Selling the brand inside

When you think of marketing, chances are your mind goes right to your customers--how can you persuade more people to buy whatever it is you sell? But there's another "market" that's equally important: your employees. Author Colin Mitchell argues that executives by and large ignore this critical internal audience when developing and executing branding campaigns. As a result, employees end up undermining the expectations set by the company's advertising--either because they don't understand what the ads have promised or because they don't believe in the brand and feel disengaged or, worse, hostile toward the company. Mitchell offers three principles for executing internal branding campaigns--techniques executives can use to make sure employees understand, embrace, and "live" the brand vision companies are selling to the public. First, he says, companies need to market to employees at times when the company is experiencing a fundamental challenge or change, times when employees are seeking direction and are relatively receptive to new initiatives. Second, companies must link their internal and external marketing campaigns; employees should hear the same messages that are being sent to the market-place. And third, internal branding campaigns should bring the brand alive for employees, creating an emotional connection to the company that transcends any one experience. Internal campaigns should introduce and explain the brand messages in new and attention-grabbing ways and then reinforce those messages by weaving them into the fabric of the company. It is a fact of business, writes Mitchell, that if employees do not care about or understand their company's brands, they will ultimately weaken their organizations. It's up to top executives, he says, to give them a reason to care.     

Transforming corner-office strategy into frontline action

When CEOs push decision making out to the far reaches of an organization, good things happen: fleeting business opportunities are seized quickly and workers are motivated to innovate and take risks. But it's tricky to achieve both decentralized decision making and coherent strategic action at a company. If everyone is a decision maker, things can spin out of control. In this article, Bain consultants Orit Gadiesh and James Gilbert explore the concept of the strategic principle--a memorable and actionable phrase that distills a company's corporate strategy into its unique essence and communicates it across an organization. If it's devised and disseminated properly, a strategic principle can empower employees to seize business opportunities but also focus everyone in an organization--executives and line managers alike--on the same strategic objectives. The authors outline the three defining characteristics of a good strategic principle--it should force trade-offs between competing resource demands, it should serve as a test for the strategic soundness of a particular action, and it should set clear boundaries for employees to operate within even as it grants them freedom to experiment. They explain how managers can create a strategic principle, how they should test it, and when they should revisit it. The authors present real-world examples of how companies use their strategic principles. For instance, they describe how South-west Airlines stopped flying to Denver after it measured the high costs of providing flight service in that part of the country against its strategic principle of offering customers short-haul air travel at fares competitive with the cost of automobile travel. This tool is increasingly useful in today's rapidly changing business environment, the authors conclude, and it is likely to become even more crucial to corporate success.     

Organizing for empowerment: an interview with AES's Roger Sant and Dennis Bakke. Interview by Suzy Wetlaufer.

The topic of empowerment is receiving a lot of attention, but how many employees are truly empowered? At the global electricity giant AES Corporation, the answer is all 40,000 of them. In this interview, chairman Roger Sant and CEO Dennis Bakke reflect on their trials and triumphs in creating an exceptional company and explain how their employee-run company works. When they founded AES in 1981, Sant and Bakke set out to create a company where people could have engaging experiences on a daily basis--a company that embodied the principles of fairness, integrity, social responsibility, and fun. Putting those principles into action has created something unique--an ecosystem of real empowerment. What does that system look like? Rather than having a traditional hierarchical chain of command, AES is organized around small teams that are responsible for operations and maintenance. Moreover, AES has eliminated functional departments; there's no corporate marketing division or human resources department. For the system to work, every person must become a well-rounded generalist--a mini-CEO. That, in turn, redefines the jobs of the people at headquarters. Instead of setting strategy and making the "the big decisions," Sant and Bakke act as advisers, guardians of the principles, accountability officers, and chief encouragers. Can other companies successfully adopt the mechanics of such a system? Not unless they first adopt the shared principles that have guided AES since its inception. "Empowerment without values isn't empowerment," says Sant. "It's just technique," adds Bakke.     

