2000 to 2014 - ifyouski.com Stands the Test of Time

It's the ski season and if you are looking for a ski holiday you could do worse than check out www.ifyouski.com.  In fact, to be clear - I love this website!

It's so good to see her keep going, year after year.  Ifyouski.com was my first internet job.  I joined in August 2000 (shortly after they raised some money from VCs) and now, 13 seasons later, she's still shining.

Ifyouski nearly didn't survive.  It had c.£3m of investment and at one point we had about 50 staff. It imploded and was saved/bought by Online Travel Corporation in 2001 for a bargain (it's since been sold again a couple of times).  A handful of us kept our jobs.  I was one of them, together with Robin Wallace, Max De Grunwald, Rob Van Selm, Tim Barke, Susanne Hedges, Andy Hiseman, Tom Corcoran and Alan Whiteley.  Great team.

Ifyouski.com was a very useful website.  It still is.  It's a well structured fusion of holiday search with great decision support content (resort information, snow reports etc.)  So what happened to the £3m? Where did that go?

I was working in a Ski Tour Operator in 2000 and it was the height of the dot com boom.  I was excited by the chance to join an internet start up and whilst I didn't know much about startups or the internet, I knew a lot about selling and organising ski holidays.  I saw an ad, thought "Yup - that'd suit me" and I joined in a role which would these days be called Product Manager.  Back then such job titles didn't exist.

7 years earlier (1993) ex-Olympian skier, Michael Liebreich published a book on ski technique called The Complete Skier. A few years later he took it online as complete-skier.com.  It had ski technique content, resort information, snow reports, ski news.  It was just stacked full of great ski related content.  On top of this a ski chalet holiday search was added as a way of generating some revenue.

As it turns out, a ski chalet holiday search in 1999 was a very useful tool indeed.  It still is.  The British ski chalet business is fragmented with many small independent operators.  In those days, if you were looking for a chalet (say) for 8 people in a specific resort for a specific date from a specific airport you'd have to phone many different operators having read the ads in the Sunday Times travel supplement.  To have a website where all of the main operators were listed was fantastic because you could search across many operators at the same time.  When you'd found your ideal holiday you could phone the booking office (our travel agent partner) or make an email enquiry.  The travel agent made a commission on the booking which they shared with us.

Nice business model.  Going strong today.

What happened in 2000 was the company looked to build on it's early success in ski by raising money to launch new sites leveraging the same technology platform.  Instead of just ski, the plan was to open up into adventure travel (ifyouexplore), golf (ifyougolf) and scuba diving (ifyoudive).  And as well as doing this in the UK, we intended to launch in 3 other countries.  Instead of 1 market in 1 country we went head first into 4 markets in 4 countries.  Instead of nuturing 1 business model that worked, we developed 1 that worked and attempted to launch another 15 that we didn't know whether they would work or not. 

This was an expensive bet to make.  Expensive as we had about 50 people (although about 20 of them were interns).  In 2000, tech development was costly (we used an agency) and almost everything was proprietary.  We had to buy our own servers, write code from scratch (very few open source libraies existed) and create our own content.  We didn't know about lean startup methodology.

As it turns out the international businesses and the non-ski businesses didn't deliver a revenue stream fast enough.   Some parts of the ski business model simply did not transfer across borders or sectors.

The cash burn was crazy. Back in the dot com boom maybe this didn't seem so crazy.  However, unable to deliver the revenues, we were not able to raise further funding and the business was sold. 

All that remains now is the one business model that worked; selling ski holidays in the UK via a travel agent using online search.

The lesson I took away from that experience was that any new business model that a company attempts needs to be validated before putting too much investment into it.  Validation of the business model requires really understanding the customer segment(s), the distribution channels, the customer relationship methods, the proposition, the key activities and resources, who the key partners are, the cost base and the revenue model.

