It's Not About Me

with similar product lines with common customers. However, large companies with diverse product offerings serving many different customer types and/or markets will have a more difficult time if they attempt to “force fit” a single operating structure onto their entire organization. While having common systems may seem like the ideal solution from an “internal perspective”, it may hinder your ability to serve your diverse customer base effectively in a variety of markets and countries. That is why it is almost always better to structure your organization from the customers’ perspective rather than from top down in your executive suite! Inside Out vs Outside In Too often, companies make decisions based on their current organizational chart structure. You have Customer Service, EDI, Web applications, Claims and Returns, Tech Support, etc. all under different department managers. They often are using multiple internal systems that are not well integrated. New opportunities or suggestions raised by one group may not resonate well with other groups because of how they see the outcome impacting their own department or personnel. When faced with this predicament, it is often exceedingly difficult to get everyo ne to see “the big picture”. Even if they do eventually come to terms with an idea…it is often only after a long -protracted effort that wastes needless time and potentially puts your company at a competitive disadvantage. What is required is the ability to look at things from the outside in or from the customers or prospects point of view. Then and only then can you more easily “breakdown the walls of dissension” and truly address what is in the best interests of the customer. Do not allow your company to be governed by “departmental boundary management” instead of “good business management”! Unless you are forming a brand- new company, most companies find themselves in a “pre existing” position in the marketplace. It is wise to construct a listing of your company’s strengths as well as your company’s perceived weaknesses versus your identified competition. Such a dual listing will provide your company with a framework that will enable you to evaluate where you need to apply your resources to improve your market position. Some companies might be tempted to focus primarily on your weaknesses as opposed to your perceived strengths. However, experience shows that it is usually easier to enhance your strengths than it is to eliminate or minimize your weaknesses. For one thing, your existing employees already have a predetermined set of skills and experience levels; you will find it easier to encourage and reward employee behavior around doing those things that your employees are already good at doing. Certainly, companies should examine their weaknesses and determine if there are any “quick fixes” that will put your company in a better market position, but usually most companies will find that minimizing weaknesses usually requires long-term solutions. o o Building on Strengths versus Minimizing Weaknesses o Seeking Perfection in Employee Performance As much as companies would like to hire only perfect employees (all strengths and no weaknesses), few succeed in the real world. New and existing employees possess a mixture of education levels, skill sets, experience levels, personality traits and dispositions…not to mention the individuals’ health issues and crises going on in their personal lives. Trying to make all your

65