The power of collective ambition

In the past few years, some companies have not just weathered the economic storm: They've emerged stronger than ever. How did such players as Four Seasons, Sephora, and Standard Chartered Bank defy conventional logic? Instead of pursuing a single ambition, such as profits, employees defined a collective ambition. As a result, those organizations deepened their engagement with employees and other stakeholders and became sustainably profitable. Purpose, a company's reason for existence, is the central element of collective ambition. The other elements--vision, targets and milestones, strategic and operational priorities, brand promise, core values, and leader behaviors--must be aligned to serve the company's purpose. Articulating the elements of collective ambition can give everyone in the organization a better sense of the company's purpose and how they can contribute to it. Purpose does not have to be about saving the world; providing excellent entertainment or banking services is just as meaningful a purpose as improving health care in emerging economies--as long as it is an authentic representation of why the company exists. To shape and then achieve a collective ambition, companies must strengthen their organizational glue (the collaborative engagement that creates a unified culture) and grease (the disciplined execution that enterprisewide change initiatives require).     

Creating the living brand

It's easy to conclude from the literature and the lore that top-notch customer service is the province of a few luxury companies and that any retailer outside that rarefied atmosphere is condemned to offer mediocre service at best. But even companies that position themselves for the mass market can provide outstanding customer-employee interactions and profit from them, if they train employees to reflect the brand's core values. The authors studied the convenience store industry in depth and focused on two that have developed a devoted following: QuikTrip (QT) and Wawa. Turnover rates at QT and Wawa are 14% and 22% respectively, much lower than the typical rate in retail. The authors found six principles that both firms embrace to create a strong culture of customer service. Know what you're looking for: A focus on candidates' intrinsic traits allows the companies to hire people who will naturally bring the right qualities to the job. Make the most of talent: In mass-market retail, talent is generally viewed as a commodity, but that outlook becomes a self-fulfilling prophesy. Create pride in the brand: Service quality depends directly on employees' attachment to the brand. Build community: Wawa and QT have made concerted efforts to build customer loyalty through a sense of community. Share the business context: Employees need a clear understanding of how their company operates and how it defines success. Satisfy the soul: To win an employee's passionate engagement, a company must meet his or her needs for security, esteem, and justice.     

Creativity, the corporate curriculum and the future: a case study

This paper explores the proposition that the successful companies of the future will be those that find the means to help their employees to think and act creatively. Based on a case study of British managers’ perceptions of creativity and how it can be nurtured in a large US-based manufacturing company, the study shows that prevailing models of creativity in the organization are inadequate. Firstly, the structure of management in the organization and many features of the culture and corporate curriculum of the company, inhibit creative thinking and action. It is not the intention of the company to do this. The company has developed many methods of problem-solving and team-working intended to release the creative energy of employees. The organizational culture of the company is not, however, as supportive of creative endeavour as it needs to be. Secondly, the models of creativity in the minds of managers and supervisors reflect a wider cultural misunderstanding of the phenomenon. Creativity is perceived in highly individual terms. It is thought of as something which expresses itself fully in non-work areas and it is not seen as a process that can be facilitated through new ways of working and thinking within the organization. To have a successful future, this company, like many others, must change the ways in which its managers perceive the creative potential of their employees.     

Transforming a conservative company--one laugh at a time.

You wouldn't think of Brady Corporation as an obvious place in which to find a fun culture. This traditional Midwestern company, a manufacturer of industrial signs and other identification products, didn't even allow employees to have coffee at their desks until 1989. But when Katherine Hudson became CEO in 1994, she and her executive team determined that injecting some fun into the company's serious culture could create positive effects within the organization and contribute to increased performance and sales. In this article, Hudson distills her approach to overhauling Brady's culture into six principles of serious fun: More people than you might think are comfortable having fun at work; used with an awareness of cultural sensitivities, fun and laughter really are well-understood international languages; humor can help companies get through tough times; fun can be embodied in formal programs; spontaneous efforts at humor can also be effective; and encouraging fun should begin at the top. She richly illustrates each principle with examples. At Brady, getting people to loosen up and enjoy themselves has fostered a company esprit de corps and greater team camaraderie. It has started conversations that have sparked innovation, helped to memorably convey corporate messages to employees, and increased productivity by reducing stress, among other benefits. And the company has doubled its sales and almost tripled its net income and market capitalization over the past seven years. Brady's experience suggests that promoting fun within the workplace can lead not only to a robust corporate culture but also to improved business performance.     