An excellent way to map this out is using a business model canvas.  A business model canvas allows you to capture on one page all of the above points.  You can highlight the parts of the canvas that you understand (the "knowns") and the parts you yet need to prove (the "known unknowns").  You can think about the assumptions you are making and then think about how you can go about testing those assumptions.  You then systematically run those tests and tweak the model based on the feedback. Once you really have proven all elements of the canvas to a reasonable degree of certainty, you're in a position to start investing money in developing this business model.  

I was lucky enough to work with some really great people at ifyouski.com.  Many remain true friends.  We had a real adventure and managed to leave a legacy which still keeps going today. 

The good news is for entrepreneurs today, lean start-up methods have made it easier to validate business models sooner.  More tools and platforms exist to support new initiatives and there's a growing workforce of talented designers, developers and marketing folks to call on. 

Give In Order To Receive

My Grandmother taught me that the best thing about presents is the giving, not the receiving.  There is great pleasure to be had in giving something to someone that they truly appreciate.

To solve someone else's need or want is a great human gesture.  We humans are social creatures and the act of giving is at the heart of all great relationships.  

It seems true in life that by giving we create goodwill and goodwill has value.  Reflecting on this, I realised that great relationships can exist between companies and a) their customers and b) their employees. And it all starts with giving.  Giving people what they need.

For example, every time I call my bank, they answer my phone call almost straight away.  When I get through, they answer my question, they are friendly and helpful.  I am a very satisfied customer and if ever get the chance, I tell my friends what a great bank they are.  I have been a loyal customer for over 15 years and will probably be for life.

My bank attracted my attention because they solved a problem for me.  My need. In 1997 my need was that I didn't want to have to walk down the high street to the bank. It was an inconvenience.  They promised 24/7 telephone banking (and later, when the time came, they provided all of this online). They made it easy for me to switch my account from my previous bank and they gave me a cash reward to say thank you.

They provided me with what I wanted, where I wanted it, when I wanted it and how I wanted it.  And they did it with a smile.  I rewarded them with my business and my recommendation.  It's a very positive relationship.

I realised that the positive relationship between a customer and a company has many similarities between an employee and a company.  Especially when it goes right.

Do you manage people?

If you do, don't you wish your team were as positive about you and as loyal to you as I am to my bank?

Here it seems lies a fundamental truth; your team are your customers and you are the customer of your manager.

Yes, people management is actually marketing.

In life if we solve other people's problems and provide people with what they need they will pay us for what they need.  That's business.  Any business is in business because it solves a problem or fulfils a need for it's customers. Give in order to receive.

Just as different customers have different needs and companies provide products and services to meet these needs, people working at those companies have needs.

You have needs and wants.  You need money to buy food, pay the rent.  You probably you want a purpose in life.  You will need to feel important and that what you do with your life matters.  You want to feel in control and therefore free of unnecessary anxiety.  You might want friends and need social stimulation.  Maybe you want to learn, develop and grow as a person.  Maybe you just want recognition and a "thank you".  You want information.

Employment can provide for some of these needs.  Just as great companies spend a lot of effort to understand their customers and provide what they need, I believe really great managers spend time to understand what their team truly need and want and figure out how to provide it.  Employees reward the company with their effort, creativity and loyalty.

(Note: people don't always know what they want.  Phone manufacturers used to think that what we wanted was a smaller and smaller phone.  It turns out we wanted a big flat screen.  We didn't know that. True needs are often hidden, often driven by emotion not logic.  Your team might say they want to be paid more.  This might be not their real need.  Their real need might be say, freedom to act, recognition or purpose. It's often these deep needs that are most powerful).

Think about the best manager that you ever worked for. Think about the best company that you ever worked for.  What needs and wants did they provide for you?  And did you give your effort in return?

When managers succeed, it's because they provide for these needs.  The need could be a training opportunity, it could just be encouragement and praise, it could be a fancy job title, it could be the freedom to make decisions, it could be a company social event, it could be a clear vision of what the company is trying to achieve, it could be the sharing of useful information.  When a manager or company gets this right, it seems like magic.  It's not magic, it's marketing.

Management is marketing?

Kind of, yes.

First of all then, what is marketing?

