I did leave these meetings with some interesting takeaways and reflections:

1) Start with strategy. Figure out what you are trying to accomplish, who your target audience is and then decide on platforms. Make sure you select the VITAL FEW messages you want to disseminate and that messaging in your company has a clear drumbeat and cadence.
2. While it is not clear where functional responsibility for employee communications should reside – opinons varied from marketing, to HR to totally distributive models – everybody seemed to pretty much agree that in order for employee communications to be effective, the executive team has to take ownership for CONTENT. As one marketing executive said, leadership is the CONDUCTOR, and marketing or HR or perhaps a partnership is the orchestra responsible for disseminating key messages.
3. Communicate, communicate, communicate! We need to continue to drive fronline managers to understand the importance of taking the VITAL few messages selected by executive leadership and then REPEATING using many different platforms.
4. Don’t forget old and proven techniques: face-to-face conversations and two-way dialogue continue to be one of the most effective ways to communicate. Tell your managers to go have lunch in the employee lunchroom. Emphasize the importance of doing one-on-ones. Engage in roundtable discussions.
5. Employees yearn for interaction in whatever way it can be offered. Leverage technology and social media such as interactive blogs, collaborative software…anything that invites dialogue is what employees want the most.Some of the fear around social media is unfounded. Companies that have introduced interactive blogs, discussion forums and more are finding that employees tend to self-police pretty effectively. If you want to start doing a company blog, make sure you pick the right person. Someone that is really boring won’t do the trick. Neither will a CEO that is using the blog to share all his vacations to exotic places, dinners at gourmet restaurants, and golf tournaments…..true example shared by one of the executives in attendance. Some of the companies, on hte other hand are using Twitter or Yammer effectively to share across their company what different executives are up to – employees already sufffering from information overload like the “small size” of messages.
6. Be appropriate for you company and industry when you use new technology. What works for a high tech company where everybody has access to a computer is not likely to succeed in a factory setting.
7. Make sure you use your managers in the dissemination of the messages you want to drive. That may mean that you have to give them a tool set, discussion points etc before you ask them to share important news.
8. Have your leadership team establish a standing agenda item at the end of meetings to answer the following question: What are the key messages we are taking out of this meeting that we want to communicate across the organization?
9. Make sure that communications are authentic and not too polished. For example, some of the companies have effectively been using flip videos to share what employees are up to in different locations. Very popular with employees.

What else would you want to add? What are some of the best practices you know of that have not been mentioned?

For more information on Executive Coaching please visit http://www.hrnow.net/coach.htm. Suzanne has two blogs: http://executiveyak.com and http://hrundercover.com/ (we want your workplace stories).

The last several years I have picked a “personal annual focus” as a way to go below the surface and explore new territory for myself. Last year my focus was on “social media.” I immersed myself: got on Twitter, developed two blogs and became an avid user of Facebook. In 2010 my focus is on “deep change.” My bias is that my home brain and work brain is one and the same (just as my life and work have become inextricably intertwined), so I am delving into “deep change” from both a professional and personal perspective. While I am doing personal work to become more aware of my own deep seated patterns of being, I also, as the founder of several executive roundtables, decided to involve my marketing and human resources executives in discussions around “deep change.” As executives we have plenty of opportunities to get exposed to change models and change management techniques. Our recent roundtable discussions were specifically designed to NOT go there, but to instead help us as leaders in our organizations take a close and personal look at who we are and how “who we are” determines how we position and lead change.

Change is certainly becoming the constant in our organizations. It is coming at us from all directions – global, financial, technological, environmental, personal, social, regulatory. Some say that change today is different from yesterday –it has a stronger emotional component than used to be the case..perhaps some nostalgia about the good old days. There is certainly more competitive pressure in the changing landscape, and because of the sometimes staggering velocity of change we are facing, we have less time to wait for people to come around. There are all kinds of compelling reasons for us as leaders in our organizations to develop change mastery.

Why is change so difficult? Can the answer be found in brain research? It is fascinating to me that scholars seem to be increasingly paying attention to the relationship between behavioral and neurological sciences. So, what does brain science tell us about change?

First and foremost, according to John Medina (author of Brain Rules), “safety” will hijack everything and anyone all the time. In other words, the first priority of the brain is “safety.” In our organizations, as we roll out change, the fundamental question every single individual will have is one of “Am I safe?”

Second, once the brain is “safe” it starts looking for what’s interesting – the brain doesn’t want to be bored. And, since boredom and interest is relative, the challenge for leaders to find compelling reasons for change is huge and complex.