Informal networks: the company behind the chart

A glance at an organizational chart can show who's the boss and who reports to whom. But this formal chart won't reveal which people confer on technical matters or discuss office politics over lunch. Much of the real work in any company gets done through this informal organization with its complex networks of relationships that cross functions and divisions. According to consultants David Krackhardt and Jeffrey Hanson, managers can harness the true power in their companies by diagramming three types of networks: the advice network, which reveals the people to whom others turn to get work done; the trust network, which uncovers who shares delicate information; and the communication network, which shows who talks about work-related matters. Using employee questionnaires, managers can generate network maps that will get to the root of many organizational problems. When a task force in a computer company, for example, was not achieving its goals, the CEO turned to network maps to find out why. He discovered that the task force leader was central in the advice network but marginal in the trust network. Task force members did not believe he would look out for their interests, so the CEO used the trust map to find someone to share responsibility for the group. And when a bank manager saw in the network map that there was little communication between tellers and supervisors, he looked for ways to foster interaction among employees of all levels. As companies continue to flatten and rely on teams, managers must rely less on their authority and more on understanding these informal networks. Managers who can use maps to identify, leverage, and revamp informal networks will have the key to success.     

Learning to lead at Toyota

Many companies have tried to copy Toyota's famous production system--but without success. Why? Part of the reason, says the author, is that imitators fail to recognize the underlying principles of the Toyota Production System (TPS), focusing instead on specific tools and practices. This article tells the other part of the story. Building on a previous HBR article, "Decoding the DNA of the Toyota Production System," Spear explains how Toyota inculcates managers with TPS principles. He describes the training of a star recruit--a talented young American destined for a high-level position at one of Toyota's U.S. plants. Rich in detail, the story offers four basic lessons for any company wishing to train its managers to apply Toyota's system: There's no substitute for direct observation. Toyota employees are encouraged to observe failures as they occur--for example, by sitting next to a machine on the assembly line and waiting and watching for any problems. Proposed changes should always be structured as experiments. Employees embed explicit and testable assumptions in the analysis of their work. That allows them to examine the gaps between predicted and actual results. Workers and managers should experiment as frequently as possible. The company teaches employees at all levels to achieve continuous improvement through quick, simple experiments rather than through lengthy, complex ones. Managers should coach, not fix. Toyota managers act as enablers, directing employees but not telling them where to find opportunities for improvements. Rather than undergo a brief period of cursory walk-throughs, orientations, and introductions as incoming fast-track executives at most companies might, the executive in this story learned TPS the long, hard way--by practicing it, which is how Toyota trains any new employee, regardless of rank or function.     

In praise of hierarchy

Hierarchy has not had its day. After 3,000 years as the preferred structure for large organizations, managerial hierarchy is still the most natural and effective organizational form that a big company can employ. Now, as in the past, the key to organizational success is individual accountability, and hierarchy preserves unambiguous accountability for getting work done. Unfortunately, hierarchy is widely misunderstood and abused. Pay grades are confused with real layers of responsibility, for example, and incompetent bosses abound. As a result, many experts now urge us to adopt group-oriented or "flat" structures. But groups are never held accountable as groups for what they do or fail to do, and groups don't have careers. The proper use of hierarchy derives from the nature of work. As organizational tasks range from simple to very complex, there are sharp jumps in the level of difficulty and responsibility. Surprisingly, people in hundreds of companies in dozens of countries agree on where these jumps take place. They are tied to an objective measure-the time span of the longest task or program assigned to each managerial role-and they occur at 3 months, 1 year, 2 years, 5 years, 10 years, and 20 years. As the time span increases, so does the level of experience, knowledge, and mental stamina required to do the work. This increasing level of mental capacity lets companies put people in jobs they can do, it allows managers to add value to the work of their subordinates, it creates hierarchical layers acceptable to everyone in the organization, and it allows employees to be evaluated by people they accept as organizational superiors. Best of all, understanding hierarchy allows organizations to set up hierarchies with no more than seven layers-often fewer-and to know what the structure is good for and how it ought to perform.     

