Peter Flatow is one of the smartest people I know, though he would blush that I write this. Before becoming a dreaded consultant, he covered himself with glory at some of the biggest and best marketing organizations in the world.
His client list is even more impressive, as are his accomplishments since throwing off the corporate coat and tie and donning a permanent "consultant casual."
The Mystery of Executive Non-Involvement
And why CEOs should at least pretend to care
By Peter J. Flatow
One of the great mysteries of life is, why do management gurus, business authors, and senior executives spend so much time talking about the importance of good customer relations but companies consistently do such an awful job at delivering them? Why do people make doing the simplest things so difficult? Does it really have to be so hard?
I believe there is a simple answer. It lies in plumbing the depths of corporate culture and values - or in some cases the lack of same. For example, over the last nine months I have been conducting an experiment with Pitney Bowes, the iconic maker of postage meters. It began with a simple situation; I wanted to return my postage meter. Would that something like that should be so simple. If I would have just sent them a check for $750 we all could have been done with it. But I didn't want to do that, so being a student of management behavior, and wanting to experiment with my culture and values thesis, I decided to “play this one out.” It has been an education.
From this experience it would appear that like some companies, Pitney Bowes has separated sales from receivables; the customer relationship from collecting their money. One side of the business apparently has no view into the other, and may not even know that the other exists! Because postage machines are leased, they have set up a separate group or “company” called PBCC (Pitney Bowes Credit Corporation). This should be your first clue that the customer experience is not going to be good one. It’s my view that there is something sinister when a company has to revert to initials. It is as if that little bit of obfuscation hides the parent name from customers in case something goes wrong. PBCC is accountable for collecting the money due PB if you keep your postage meter until a contract ends. Alternatively, if you want to return your machine as I did, they will offer a buyout of the contract.
A little background is required. This little misadventure was going on while I was trying to decide whether I would sell my business or simply close it down. In either case I had no need for a postage machine. For obviously reasons, this information was not known by the staff people in my office at this time. In a typical piece of irony, it appears that while these deliberations were underway, a Pitney Bowes sales person visited the office because our “contract” was up for renewal. Maybe this is a technicality, but the salesperson told a staff person it was OK for her to sign the contract even though that person was not authorized by my company to do so.
Wanting to know what the CEO thought of what I considered to be shady behavior on the part of the PB rep, I wrote a letter to the then Pitney Bowes CEO, Mike Critelli. Given the brave language that populates the typical corporate mission statement and annual report, and given the logic that culture and values should start at the top, it seemed fair to see what the top thought. As it turns out, this particular CEO doesn’t appear to see his own mail. Maybe he gets too much. He is, I guess, just too busy.
Instead of a polite letter from “his office”, I get a call from yet another representative at PBCC. She has my letter and wants to know when I will pay up. Based on this call, I wrote Mr. Critelli again. But again my letter was passed on to yet a different representative from you guessed it Pitney Bowes Credit Corporation.
Now you may say, and fairly so, why should there be any expectation that a CEO should respond at all? You might also say that the failure was mine, that I should have better trained my employees not to sign contracts without talking with me. Perhaps you’re right on that last one.
But in response to the first question, I have two responses. First if a CEO of a corporation is not concerned about the ethics of how business is being done in that company, then we have situations best illustrated by Enron and WorldCom to prove why he or she should be. Second, if he is too busy to think about customers, then one of his direct reports should at least give the impression of interest. In Peter Drucker’s words it has to do with span of control where everyone operates under the same objectives, or in my words, embraces a common set of values and culture.
In Malcolm Gladwell’s often quoted book “The Tipping Point” he addresses this issue head on when he wrote about the power of 150. He makes a compelling case that groups, companies, divisions (military and otherwise) over 150 people become unmanageable. People don’t know each other, but more importantly they can not build and live within a common culture. While the financial and efficiency experts might think that costs can be saved by bigger is better, the facts make an opposite case. Maybe the CEO should not respond him or herself, but passing the letter to a collections person surely isn’t the only other alternative unless that CEO truly is not concerned about customer relations.
How many times have we all received letters from what appeared to be the CEO in response to a customer complaint or concern? “Thank you for your interest in government . . .” Consumer corporations have a staff of people sending out coupons for free product to help ensure customer satisfaction, or at least passivity, in response to some problem, real or imagined.
In contrast to my adventures with Pitney Bowes, I recently had the most positive experience with Dell. I had a situation and wrote to Michael Dell. A “person from his staff” emailed me back with a resolution that exceeded my expectations. They have the right culture and process to ensure the next time I buy computer, whether it’s one or a hundred, it will be a Dell. It’s a big corporation and they seem to get it right just look at their results.
Unfortunately, we still have too many CEO’s like Mike Critelli at Pitney Bowes that just don’t get it. My experiment with his company has proven that. In the end I will pay them less than $500. In return, seven different people will have talked with me (at what cost?) and I am telling everyone I know, “don’t do business with Pitney Bowes.” And now you’re reading this story. For the cost of a letter and maybe an ounce of logic . . .
I’m left with a rhetorical question that leads to an obvious answer: What is the value of great word of month, the ability to employ the best people because they want to work there, and highest repeat sales? Mr. Critelli? Mr. Dell? Anyone?
Send mail to
webmaster@kevinhoffberg.com with
questions or comments about this web site.
Copyright © 2002
Kevin Hoffberg
Last modified:
07/24/05