Why do change initiatives fail?
About 70% of organizational change initiatives fail, probably not because the change was a bad idea, but because leaders failed to help employees feel safe, further complicated by the fact that each and every employee has different risk tolerance levels. What feels safe for me is probably not feeling safe to you. What is an opportunity for you may feel like a risk for me.

One of my marketing executives shared an interesting story. At one point in his career he had been the catalyst for a major change initiative taking an organization from an engineering focus to a sales focus. While business results coming out of the change were impressive, they were not sustained when he left the organization a few years later. So, what was the problem? This change initiative included significant personal change for individuals at all levels of the organization and he had failed to make sure that the whole organization felt safe and invested in the change. He had focused too narrowly on the functions most immediately impacted and as a result, the change could not be sustained as employees gradually returned to the comfort of what had felt safe in the past. This executive had let his own results orientation and sense of urgency get the better of him and failed to recognize the importance of reaching out to the whole organization as a critical element of sustainability.

Another executive shared the pitfalls of having been too passionate in leading change and mistakenly assuming that everyone else would feel the same. In reality people on the receiving end of his passion became fearful. As a leader he had to ask himself how willing he was to stop himself and start asking some tough questions. Why am I doing this? What are my employees feeling unsafe with? Are they even aware that they are feeling unsafe?

What is the key to successful change?
Between the two groups of executives tackling this question, several themes emerged:
• As a leader, you have to be courageous and be willing put yourself out there and take risk at a personal level: “You have to become that thing you are saying you want us to become.” The reality is that the eyes of all employees will be on you. Will your actions match your words? Dissonance WILL be noticed….for example the CEO who takes a BIG bonus at the same time as the workforce is severely cut back….You had better be prepared to ask yourself whether you are willing and prepared to change and demonstrate the behaviors you ask for before you roll out the change.
• If you don’t come up with a compelling reason to change, you cannot successfully work through the natural resistance to change. Can you answer the question: What bad things will happen if we don’t change?
• As a leader you have to demonstrate humility, be in a constant state of learning and be transparent about your own weaknesses. You have to embrace learning, no matter what the source is.
• You have to surround yourself with other agile leaders. One of the HR executives for whom this had been a particularly important element of working through change at his company said: “They challenge the hell out of me!”
• You have to be keenly aware of your own personal leadership style and risk tolerance level. When you position change you do it from that perspective and run the danger of ignoring and forgetting that others have different needs. Leadership style profiles, such as DISC, can be a valuable tool to help leaders become more aware of their own styles, how they impact others and how to adapt (DISC is a cornerstone of my executive coaching practice, and there are many other good assessments such as the Behavior Style Profiles of the Effectiveness Institute).

What is HR’s Role
The HR executives also had a discussion around the unique role HR can play in organizational change initiatives. Here are some of the nuggets from that discussion:
• Present the raw truth to your CEO – smack your CEO right between the eyes – you may get pushback, but over time your honesty will be appreciated. Realize that you have to earn the right to be this direct and couple the truth-telling with humility,
• Realize that it is not HR’s role to save everyone, but rather to help educate employees to make choices and decisions that they ultimately own personally,
• HR has a bird’s eye view that provides a unique opportunity for HR to act as a connector and as the face of change.
• Develop a learning organization culture where change has become the constant.
• Be genuine and approachable. An open door is sacred. You cannot allow yourselves to hide behind it.

My 2010 journey into “deep change” has started. I understand that this year will provide me with an unprecedented opportunity to wrestle with both personal and professional change. I also understand that some of the change I am facing has both risk and opportunity and how I manage and try to mitigate risk and fear goes back to deep seated patterns that have developed over a lifetime. I look forward to the challenge. Stay tuned.

Lastly, my thanks to George Myers from the Effectiveness Institute for working with me to make the HR and Marketing Roundtable discussions on Deep Change productive and truly meaningful for myself and the close to 50 execs from my roundtables that participated.

Suzanne Elshult, HRNow

The College Success Foundation is a great resource for finding talented,
diverse employees to fill openings at your organization. CSF is seeking to
partner with organizations to place their graduates. This is not a
recruiting firm. Their primary mission is to provide support to low income
students to attend college and to reach their full potential in life. For
more information about this program, call Sarah Graham, Senior Program
Officer, Alumni at (425)416-2002 or email her at
sgraham@collegesuccessfoundation.org. For more information read the CSF Overview below.