What it means to work here

What distinguishes a company that has deeply engaged and committed employees from another one that doesn't? It's not a certain compensation scheme or talent-management practice. Instead, it's the ability to express to current and potential employees what makes the organization unique. Companies with highly engaged employees articulate their values and attributes through "signature experiences"--visible, distinctive elements of the work environment that send powerful messages about the organization's aspirations and about the skills, stamina, and commitment employees will need in order to succeed there. Whole Foods Market, for example, uses a team-based hiring and orientation process to convey to new employees the company's emphasis on collaboration and decentralization. At JetBlue, the reservation system is run by agents from their homes, a signature experience that boosts employees' satisfaction and productivity. Companies that successfully create and communicate signature experiences understand that not all workers want the same things. Indeed, employee preferences are an important but often overlooked factor in the war for talent. Firms that have engendered productive and engaged workforces address those preferences by following some general principles: They target potential employees as methodically as they target potential customers; they shape their signature experiences to address business needs; they identify and preserve their histories; they share stories--not just slogans--about life in the firm; they create processes consistent with their signature experiences; and they understand that they shouldn't try to be all things to all people. The best strategy for coming out ahead in the war for talent is not to scoop up everyone in sight but to attract the right people--those who are intrigued and excited by the environment the company offers and who will reward it with their loyalty.     

Managing emotional fallout. Parting remarks from America's top psychiatrist. Interview by Diane Coutu

Last fall, the United States was brutally thrust into a new and dangerous world. As the twin towers of the World Trade Center collapsed and the Pentagon burned, the horrible reality of terrorism seared the American consciousness. It touched more than the victims and their families; everyone who sat transfixed before the horrific images on TV lived through the trauma. In a sense, we were all eyewitnesses, and we must all cope with feelings of anger, stress, and anxiety. That poses a huge immediate challenge for business, because it is largely in the workplace--where we spend so many of our waking hours--that we will confront these emotions. And many companies have risen to the challenge, establishing new guidelines for processing mail in light of anthrax fears and organizing stress reduction programs for employees. While the logic of taking such action is incontestable, it raises a much larger question: What responsibility does a company bear for the mental well-being of its work-force? If companies help employees deal with depression and anxiety in the wake of terrorist acts, doesn't that put mental health care on the business agenda? To answer these questions, HBR senior editor Diane Coutu talked with Dr. Steven Hyman, the former director of the National Institute for Mental Health. In this interview, he discusses the implications of coping with tragedy, the resilience of individuals, and the treatment of mental illness. And he suggests that September 11, 2001, may come to be seen as a tipping point--the moment when managers started to think about dealing with mental health issues on a regular basis.     

The service-driven service company

For more than 40 years, service companies like McDonald's prospered with organizations designed according to the principles of traditional mass-production manufacturing. Today that model is obsolete. It inevitably degrades the quality of service a company can provide by setting in motion a cycle of failure that produces dissatisfied customers, unhappy employees, high turnover among both--and so lower profits and lower productivity overall. The cycle starts with human resource policies that minimize the contributions frontline workers can make: jobs are designed to be idiot-proof. Technology is used largely for monitoring and control. Pay is poor. Training is minimal. Performance expectations are abysmally low. Today companies like Taco Bell, Dayton Hudson, and ServiceMaster are reversing the cycle of failure by putting workers with customer contact first and designing the business system around them. As a result, they are developing a model that replaces the logic of industrialization with a new service-driven logic. This logic: Values investments in people as much as investments in technology--and sometimes more. Uses technology to support the efforts of workers on the front lines, not just to monitor or replace them. Makes recruitment and training crucial for everyone. Links compensation to performance for employees at every level. To justify these investments, the new logic draws on innovative data such as the incremental profits of loyal customers and the total costs of lost employees. Its benefits are becoming clear in higher profits and higher pay--results that competitors bound to the old industrial model will not be able to match.     

