ill

I can't wait for the upcoming book by Harvard Business School marketing professor John Quelch (his blog is here) and Katherine Jocz called "Greater Good"--because I am fully expecting to disagree with it.

I read the abstract last month and have been stewing over it since then. Here it is in full:

Marketing has a greater purpose, and marketers, a higher calling, than simply selling more widgets, according to John Quelch and Katherine Jocz. In "Greater Good", the authors contend that marketing performs an essential societal function--and does so democratically. They maintain that people would benefit if the realms of politics and marketing were informed by one another's best principles and practices. Quelch and Jocz lay out the six fundamental characteristics that marketing and democracy share: (1) exchange of value, such as goods, services, and promises, (2) consumption of goods and services, (3) choice in all decisions, (4) free flow of information, (5) active engagement of a majority of individuals, and (6) inclusion of as many people as possible. Without these six traits, both marketing and democracy would fail, and with them, society. Drawing on current and historical examples from economies around the world, this landmark work illuminates marketing's critical role in the development, growth, and governance of societies. It reveals how good marketing practices improve the political process and--in turn--the practice of democracy itself.


The ennobling of marketing--connecting it with vital societal interests--got my attention. I am a marketing professional, and I like to feel good about myself and my profession, and as such I liked the book's idea--for about five minutes, after which it lost its flavor faster than a free after-dinner mint.

What lingered was this thought: there's an awful lot of bad marketing out there (not ineffective marketing, but "marketing-for-ill"), and I'd wonder whether Quelch and Jocz would do more for society by writing about that.

Here are some fundamental principles of marketing-for-ill that I bet won't appear in Quelch's and Jocz's book: (1) bombard people with buy messages for commodity products such as credit cards, (2) use selective language to play up one's product while disparaging the competitors'--as with any Oracle ad, (3) craft deceptive messages to get people to buy something that is not in their best interests--exhibit A: low-introductory rate mortgages, (4) create multilevel marketing networks to make revenues primarily via self-consumption of the networks, (5) use complex pricing schemes to make it difficult to assess total costs before buying--e.g., "my cellphone plan."

It's unfair, of course, to judge the book without reading it. So I promise I'll read it when it comes out, and I'm pretty sure it will be a good book and unworthy of my scorn.

At minimum, it has caused me to confront a lot of what I don't like about my profession, and reflect on what I can do not to promote those ideas.

, , ,

Monday, October 29, 2007

Shop Talk Podcast #3 - Traci Fenton on democratic workplaces

On this edition of the Shop Talk Podcast, I talk to Traci Fenton, CEO of WorldBlu, a business design studio that helps companies adopt democratic processes. Her company created the World's Most Democratic Workplaces list, featuring companies like Linden Lab and Rite Solutions who embody these ideals.

Traci and I talk about what constitutes a democratic workplace, how it is to work in this type of company, discuss some examples, and learn that while some decision-making may be slower due to seeking consensus, implementation is that much faster and success more assured as a result.

Click here to download the podcast.

Companies mentioned in the podcast:

Linden Lab
Rite-Solutions
General Electric
Whole Foods Market
Southwest Airlines
Motek
SRC Holdings

Errata:

  1. I continually called Linden Lab, the creator of Second Life, Linden Labs. Traci said it right every time, and I never got the hint. My apologies.
  2. If you listen carefully, you will hear a couple of Skype blips during the podcast.

, , , ,

Thursday, October 18, 2007

On Gary Hamel's "The Future of Management" part 4 - Learning from highly-adaptable systems

After lengthy case histories of some new-management examples (W.L. Gore, Whole Foods Market and Google), Hamel gets down to helping us imagine what the new management model might look like. In Chapter Eight of "The Future of Management," "Embracing New Principles," he lays out models for highly-resilient, self-organizing systems, so that by example we could create some rules and practices for new corporate managment. The systems are:

Life - by its limitless diversity, life has adapted to every calamity and catastrophe that has befallen the earth in the last billion years or more. It's instructive that most life "experiments" are failures--virtually all species become extinct, most mutations don't survive. Yet the overall results are anything but a failure.

Markets - they rapidly incorporate information from buyers and sellers, and set prices without any ultimate authority. Investment abandons poor investments quickly to seek higher potential or lower risk, and there are numerous sources from which to raise money.

Democracy - gives each citizen a stake in his governance. By giving voices to many, dissent is prevalent. Which leads to slower, but sounder, decision-making. And, transparency of information is the rule--which tends to create a more egalitarian environment and one where citizens feel empowered to protest what they see as injustice or inequity (you should have seen the uproar when this news was published in my local paper).

Faith - gives meaning to people's everyday lives, and allows them to persevere through tragedy and heartbreak.

Cities - they reinvent themselves continuously by taking on the character of their inhabitants--usually a highly-diverse, creative, enterprising group--and providing variety and space for self-expression. By their layouts, they "increase the odds for serendipity" by allowing people from different viewpoints and areas of expertise to collide, dialogue and perhaps collaborate.

The question Hamel poses in this section is: are any of these traits found in your company? The answer will be, for the vast majority of us, no.

Corporate hierarchies don't allow for many failures to find the one great success; they don't move quickly to defund bad ideas, and are terrible at speculation; they aren't democratic in the least; a higher mission or calling is rare (certainly a deeply-felt mission); they are laid out to reduce costs, not increase the environment to collaborate.

All of this points to the fact that (a) instituting such change will be difficult and (b) those who can do it will achieve outsized rewards, for imitating it will be a challenge.

Ending again with a quote:

Indeed, the more one learns about what it is that makes things adaptable, the more one is tempted to question the very foundations of modern management theory. After all, when compared to large companies, the most adaptable things on the planet are either under-managed or, Mon Dieu, un-managed.

Other posts in this series:
Part 1
Part 2
Part 3
Part 5

Note: you can find excerpts of the book here.

(Photo by echobase via stock.xchng)