Pamela Taylor, Vice President Human Resources, HomeStreet Bank

The College Success Foundation has 10 years of proven experience inspiring and supporting under-served, low-income students to finish high school, and providing the financial support and mentoring they need to succeed in college. Many low-income students are unable to reach their full potential in life because they are constrained by economic and other barriers that prevent them from succeeding in high school and college. At the College Success Foundation, we’ve spent the past ten years developing a successful, results-backed model for how to remove these barriers and unlock students’ potential. Our approach is to intervene early, providing students and parents with the inspiration, incentives, mentoring, and financial supports they need to make a college degree possible. We are passionate about what we do, and we promise to stop at nothing to help America’s children succeed in college, the workplace, and life. When we help our children succeed, we help our communities and America succeed.

Our Success to Date

We are proud of the success of our students in Washington State. The following metrics show the progress of the College Success Foundation from its inception through the year 2009.
• Total number of Washington State scholarship dollars disbursed – $107 million
• Total number of Washington State scholarships awarded – 5964
• Total number of Washington State college graduates – 1600

College Success Foundation Graduates are a Great, Diverse Workforce Talent Pool

Currently, there are nearly 1,600 graduates from our five scholarship programs. Of those, 71% are graduates of color (breakdown below). In addition, we will graduate approximately 350 scholars each year in the future.

Ethnicity of College Success Foundation Graduates %
• Asian, Asian American, or Pacific Islander 17.0%
• Black or African American 17.8%
• Hispanic 25.9%
• Multi-racial 7.3%
• Native American 3.1%
• White or Caucasian American 28.8%

Many of these students are first generation college graduates – the first in their family to even attend college. While attending school, they have worked many hours to help support their families. Because of this, they have a very strong work ethic, are eager to improve their lives, and are ready to serve. They attend and graduate from colleges and universities, primarily in Washington State, but all over the country. Over 18% of College Success Foundation alumni are completing or have completed post-baccalaureate programs. Not only are they eager for employment, they have a commitment to give back. Over 10% of our scholars are contributing through College Success Foundation initiatives, including mentoring future scholars, volunteering at summer programs, and speaking about their experiences at high schools.

Next Steps…
The College Success Foundation is looking to build relationships with employers in the Northwest to help place these talented, hard-working young people in the workforce. With your help we can continue to build a brighter future for our communities, one student at a time.

Rod Brooks, CMO with PEMCO is a long-term member of the MER Roundtable and occasional guest writer of my ExecutiveYak blog. Please help support the families of the fallen officers by forwarding this blogpost link to your network:

http://executiveyak.com/?p=331

 Hi ExecutiveYak Readers:

This is Rod Brooks, CMO at PEMCO Insurance.  We’re deeply saddened by the recent and tragic loss of law enforcement officers in the Puget Sound Region.  As many of our Northwest neighbors have already demonstrated in countless ways, we want to help in whatever way we can.

On Friday, Dec. 11, PEMCO is hosting a fundraising event encouraging the Northwest community to join in supporting the families of local police officers who recently died. 

All are invited to come together in the holiday spirit of giving to help surpass PEMCO’s $12,500 matching commitment with additional contributions — with the ultimate goal being to grow the total funds PEMCO will match and donate to the police officers’ benevolent fund. 

As part of our commitment, PEMCO will match all ticket sale proceeds dollar for dollar and will equally match additional donations made at the event, held at The Canal in Seattle from 6 p.m. – 9 p.m.

The price of admission directly benefits the fallen officers’ families and provides a festive evening to come together as a community to honor and remember those who lost their lives.

Refreshments will be provided, along with fun activities throughout the night. 

The holidays are always a busy time of year, and we announced the event on short notice. Still, we hope you can join us on Friday, Dec. 11 for this worthy cause.  If you can’t attend, we’ve made it easy to support in other ways.  We’ve posted additional information on our blog  and you can also make a difference by donating directly to the Lakewood Police Independent Guild.

Visitors can purchase tickets here for $25 each and all ticket proceeds will directly benefit the benevolent fund established by the Lakewood Police Independent Guild.

This is an overwhelmingly difficult time, and we appreciate your interest in this cause. Our heartfelt condolences go to the families and all those touched by this recent loss.

Many thanks,

Rod Brooks

VP & CMO of PEMCO Insurance
Rod.Brooks@pemco.com
@NW_Mktg_Guy

For more information on Executive Coaching please visit http://www.hrnow.net/coach.htm. Suzanne has two blogs:  http://executiveyak.com and http://hrundercover.com/ (we want your workplace stories).