Here's the best definition of marketing I've ever heard...  "Marketing is creating and value and extracting value"

• Creating the value is defining a product or service that people are willing to pay for.  It includes amongst other things the function, the packaging, the place, the design.
• Extracting value how we get people to pay for that product or service. Communication, pricing etc.

If managing people is like marketing then it is all about creating value for employees and extracting value from employees.  So many managers focus on "extracting value" when in fact the focus needs to be on "creating value".  By creating more value, it's easier to extract value and to extract more of it.

Think about the relationship a company has with it's customers...

The best kind of customer is an advocate.  The advocate will tell everyone and anyone about your the great product and service.  Every business wants more advocates.   Then, there are repeat customers.  You like these.  Even if they are not advocates yet, you hope to make them into advocates.

At the other end of the scale are the detractors.  Those who really dislike your company and tell everyone about it. You need to convert these and save this relationship before it damages your business.

Now think about employees in the same way...

Employee advocates are what I call "multipliers".  They not only do a great job, they cause others around them to do a great job.  They do this because their needs are met. Repeat customers are your "adders".  They turn up every day and do good work - solid, dependable, but don't necessarily cause others to do a good job. The detractors are your "dividers".  They not only do a poor job but they cause friction, discontent and misery around them.  You need convert them or remove them if you can't.

Therefore, address needs and wants to build “multipliers”.

If you can provide for their needs, these multipliers will go the extra mile, they'll absorb themselves in their work and they’ll recommend the company to friend.

So many managers act as if they are the customer.  In a way that is perhaps technically correct.  At least that's the way the money flows.  The company pays a salary after all.  I however propose that this is a fundamental error to think this way and although it's counter-intuitive, we should start to think the other way around. Employees are customers.

If you agree with this approach, as a manager, there are implications;

1. Identify what your team need and want (at both an individual level and as a group)

2. Provide it

3. Continuously seek feedback if you are on the right track

4. Show appreciation

  

People management is marketing - the company is the product and the employee is the customer

Do you agree…?

Stay on the Yellow Brick Road

The path most travelled and the path of least resistance are often the same.

On a recent supermarket trip I was at the check-out.  I saw the usual chewing gum, cooking magazines, batteries and chocolate on display.  High profit items that customers impulsively buy as they wait to pay for the rest of their goods.  I wonder, if supermarkets had to rely on people only buying what they came to the shop to buy, would they actually make a profit at all?

On this occasion, I had to deal not only with the persuasion of my inner self ('hmmm, I really fancy some chocolate right now') but also with the persuasion of my kids who were asking for lollipops and magazines with free plastic toys.  To avoid giving in to my kids I felt it necessary to not yield to myself as well.  In the process, our local supermarket missed a few extra pounds profit and our family saved some unnecessary expense.

Marketing folks have of course always understood that to generate a customer response they need to place the goods and services as close to the customer's existing path as they possibly can.  The supermarket checkout is a classic example and has been taken to new extremes these days by almost every retailer.  If I try and buy a bottle of water at the airport at the newsagent or chemist I will inevitably meet with a queuing system that sees me waiting for the next available checkout whilst I have a chance to view almost all the high profit impulsive purchase products that the retailer has to offer.  Chocolates, crisps, suncream, ear-plugs, travel pillows, tissues....the aim is to convert paying customers to higher paying customers.

Marketing folks online also get this.  Why do you think Google Adwords has been so successful at generating results for marketeers?  Because the potential customers are already there.  In this case the challenge is not to convert an existing customer, the challenge is to acquire a new customer.  As we know that potential customers are already on Google (and we know their intentions from their keywords) we can take advantage of their existing path and offer them our products and services.

Likewise with TV advertising.  You wouldn't ask parents to 'please come downtown tomorrow to view the new home cleaning product advert on a big screen'. No, you'd probably put the advert on a kids TV channel hoping they'd see it whilst they watch TV with their kids.

The best way to make change happen is to find and use the path most travelled.

Managers in businesses however don't quite get this.  If they have a program of change that they want to achieve, they need to think marketing and they need to think about distribution channels, paths and existing behaviours.  So many don't.