The provision of financial information to employees: A study of the reporting practices of some large public companies in the United Kingdom

The provision of financial information to company employees has grown rapidly in recent years. These developments are discussed in the context of wider social changes and, followed by the findings of an exploratory empirical study, conducted in order to isolate more precisely the forces at work on the management of large public companies.Although the findings suggest that companies either have an “open” management attitude to information provision or they do not, both categories of company appear to have been provoked into providing information by trade unions.     

Loyalty-based management

Despite a flurry of activities aimed at serving customers better, few companies have systematically revamped their operations with customer loyalty in mind. Instead, most have adopted improvement programs ad hoc, and paybacks haven't materialized. Building a highly loyal customer base must be integral to a company's basic business strategy. Loyalty leaders like MBNA credit cards are successful because they have designed their entire business systems around customer loyalty--a self-reinforcing system in which the company delivers superior value consistently and reinvents cash flows to find and keep high-quality customers and employees. The economic benefits of high customer loyalty are measurable. When a company consistently delivers superior value and wins customer loyalty, market share and revenues go up, and the cost of acquiring new customers goes down. The better economics mean the company can pay workers better, which sets off a whole chain of events. Increased pay boosts employee moral and commitment; as employees stay longer, their productivity goes up and training costs fall; employees' overall job satisfaction, combined with their experience, helps them serve customers better; and customers are then more inclined to stay loyal to the company. Finally, as the best customers and employees become part of the loyalty-based system, competitors are left to survive with less desirable customers and less talented employees. To compete on loyalty, a company must understand the relationships between customer retention and the other parts of the business--and be able to quantify the linkages between loyalty and profits. It involves rethinking and aligning four important aspects of the business: customers, product/service offering, employees, and measurement systems.     

UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS ROUNDTABLE ON ENERGY DERIVATIVES AND THE TRANSFORMATION OF THE U.S. CORPORATE ENERGY SECTOR

In this roundtable, a successful oil entrepreneur and a group of ex‐bankers whose careers have taken them into the energy business discuss the deregulation of energy markets and the emergence of energy derivatives, and how these two developments have affected both the way companies do business with each other, and how the companies themselves are organized internally. The first part of this two‐part discussion explores how derivatives and corporate risk management have produced a strikingly new business model for a number of once traditional energy companies, including Enron Corp. and Mirant Corporation (until recently, Southern Energy). In addition to its ability to change corporate strategy, the panelists also consider how the hedging of price risks can affect a company's financing strategy and cost of capital. A notable feature of the new business model is a corporate structure that differs greatly from that of conventional large energy companies. And in the second half of the discussion, the focus shifts from risk management and strategy to issues of corporate structure, such as: How do companies divide themselves into business centers for reporting and accountability; how much decision‐making authority is entrusted to the managers of those divisions; and how many layers of corporate management are necessary to coordinate and control the activities of the business units? Also discussed at great length are questions of performance evaluation and incentive compensation: How do companies evaluate their own performance on a year‐to‐year basis? And what basis do they use for rewarding their managers?     

Preference Transaction Avoidance in Ghana: Has the Liquidator's burden changed?

Financially distressed companies sometimes conceive plans to pay off certain creditors before petitioning the Court for winding up. This last‐minute payment referred to as a preference transaction puts the preferred creditor in a better position than the rest of the company's creditors because the distressed company may not have enough assets to satisfy everyone. Insolvency law frowns on such last‐minute transactions and provides the Liquidator with the power to avoid these transactions, to restore the asset to the company and distribute it to all the creditors. Preference avoidance forms an integral part of the corporate insolvency law in Ghana. These principles founded upon the common law of England are now provided for under the Bodies Corporate (Official) Liquidation Act 1963 (Act 180) of Ghana. This essay discusses preference avoidance under Ghanaian law. It also examines a recent judicial application of the law and finally suggest avenues for reform.     