What is evident, moreover, is that the tactics used by the marketing function in a business-to-business world all have something in common. They are geared toward achieving an objective that is not short-term focused. With the possible exception of an ad that has a near-term offering, marketing campaigns are designed in terms of frequency of exposure, as well as reach (how often how many people view it). Actions like this take time to have an impact since their persuasiveness is a function of purposefully repetitive and, therefore, cumulative effects. Consequently, these are not drivers of short-term behavior as much as they are promoters of patterns of perception around either the company or its offerings. In simple terms, this is a battle for the attention of a potential buyer as opposed to an effort to close a near-term sale. This, of course, implies the sales function is not considered a marketing tool.

A salesperson may use to his advantage that attention and awareness marketing has engendered, but the sales tactics used will be geared toward facilitating a buying decision in as short a time frame as is feasible given the buyer’s disposition. Examples of this more immediate collection of tactics are: statements of product or service benefits, then questions asking for reactions to benefit statements, “closing” questions related to the perceived value, as well as many leading questions that are designed to move someone closer to revealing their level of interest in buying and, of course, the timing of the buying decision. All of these are used to get agreement on the value of the offering to the buyer, clarify to the buyer sufficient interest in the offering, and finally facilitate a buying decision.

This results in two groups of people whose interests intersect only over a span that is of no immediate curiosity to one group (salespeople) and only in a cumulative fashion to the other (marketing). Is there a way, however, that this difference in time horizons can be capitalized on more effectively by the marketing organization rather than become a source of conflict?

In Philip Kotler’s textbook on marketing, he states: “Marketing has evolved from its early origins in distribution and selling into a comprehensive philosophy for relating any organization dynamically to its markets.” If there were any definition less likely to attract the interest of salespeople, it would be hard to find. On the other hand, if one were to reword, as well as narrow, the focus of the same statement to “an approach to creating a closer relationship between salespeople and their prospects,” you might get some salespeople to take notice.

What might other marketing principles look like if put in a “sales” perspective? To explore this, one only needs to start with understanding one of the critical concepts in modern marketing theory, the “marketing mix.”

Product, Place, Promotion, and Price

According to Kotler, “Marketing mix is the set of controllable variables and their levels that the firm uses to influence the target market.” He considers four variables: “Product, Place, Promotion, and Price,” although some marketing strategists like to include “Packaging,” as well.

For the purposes of this discussion, we will focus on “Product.” Theodore Levitt’s marketing text titled, “The Marketing Imagination,” offers the first instance of someone describing a product as a layered concept starting with the core or “generic” center without which one cannot compete, i.e., what is covered by the purchase agreement, and successively adding more layers, which include the “expected” product, i.e., price, payment terms, delivery, technical support, and anything else that comprises the minimally expected features necessary to the customer; the “augmented” product, i.e., unrequired reporting, helpful advice, special delivery, or anything the customer perceives to be surpassing its minimum expectations but still key to successfully selling the product; and finally, the “potential” product, which is anything that may be added or changed, a product-related variable that is possible depending on changing circumstances in the marketplace and existing primarily to grow the product’s viability over time.

It’s important to understand what professional marketers think the “product” consists of. This is what the generally accepted marketing experts believe is the most effective and useful way of looking at what it is salespeople sell. Note the salespeople themselves are not considered part of this paradigm. They don’t fall into any of the concentric circles of the product concept, although special delivery and technical support do.

Direct selling, however, is considered by these same authors to fall into the category of “marketing communication.” This includes advertising, sales promotion (samples, coupons, contests, and buying allowances), and publicity (public relations). However, direct selling, sometimes referred to as “personal selling,” is believed to have certain unique qualities. Kotler describes personal selling as having three unique attributes:

1. “Personal confrontation. Personal selling involves an alive, immediate, and interactive relationship between two or more persons.”

2. “Cultivation. Personal selling permits all kinds of relationships to spring up, ranging from a matter-of-fact selling relationship to a deep personal friendship.”

3. “Response. Personal selling, in contrast to advertising, makes the buyer feel under some obligation for having listened to the sales talk or using up the sales representative’s time.”

Psychological Aspect

Beyond Kotler’s description of the distinctive aspects of personal selling, it also should be noted that many authors of “how to” sales books discuss some of the psychological aspects of buyers who prefer to buy from salespeople they identify with or they believe represent “success,” however they may define that. This could mean preferring to buy from someone who drives an expensive car or someone whose fashionable dress projects success or someone whose network includes other successful people. Clearly, no matter how one looks at this form of marketing communication, some powerful forces are at play here—more powerful in persuading a buyer to buy than the simple communication of product benefits or even the purported subliminal appeal to psychological predispositions inherent in some advertisements.

