Back to index of articles ►
When Communication is Fallow 
Matthew Clulow - All Rights Reserved - 2005

Corporations build office infrastructure the same way Henry Ford built cars. Like Henry's plant, business processes tend to run horizontally across many departments. When Henry wanted to produce a different result he re-tooled the assembly line.

No! I am not suggesting that you retool your office process. I'll leave that to the change management specialists. What I am suggesting is that effective communication is part of the process, and it can either cause or resolve a lot of road blocks between you and your vision.

If you let a field go fallow you have no idea what's going to grow. If you plant a specific crop there is a good chance you're going to reap what you sow.

Case in Point - A multi-department team responsible for turn-key stores. 

Senior management believed that opening new stores was an essential competitive strategy and a priority. They also wanted good relationships with franchisees but hadn't addressed that in their strategic plan; it was just an expectation. While the stores were generally finished on-time and everyone had completed their respective tasks as required, the franchisees were withholding significant payments because they felt they hadn't received what they were paying for. The problem had been accruing for two years and the outstanding collections were now too significant to ignore.

One manager seemed to be taking all the heat for the problems. The fact that this guy had become the scapegoat was interesting study itself, but it wasn't the problem we were asked to work on. Regardless, under the microscope it became apparent that he had done more than anyone to resolve the issue and was far more interested in resolving problems than placing blame. In fact, he had founded the entire process and had produced a record number of stores in the last two years. If he wasn't the problem, who was?

To avoid a fruitless blame game we started with the assumption that there was room for improvement in the process and not the people. Here is a brief summary of the type of dialogue that emerged as we began asking questions.

1. Law Department: We have a contract. Look at what we have on paper and issue a default notice.

2. Human Resources: We have to ensure that this accountability has been detailed in the job description, and that we train our staff to handle these unique accountabilities.

3. Information Technology: We could install Microsoft Project Manager so everyone can see what has to be done, when, where, and why. The technology part is actually quite easy, but someone else will have to map the process. 

4. Accounting and Finance: When the project is done we tally the charges and mail the invoice. If we can't collect it becomes a legal or franchise department problem.

5. Store Set-up Team: We don't get fixtures when we need them. We don't get inventory soon enough to meet deadlines and there are large wholes in the merchandising because inventory is back-ordered. We are pressured to open the stores before they are really ready.

6. Real Estate: We have to push to open the store by the end of the rent free period. After that it costs us money every day we are closed.

7. Franchise Sales: Our marketing material sets up a performance expectation. If we don't start delivering on that it's going to be hard to sell franchises. 

8. Dealer Relations: We used to have such a good relationship with our franchisees but now we don't. Word is getting around that we don't deliver and it's the new store team that's causing the problem.

9. Merchandising: New stores are a small part of our responsibilities but they take up in inordinate amount of time. We squeeze the vendors to death for discounts, rebates, returns, promotions, sponsorship and terms, and then we don't pay them on time. It's tough getting them to ship. Finance has to pay our vendors on time. 

10. Advertising: It seems like we are always getting the short end of the stick. A supplier doesn't deliver product so we have to change the flyer at the last minute. It seems like everything is a mad rush and when we deliver, we have to delay the distribution of a preprinted flyer because the store set-up team didn't finish on time.

11. Distribution: Our system is highly effective for replenishment, but handling one-off scenarios like new stores always requires and inordinate mount of special handling.

After our initial survey we felt that everyone seemed to understand the significance of the role they played and delivered as expected, and the process was well documented and effective. While the number of unresolved problems with each store seemed higher than normal it was tough to pin down a specific source of the problem. The only real issue was how long it was taking to resolve the deficiencies and that was more a reflection of seasonal workload.

After looking at the range of practical solutions put forward by various parties, all of them with merit, we still felt that we were looking at the symptoms and not seeing the real disease. Then came the the million dollar question. If everyone has the right idea, and all the practical stuff is in place and working, what's left? The list of unresolved issues could be resolved, so why had the backlash and stonewalling been so disproportionate?

For some reason I found myself reflecting on a conversation I had  with an artist, years before. He had said it "It is perfectly okay if you think my work is garbage. What I really hate is indifference". He felt validated when you said his work was either bad or good, but he felt invalidated and slighted if you said nothing.

We reviewed the process map and there it was. The Turnkey approach, by design, did not include regular communication with franchisees. The team had developed a high degree of competence, and inexperienced franchisee involvement was nether required nor desirable. When the store was opened a deficiency list was filed and solutions were scheduled as the team shifted it's focus to the next store on the list. 

Here's the rub. Efficient experts are seen as arrogant and indifferent by people who are trying to part of the team. The franchise sales group had set up an expectation of teamwork and support from the home office while selling the franchise, but the new store team did not include them in the process until just before the store opening. Then, by due process, they discovered deficiencies only to see the team disappeared to work on the next store. All of this is a normal process to an expert who is in the loop, but it's a major point of anxiety for a guy opening his first store. If someone is looking for a relationship, the conceptual or practical view won't satisfy them.

In a nutshell, the process was sending a different message than the marketing material was. The relationship was not controlled by either side.

The deficiencies were easy to resolve. The challenge now was to have the team discover the root problem for themselve, and resolve it themselves. Process review was not new to this group so we did a process review. As the facilitators, our role was to steer the conversation down the right road. As we walked through the process several things became clear.  

1. No one in the room knew what the whole process was, except for the manager who built it, and there were a couple of surprises for him as well.

2. Incumbents had a tendency to view tasks in isolation rather than part of an end goal.

3. While many wanted to be part of a better result there was some reluctance to accept mutual responsibility for the overall failure; they had each done their prescribed. They were willing to resolve it if they knew how.

4. Several people disagreed on a critical point of the process. This was resolved through conversation but would have festered had we not reviewed the process as a group.

5. One step had become redundant so they stopped doing it.

6. No one owned or felt responsible for the relationship with the franchisee, only the tasks assigned to them; a sense of  helplessness is not uncommon where the individual is part of a much larger team. When that discussion surfaced someone saw this as an opportunity for personal growth and jumped on it. 

With the problem identified and someone taking ownership of the relationship, the next step was to build a communications strategy and anchor it in the process. In the end, there was no significant change other one person taking on the responsibility for the relationship. This was neither costly nor difficult.

Conclusion

1. Deeds speak louder than words, you're communicating even when your saying nothing.

2. If communication is left to chance, so is the outcome.

3. When communication is integrated into your strategic plan, you have a far better chance of achieving your vision.

Next Article: Letting your target audience communicate your message.

Back to index of articles ►