Every employee an owner. Really

Surveys indicate that when new rules on expensing stock options take effect, many companies are likely to limit the number of employees who can receive equity compensation. But companies that reserve equity for executives are bound to suffer in the long run. Study after study proves that broad-based ownership, when done right, leads to higher productivity, lower workforce turnover, better recruits, and bigger profits. "Done right" is the key. Here are the four most important factors in implementing a broad-based employee equity plan: A significant portion of the workforce--generally, most of the full-time people--must hold equity; employees must think the amounts they hold can significantly improve their financial prospects; managerial practices and policies must reinforce the plan; and employees must feel a true sense of company ownership. Those factors add up to an ownership culture in which employees' interests are aligned with the company's. The result is a workforce that is loyal, cooperative, and willing to go above and beyond to make the organization successful. A wide variety of companies have recorded exceptional business performance with the help of employee-ownership programs supported by management policies. The authors examine two: Science Applications International, a research and development contractor, and Scot Forge, which shapes metal and other materials for industrial machinery. At both companies, every employee with a year or so of service holds equity, and employees who stay on can accumulate a comfortable nest egg. Management's sharing of financial information reinforces workers' sense of ownership. So does the expectation that employees will accept the responsibilities of ownership. Workers with an ownership stake internalize their responsibilities and feel they have an obligation not only to management but to one another.     

Strategy as ecology

Microsoft's and Wal-Mart's preeminence in modern business has been attributed to any number of factors--from the vision and drive of their founders to the companies' aggressive competitive practices. But the authors maintain that the success realized by these two very different companies is due only partly to the organizations themselves; a bigger factor is the success of the networks of companies with which Microsoft and Wal-Mart do business. Most companies today inhabit ecosystems--loose networks of suppliers, distributors, and outsourcers; makers of related products or services; providers of relevant technology; and other organizations that affect, and are affected by, the creation and delivery of a company's own offering. Despite being increasingly central to modern business, ecosystems are still poorly understood and even more poorly managed. The analogy between business networks and biological ecosystems can aid this understanding by vividly highlighting certain pivotal concepts. The moves that a company makes will, to varying degrees, affect the health of its business network, which in turn will ultimately affect the organization's performance--for ill as well as for good. Because a company, like an individual species in a biological ecosystem, ultimately shares its fate with the network as a whole, smart firms pursue strategies that will benefit everyone. So how can you promote the health and the stability of your own ecosystem, determine your place in it, and develop a strategy to match your role, thereby helping to ensure your company's well-being? It depends on your role--current and potential--within the network. Is your company a niche player, a keystone, or a dominator? The answer to this question may be different for different parts of your business. It may also change as your ecosystem changes. Knowing what to do requires understanding the ecosystem and your organization's role in it.     

Strategic sourcing: from periphery to the core

As globalization changes the basis of competition, sourcing is moving from the periphery of corporate functions to the core. Always important in terms of costs, sourcing is becoming a strategic opportunity. But few companies are ready for this shift. Outsourcing has grown so sophisticated that even critical functions like engineering, R&D, manufacturing, and marketing can-and often should-be moved outside. And that, in turn, is changing the way companies think about their organizations, their value chains, and their competitive positions. Already, a handful of vanguard companies are transforming what used to be purely internal corporate functions into entirely new industries. Companies like UPS, Solectron, and Hewitt have created new business models by concentrating scale and skill within a single function. As these and other function-based companies grow, so does the potential value of outsourcing to all companies. Migrating from a vertically integrated company to a specialized provider of a single function is not a winning strategy for everyone. But all companies need to rigorously reassess each of their functions as possible outsourcing candidates. Presented in this article is a simple three-step process to identify which functions your company needs to own and protect, which can be best performed by what kinds of partners, and which could be turned into new business opportunities. The result of such an analysis will be a comprehensive capabilities-sourcing strategy. As a detailed examination of 7-Eleven's experience shows, the success of the strategy often hinges on the creativity with which partnerships are organized and managed. But only by first taking a broad, strategic view of capabilities sourcing can your company gain the greatest benefit from all of its sourcing choices.