Do these differences between personal selling and other marketing communication tools suggest taking a different perspective? Is it sufficiently different to have us rethink the traditional view marketers or marketing professors have promulgated since the first printing of Philip Kotler’s “Marketing Management” in 1980? In my opinion, yes, it does.

Why? Well, if we could simply say a sales call can be quantified in some way consistent with the frequency, reach, and other statistical formulations associated with advertising, public relations, and other promotional efforts, then perhaps there wouldn’t be the qualitative differences that cause the traditional categorization of personal selling to potentially have less value. The fact that a sales meeting can be a “stressful encounter” and that it can build a “relationship” that also may induce a buyer to feel an “obligation” to respond in some fashion should make it clear we are dealing with an entirely different situation than that engendered by other forms of marketing.

How different is this? What new way should anyone, no less a marketer, use to view the role of the salesperson? What are the implications of this new perspective for hiring salespeople, managing them, and facilitating their effectiveness?

Since I believe personal selling cannot be lumped together with advertising, promotion, and other forms of marketing communication, it, therefore, must be placed in some other conceptual space that is more appropriate. What might that be?

First, let’s look back at the concept of the “whole product.” Note the “expected product” area. This layer describes that part of the whole product where the customer’s minimum expectation of features, capabilities, or support beyond that of the generic or core product are met. As Theodore Levitt wrote, “Every customer has minimal purchase conditions that exceed the generic product itself.”

Examples that have been given of this “minimal expectation” include things such as delivery terms, payment terms, and technical support associated with product offerings; a suitable office for the customer to meet with a realtor; and a pleasing personality in an attorney when associated with a service offering. These examples suggest a close connection with the core product and although not an integral part of the “core,” still are required to make a sale. Along these lines, aren’t there personally sold products or services where a particular sales approach, personality, or expertise also is required for the sale to take place?

For an appropriate example, let’s look at the outsourced software development business, which is a technically focused service described using idiosyncratic language to people who have an understanding of its principles. Selling this service requires a facility with terms such as “software development life cycle (SDLC),” “waterfall methodology,” “SCRUM,” “prioritized feature lists,” “code reviews,” “bug levels,” and much more. These words describe the particular processes used to develop software and how the outcome of the programming effort is evaluated and measured. Without knowing this unique language, a salesperson would have no effective way to communicate how the service is differentiated, no less described in ways similar to a competitor’s.

Additionally, due to the significant cost associated with software development, the financial risk associated with outsourcing this activity is considerable. Moreover, if the outcome of the outsourced project exceeds the budget and/or time frame it was allocated, or in the worst case—which happens more frequently in this business than generally recognized—a complete failure occurs, people’s careers can be tragically impacted.

Consequently, the degree to which the prospective customer trusts the salesperson’s portrayal of a positive outcome perforce becomes a significant factor in the decision-making process. The track record of the firm, the track record of the particular methodology of development used, the reputation of the developers and managers, and, of course, the passion with which the salesperson describes the firm’s dedication to the success of his or her customers all play a role in the purchasing decision.

To say the facilitation of a sale in the aforementioned service industry requires personal selling rather than another form of marketing communication is so generally accepted that I have yet to find a company selling this service for the purpose of doing non-trivial information technology projects without a direct sales organization of some kind. Outsourcing software development to lower cost labor centers such as India, Vietnam, China, and Eastern Europe for enterprise-level applications still involves a personal selling effort whose characteristics mirror those just described.

Effectively, personal selling in the example above has become part of a customer’s minimal expectation for the “product.” The question then becomes whether or not this alters the ways in which firms in industries where personal selling is actually a component of the “expected product” hire and train their salespeople.

Salesperson Selection

So, if salespeople could be considered in any given instance part of the minimum expectations the potential customer has for what is included with the product or service, then what might happen to the selection process for these salespeople? Would the marketing department be involved to make certain its view of the service or product’s positioning was an influencing factor in the hiring decision? Would the hire be viewed by executives as more important and, therefore, suggest they become part of the interviewing process?

Once hired, would the salesperson’s training be any more extensive than would otherwise be the case? Would the positioning of the product or service be taught any differently? Would the salesperson become part of that positioning? Would the dress, speech, demeanor, or target of the sales call be altered in a meaningful way?

