That term, “competitive advantage”, caused me to start this newsletter with the intent of using the BBB study as a reason for you to buy business relationship enhancing gift albums from me. As I started writing, I realized that there is much more o
n the table than just making a sale. The ramifications of the BBB study are staggering.Speculation is rampant about the cause, or causes, of this rather dramatic decline. Economists blame the sky rocketing cost of gasoline as the straw that broke the camel’s back. Democrats blame the Republicans, and vice versa. However, confidence extends beyond specific businesses to business in general.
Even the Girl Scout who knocks on your door to sell Girl Scout cookies has to overcome the public’s loss of confidence in eating high fat, high sugar foods.
Jason McClain, founder of Evolutionary Sales in San Francisco, would probably use self esteem to explain how to interpret the BBB study. www.symbiosis4u.us/MP3/SelfEsteem.mp3
Perhaps Seth Godin, former VP at Yahoo, would identify a loss of consumer confidence as a reaction to an inundation of sales messages. www.symbiosis4u.us/Newsletter/ManipulatorsBySeth Godin.pdf
Because my previous business was repeatedly impacted by outsourcing, I assumed the primary cause would be loss of jobs, and/or loss of job security, due to off shore competition.
As I thought about the BBB report, I could see that each of these diverse answers held some element of cause-effect. However, not even the combined answers could encapsulate the whole problem. Something was missing. What did I not see?
I was discussing this issue with my think tank when one of them mentioned that that the BBB report does not refer to the past, but expectations of the future. All of the probable causes which had been postulated, each with some element of validity, were all based on the past, not probable futures.
With this new perspective, I asked myself how a highly regarded futurist would interpret the BBB news?
Alvin Toffler, author of Future Shock and other best selling books about the near future, in an interview with Wired Magazine said …
“I once had a class of 15-year-old high school kids and I gave them index cards, and I said, ‘Write down seven things that will happen in the future.’
“They said there would be revolutions and presidents would be assassinated, and we would all drown in ecological sludge. A very dramatic series of events. But I noticed that of the 198 items that they handed in, only six used the word ‘I.’ So I gave them another set of cards, and I said, ‘Now I want you to write down seven things that are going to happen to you.’
“Back came, "I will be married when I'm 21,’ ‘I will live in the same neighborhood,’ ‘I will have a dog." And the disjuncture between the world that they were seeing out there and their own presuppositions was amazing.
“We thought about this, and concluded on the basis of just guesswork that the image of reality that they're getting from the media is one of high-speed rapid change, and the image that they're getting in their classrooms is one of no change at all.”
Could this be the main reason for the loss of consumer confidence in business … nothing has changed … past tense? Or is it that consumers, most of whom are employees, do not believe that anything will improve tomorrow or next year … future tense?
We humans are creatures of habit. We predict the near future (next month or next year) based upon what has happened in the near past (last month or last year). When our expectations in the near past were not realized, we do not expect our expectations in the near future to be realized. Hence, no expectations for the future. No confidence in the future.
Since future expectations are typically linked to employment, then a lack of expectations could easily translate into a 24% decrease in trust in business.
Could the BBB study mean that many consumers (employees) feel they are just a number on the company’s employee list … and fear it will change for the worse … by not being listed as an employee at all?
Could we interpret the study to mean that many consumers (employees) feel that their employer controls their lives, and a loss of confidence means they expect their quality of life will be less in the future?
After study, and some really enlightening conversations, I have a different understanding of the BBB study. When you boil all the diverse reasons, past or future, employee or consumer, it comes down to a simple statement. Consumers, employees, voters, and families do not believe that anyone cares.
Consumers don’t believe anyone cares … because nobody can control the rising price of everything … of which gasoline is just the most obvious. No company, no CEO, no HR Manager, not even the President of the United States can give what they do not have … control over inflation. Employees don’t believe that anyone cares … because there is no job security … because the company cannot see beyond the next year, let alone beyond the next decade. Bill Gates put this concept in a nutshell when he said that Microsoft could become a defunct business within two years of whenever someone comes up with a better operating system, at less price. Because Microsoft is like an apple ripe for picking, not even Microsoft has a vision of the future. No company, no CEO, no HR Manager, not even the Founding Father of Microsoft can give what they do not have … job security.
Voters do not believe anyone cares … because of the Golden Rule. The Golden Rule is to “Do unto others as you would have them do unto you”. However, Joe Taxpayer believes the Golden Rule has been politically massaged into , “He who has the gold, makes the rules.” Since Joe Taxpayer does not have the gold, he cannot make the rules. Ergo, he chooses to not participate in elections because … neither his vote … nor his life … are significant.
Napoleon once described foot soldiers as “canon fodder” … food for canons. Is it possible that voters feel like they are like disposable assets, nothing more than “canon fodder”?
If the antithesis of “canon fodder” is … significance … then no company, no CEO, no HR Manager, no five star general, (not even the Emperor Napoleon) can give what they do not have … significance.
Or can they?
For millennia, the main source of significance has been in the family unit. Fathers realized significance by providing for their family. Mothers personified significance by raising children to become self-sufficient, caring adults who also sought significance. Grandfathers and grandmothers found significance through wise counseling for the extended family.
Then the Industrial Revolution fractured thousands of years of family unity. The nuclear family almost ceased to exist. Because humans need to feel significant, and because the primary source for feeling significant had nearly disappeared, the nuclear family was gradually replaced with the nuclear work group. The extended family was slowly replaced by the company. The community was sometimes replaced by the large corporation.
Consider the following.
Does not the average employee spend more waking hours with their co-workers than with their family?
Do not co-workers develop bonds of friendship that are frequently closer than bonds with biological siblings?
Do not some managers function as if they were the patriarch of a family, in contrast to those who manage by intimidation?
As you can see from these limited examples, large corporations, companies, and work groups have a significant amount of influence over an employee’s feelings of “significance”.
However, they only have that influence … AFTER they realize that employment means more than just earning a paycheck.
The “significance” an employee feels is directly proportional to the personal recognition they receive from their immediate (or higher) supervisor … not just from the size of their paycheck … nor just how big their office is … nor even the size of the rubber tree plant in the corner. Because significance has its root in the family relationships, then significance is primarily about relationships, not money. Which is best expressed through the old adage …
Money will buy a fine dog, but only kindness will make him wag his tail.
An employee’s feeling of significance is an emotional state that is developed, not bought or sold.
Only a person who has significance can give it away (you cannot give what you do not have).
Expressed inversely, significance cannot be given by a person who is not significant in the eyes of the intended recipient.
Let me close this newsletter with the question that my research caused me to ask myself …
WHO … HAS TO DO WHAT … IN ORDER TO MAKE ME FEEL SIGNIFICANT?
WHO OR WHAT CONSISITENTLY CAUSES MY TAIL TO WAG?
As I thought about my answers to that question, I realized that one of those people … is you.
I hope you realize that your reply to my newsletter is actually your gift of significance to me.
As a “thank you” for your reply, I will send you a copy of Wallace Wattle’s classic “The Science of Greatness”. I reformatted this 100 year old classic into an easy to read EZ eBook so you can turn pages on your computer screen (or PDA) similar to the way you turn pages in a book. If you don’t have any comments on the BBB article, just send me an email with “great” in the subject line and I will send you the eBook … for free … because you are significant to me.
No comments:
Post a Comment