It's essential to start thinking about internal comms in the same way as external comms.  Who are my audience?  Where can I reach them?  How do I integrate my message into their existing behaviour?  How can I get the results I want from their existing environment?

In a previous job, our tech team were trying to figure out how to build knowledge and awareness within the customer support team about how our products worked.  Their solution, although commendable for the effort put in, was ineffective. They decided to create blog and wiki where they would explain how things worked.  New posts would be available by RSS feed.

What needed to happen for this to work was that all the customer support people needed to have a separate login for the wiki.  Then, they all needed to configure their email client to pick up the RSS feed.  Then they needed to remember to check the RSS feed folder in their inbox on a regular basis and read the articles. Sounds dead easy if you work in tech. It failed.

Imagine if our supermarket had a separate room for all of their high margin add-on sales.  You had to go there specifically in order to see the product offerings.  And you needed to pick up a separate basket in order to carry these products to the check-out in addition to your main trolley.  They wouldn't sell anything would they?  Of course, not.

The path most travelled is why the supermarket check-out system works for the add on sales.  The path most travelled is also the reason the tech wiki failed.

For the tech wiki project to work it needed to use the systems that the customer support staff were already using on a daily basis.  There were three; the company back office system, the CRM database and email.  Anything outside of these three systems was irrelevant because support staff were busy enough dealing with these three systems to think about adding another.

So, when trying to introduce a change to an organisation, focus on making your change happen using existing pathways.  Making change happen is hard enough.  Having to create new pathways at the same time makes it even harder.

As a bonus, not only is the path most travelled the easiest place to introduce your change, it's also the path of least resistance.

No matter what their discipline or function, the more a manager thinks like a marketeer, the most likely he or she will succeed.  Be where people are and be where they are receptive.

Find and use the path most travelled. It could be your yellow brick road.

Once upon a time in Soho

I was having lunch with a friend in a lovely vegetarian café in Soho this week and we were talking about work.  He and I work in different companies, different jobs, but we share an interest in how the world works and a desire to learn.

He said, 'The bit I don’t get, is how to get my point across to the decision makers.  I can blind them with logic, I can build a great presentation….'

He was struggling with what so many of us struggle with, influencing others.  A few moments later we went back to the topic and I said, 'So, what other ways are there do you think to get a point across?'  He started thinking out loud and after a few sentences he started getting warmer when he said, 'metaphor'.

I find that most people use a, rational approach, a deductive logical approach to solving problems and indentifying opportunities.  Think it through, understand cause and effect, then put a solution together.  The trouble is if you want others to adopt your solution, telling them so in a rational way doesn’t have the impact and influence.

How to get your point across?

I said to my friend, 'You could tell a story.  Stories capture attention because we’ve been wired for tens of thousands of years to communicate using stories'.  (For example, Jesus told parables, he didn’t  state a moral code as such – he explained what  people living that code did).  I went on, 'it may be that you had a vivid conversation with a customer about your product and this validates the conclusion you came to using data and logic.  If you tell the story first, then provide supporting data, you’ll have way more impact'.

(Of course – be sure to tell stories that support your rational conclusions, not the other way around.  Anecdote is not data.  Fool others, but don’t fool yourself – be sure the data supports the anecdote).

We continued our conversation and discussed the presentation methods and sales techniques that really work.  Logic featured as back up, not a leading strategy.  Other than stories, we identified using imagery, analogies and experiences. 

It’s no co-incidence that I started writing this blog post as a story.  I was hoping it  would capture your attention better than it would if I just started out with explaining how to get a point across.  Well did it?

Remember – we have two brains.  A logical one and an emotional one.  The emotional  one always wins the battle for influence and the triggers you can use  (stories, images, experience, patterns) are very different to the way in which you came up with the solution (logic, analysis, reasoning).

So, by all means solve a problem.  To get others to act on your solution figure out how you can tell a story.

My friend and I will be meeting up in another month.  Maybe I’ll bring you back another story.