Responses to these questions, of course, will tend toward situational, industry-specific, and company culture-oriented answers. However, the prospect of focusing more on these questions as a result of a new perspective regarding the relationship of personal selling to the whole product concept should produce different and potentially superior results. Realizing there are more powerful forces at play in the salesperson—more prospect interaction than could ever exist in the interplay between other marketing communication vehicles and the prospective customer—makes for a different and potentially much more effective selling process. Taking greater care of the implications for personnel selection and training are an obvious consequence.

When sales is viewed more as an integral part of the “expected product,” marketing’s view of the role of personal selling in the marketing mix will have to change, and with it, the importance of understanding the value of the salesperson. Although a simple hypothesis, a change in thinking about the nature of the “whole product” may have powerful repercussions for the place personal selling has in businesses where effective direct selling is crucial.

Cliff Chirls has held a variety of sales management, marketing, and general management positions in his 30-year career, including the role of marketing director at Aldus Corporation (which merged with Adobe), where he managed the company’s $60 million graphics products business, and chief operating officer of SolutionsIQ, a $50 million IT services firm. He currently is managing partner at the Effectiveness Institute, a global training and consulting firm based in Redmond, WA. Contact him at cliff@effectivenessinstitute.com.

I had a provocative discussion on healthcare reform with some 25 top HR executives in the Seattle area last week. Any doubts I had silently harbored  about how meaningful this roundtable would be, evaporated almost instantly  as the group started interacting in a meaningful way almost immediately. Some of the comments from long-standing members have ranged from : “fantastic session” to “the best HR Executive Forum we ever had.”

So, what did I walk away with? A sense that healthcare reform will happen. There is an expectation that something will land on Obama’s desk before the end of the year. We can save a LOT of money by addressing systemic problems such as overutilization and administrative waste (some say as much as 50%). A single payer plan is not possible in the US at this time – it’s too great of a clash with our culture of differentiation, choice and competition – one size fits all simply will not work here.  Realistically a public/private option is most likely to fly.  One of our member executives pointed out that in the 13 countries her company is doing business, the US is the only one with no government option, but in most other countries with a public option it is not comprehensive and employers still offer supplemental plans. What else? The expectation that we can cover everybody for everything is unrealistic. We have to decide what it is we can afford and what our priorities are. That is hard to do without it becoming deeply personal.  Regardless of what happens employers will continue to play a big role.

Questions I Have

1. Can we really save 50% of healthcare costs without doing a single thing ( some say we can achieve that level of savings by addressing things like overutilization, defensive medicine and administrative waste)?  There are huge barriers to overcome including the fact that trial lawyers have 2/3rds of congress in their pocket (in part our litigious society is at fault and the expectation we have that any outcome that is less than perfect is unacceptable and reason to file suit). Doctors are being increasingly squeezed – paid less, expected to be more productive and thus see patients less – and trying to make up by finding new ways to make money (in-sourcing services, more tests etc…). Some say the individual practice model is dying and morphing into something different. As an industry, healthcare has lagged sorely behind in terms of investing in technology to reduce administrative waste. 
2. Will the US economy collapse if we fail to do something now. The weight of our current debt is staggering and healthcare reform may  be an issue of national security. What happens if China stops buying our treasuries?
3. Does it make sense that employers continue to play as big of a role in providing healthcare as they have in the past? The current model grew out of the depression. Are things different enough now to warrant a totally new and different model?
4. How can we be successful long-term with healthcare reform if it does not decisively address the underlying issue of becoming less healthy as a society? In fact some reform seems to go against some of the inroads we have been making with wellness strategies in recent years.
5. How can we better educate our citizens/employees to become more savvy consumers? We have not done a very good job in the past.
6. Is it realistic to expect the average citizen to track healthcare reform and understand the implications for themselves and others when one single bill is more than 1000 pages (are you wonky enough to go on the internet and read it all?), and there is a lot of secrecy and machinations under the table in Washington DC? Newt Gingrich calls the legislative process “perverted “ (at least one thing he and I can agree on).
7. Is fee for service medicine all over and going away? How do consortiums differ from managed care? Is our specialty-oriented way of providing care viable? Our specialty orientation is very unique to the United States.
8. Why is dealing with healthcare so different from how we deal with education in this country? We all pay for public schools and then as a private citizen you have the choice to pay more for a private school?
9. Can we afford to pay for everything? Probably not. The problem with the Washington State Basic Plan is that it is trying to cover too much. So, how do we decide what we can afford and what is important to us as a society? Does it ultimately boil down to what Keith Olberman  said recently….it all becomes very personal when we start talking about death. It is really all an academic discussion until you or someone in your family gets sick.
10. Some healthcare reform options provide employers with an opportunity to pay a penalty (for example 8%) if they stop providing healthcare? Is this a built-in incentive for employers to say “Great, I will write you  a check?” Is this a way to give the public option a jump start? Is this good or bad?

Do you have answers to any of these questions or other questions you want to add? Reply to this post!!!

Do you have  personal stories related to healtcare reform to share (anonoymously? Go to http://hrundercover.com

For more information on Executive Coaching please visit http://www.hrnow.net/coach.htm

In my last post we explored how HR can help Marketing. In this post, the  third of four in a series on Internal Branding, the focus is on how Marketing can help HR. Here are some ideas brainstormed in my joint Marketing/HR Executive Roundtable  a few weeks ago:

• Bring creative expertise to internal branding
• Provide writing and messaging support
• Foster enthusiasm for internal initiatives
• Help HR stay informed about external strategies
• Share  expertise for soliciting feedback to get internal/employee input
• Capturing and publicizing brand heroes during a relaunch
• Connect to Purpose campaign to use testimonials from customers as an external branding campaign
• Hold events for employees centered on your products and/or mission
• Encourage employees to hold parties celebrating a new product launch, and introduce the product to your friends/families; providing marketing materials and small incentives  (grassroots marketing)

 In my final post in my internal branding series we will discuss how social media is impacting internal branding. Stay tuned!

Question: What are some other ideas on how Marketing can support HR in internal branding? What is your marketing department doing?  What are the barries and opportunities?

For more information on Executive Coaching please visit http://www.hrnow.net/coach.htm. Suzanne has two blogs:  http://executiveyak.com and http://hrundercover.com/ (we want your workplace stories).

It  is not always easy to know where marketing ends and where HR starts and vice versa. For HR and marketing executives to not run into each other takes a commitment to coordinate, communicate and collaborate. The bottomline question is: what is good for the company, not what is good for HR or Marketing. The main focus for executives should be on representing the company, not their own  functional goals and interests. Here are some ideas for how HR can help Marketing brainstormed in my joint Marketing/HR Executive Roundtable  a few weeks ago:

• Help recruit employees that reflect the community that Marketing is trying to target  (for example Spanish customer service reps needed before marketing to the Latino community)
• Partner to help communicate marketing initiatives to employees in advance of launch
• Connect and work together regularly; reporting to the same executive helps
• Work together to collect survey data from employees
• Find ways to make sure the customer story and brand is reflected in human resources training/communication/orientation
• Make sure  new recruits are a cultural fit to the brand
• Help with the details of the big picture; fill in the blanks
• Combat turfism together; sit at the same table on strategic initiatives
• Have employees help with tradeshow booth, to learn about the event/tradeshow and the products featured
• Bring customers to employee meetings to help convey brand positioning and customer perspective
• Help with consistency in communications – inconsistency is the enemy of authenticity
• Use employees to evangelize the brand in whatever ways you can think of

In my next post, we will explore how Marketing can help HR.

Question: What kind of leader are you? As a member of the executive team, do you represent your own functional interests or those of the overall organization? Or both? 

For more information on Executive Coaching please visit http://www.hrnow.net/coach.htm. Suzanne has two blogs:  http://executiveyak.com and http://hrundercover.com/ (we want your workplace stories).

As the healthcare reform debate rages on in Washington, HR executives are having to manage the fallout from an increasingly antagonistic environment. Some businesses are openly taking a position and engaging their employees as advocates. Others are staying neutral and taking a wait and see approach and closely monitoring what will come out of Washington and what it will mean for their employee benefit plans. Without a doubt many plan sponsors  are also actively thinking about the impact of some of the proposals on their plans and their Employer Brands.

In a few weeks I will be meeting with a group of senior HR executives here in the Pacific Northwest to discuss a variety of critical issues related to healthcare reform. Here are some of the questions this group has decided to address:

• What should we – HR executives – be asking of ourselves and our executive leadership? How can we take a strong leadership role relative to healthcare reform? Should we?
• Is your company taking a public position wt re: to reform? Is your company approaching this issue from a “business” or “moral” perspective or both?
• How are you communicating about healthcare reform wt your employees? Are you trying to engage them with a particular point of view (asking them to send letters to senators etc)? What about unions?
• What are the real life impacts on your organization of various healthcare reform scenarios, how will they affect your organization and how should you position yourself for the decisions that need to be made in your role as steward of your organizations’ benefit and total compensation dollars?
• Is it possible that many of you in fact have plans that do not measure up to what the government states is sufficient levels of coverage?
• What would be  acceptable minimum coverage to avoid an employer getting fined – or needing to pay a tax?
• How is the sufficiency of the plan assessed  (i.e. by design elements such as coinsurance and size of deductible; by premium costs, by percentage of employer contribution to premiums?   What are the early indicators on what is acceptable to be considered a player in the “pay or play” world we will likely be seeing?
• What are implications of this on recent trends that encourage more employee skin in the game – (HSA, HRA, qualified HDHP plans, etc,)?
• Does the endorsement of wellness as central to the strategy of containing costs open the door to more aggressive “carrot and stick” motivators to encourage participation in wellness programs?
• What tax implications will most likely be included – and what are the likely effective dates – and how do we educate /communicate same to our employees?

What other questions and issues do you think HR Executives need to concern themselves with relative to healthcare reform? Do you have  stories related to healtcare reform to tell? Go to http://hrundercover.com

For more information on Executive Coaching please visit http://www.hrnow.net/coach.htm

What happens when you put 50 high-powered HR and Marketing Executives in one room for three hours to explore:

1. How can Marketing help HR?
2. How can HR help Marketing?
3. What are the Implications of social media for internal branding?

These are the questions we posed to the Seattle HR Executive Forum and Marketing Executive Roundtable in a recent joint meeting? Sounding kind of dull? You’d better rethink that. Just check these terrific graphic notes to get a sense of the energy and creativity in the room:

http://www.hrnow.net/internalbrandinggraphicnotes.htm

In fact so much rich content came out of this roundtable, I plan to do a series of blog posts over the next several weeks. Today I’ll give you the general flavor of the discussion and also share one success story of a company where HR and Marketing have done an outstanding job of partnering in a re-branding initiative: PEMCO, here in the Pacific Northwest.

Pretty much everybody in the room agreed that Marketing and HR need to partner and where they come together the most is in the brand, and how the internal brand interacts with and reflects the external brand. Easy say, hard do! It takes time, it means working through turf issues and conflicting views on the right approach. And, the process must be authentic! The employee value proposition needs to align with the true situation (anywhere from the physical environment, to the kind of artwork and furniture chosen, to the dress code – or lack thereof – adopted, and more).

It is not uncommon to see a huge disconnect between a company’s internal and external brand. One of the examples shared was a company with a strong internal brand and culture which was smart, unique and fun, but by no means represented in the external brand which was created by scientists favoring informative but very dense materials.

PEMCO is a great example of a company that dramatically changed it’s brand over a period of years from a meat and potatoe type company to one that has clearly set itself apart by emphasizing it’s unique focus and presence in and identification with the Pacific Northwest. Living here and not being aware of the PEMCO NW Profiles campaign is hard to impossible. The Chief Marketing and Chief People Officers understood from the very beginning that they needed to look at both internal and external branding to make the shift the company needed. In fact, HR and Marketing formed a “Brand Council” and aggressively went to work to take the external brand values and develop employee competencies reflecting the new and desired culture. Many new initiatives were launched to facilitate the change internally to better reflect the external brand. Here are some examples:

• New benefit programs including domestic partners and a wellness initiatives
• Initiatives supporting employee community participation
• Branded clothing for employees
• Introduction of authentic brand value and collaboration techniques such as the World Café, Open Space and Appreciative Inquiry
• A thought leadership and author series initiative (for example bringing local poets to events)
• A new Leadership Initiative emphasizing authenticity and interaction
• Employee events supporting the Northwest Profiles campaign
• A new, more informal dress code (even allowing blue jeans for special events….historically a BIG NONO!)
• New artwork and furniture reflect the new NW brand
• Focus on sustainability. The PEMCO carbon footprint is tracked and posted for all employees and customers to see.

PEMCO is without a doubt a great example of what can happen when HR and Marketing work together.

In my next blog post, I plan to share some specific tools, ideas, resources and reflections that came out in response to the three questions I started out with in this post. You don’t want to miss this! Stay tuned….

For more information on Executive Coaching please visit http://www.hrnow.net/coach.htm. Suzanne has two blogs:  http://executiveyak.com and http://hrundercover.com/ (we want your workplace stories).