Help me here. Is there a difference between our business and our people? “No way”, might be your first reaction and knee jerk response. It was mine. That is the trouble with companies today – they pay less attention to the people and more attention to the business. Don’t they get that they are one and the same? That without the people there is no business?
Then I thought about again. What if there is a difference? A real difference? And what if we could leverage that difference, make it a competitive advantage for all of our key stakeholders, ourselves, our corporation, the financial community, and of course last but certainly not least, for our clients?
Think of it this way – if you have a toothache you go to a dentist. If you need your appendix taken out you go to a surgeon. And if you want your hair cut…you get the point. Although if you have ever read about the Old North American Wild West, barbers were also dentists… Nevermind. Keep reading…
We are in a business where our most valuable asset is our people and the intellectual property or better properties you all represent. It is our ideas, our programs, our relationships, our humanly designed applications that drive our engagements, win us business, grow our revenue, and make our clients come back for more.
Yet it is also our ability to control costs, to deliver on-time and on-budget, to protect our assets and grow our profits that excite the financial community, make our client relationships work smoother, and of course help us reward and incent as we should.
Funnily enough, the two are often at odds. Controlling our business and our people sometimes creates friction and has on more than one occasion led to poorly thought out actions by well intentioned executives who erred on one side or another.
The truth is, it reminds me of our notion CRM – remember? Do customers really want to be managed? You want the bank to manage your money, not your relationship.
And here, just maybe, is another lesson in leadership. Listen to the following thought:
“You cannot manage me into battle. You manage things, you lead people.”
- Admiral Grace Murray Hopper
Does that change any of your perceptions? Might you behave differently? Would you demand different interactions from yourselves and from others? Can you see that this kind of thinking might affect your management techniques and/or your leadership qualities?
Try this one on – Microsoft believes that we need professional managers who have been trained and benchmarked to deliver project work. They also want us to have thought leaders who raise the level of engagement through the quality of ideas that we bring them. They see two career tracks – our industry has traditionally seen one. What do you think?
Can you see the difference between management and leadership in the outcomes here?
We need managers and we need leaders. Both are critical, both are equal, but both suffer if the other is needed.
Management and leadership. A great partnership that is not mutually exclusive. In fact, for the success of our business mutually inclusive. But maybe different… What do you think?
Interestingly, I was thinking about this issue this morning on my way to work.
I have to say I tend to agree with Microsoft. I think it is our fault that we don’t recognize we are actually running two businesses under the same roof. One is a strategy consulting business and one is an executional creative agency. Some functions within this business may be working across both realms (i.e. account) but some are clearly working on one (i.e. project management).
Running the consulting side of the business like any other consulting business, a lean, mean and smart machine, will position us most favorably in the eyes of our clients. They are used to working with consulting businesses and have limited understanding as to why we have big account teams on highly strategic projects where someone from Strategy and Insights or Planning does most of the heavy lifting.
On the other hand, actually thinking about, presenting and executing great creative is a completely different business. It requires balancing the creative juices with the budgets and the project plan.
Focusing on one or the other is a mistake and fails to acknowledge the challenge that this business presents – it is actually two businesses.
Keren
Thought leadership has to move on an assembley line, but we can’t have thought leaders on the line because their hourly rates are too high. Go figure.
There’s a saying in the film world — “You’ve got to master the logistical to make the mystical.” As our work here becomes more complex, in effect, more collaborative, I think the filmmaking model might be instructive.
The filmmaking machine is divided into two parts, each run by a separate leader/manager — on one side is the Director whose team includes the actors, set designers, cinematographers, makeup, script and everything else in front of the camera. One the other side is the Producer whose purview is logistics, scheduling, locations, planning, budgets, transportation, casting, food, insurance, parking and everything else that supports and protects the creation and completion of the project.
Both sides are intensely creative, resourceful and mindful of budget and schedule. Ideally, they would have a common vision of the final product and be able to collaborate seamlessly, all the way down the chain of command. For example the Location Scout might be looking for the main character’s Penthouse Apartment. For the Director it has to be Art Deco with a sunken living room and a view of the Empire State building. For the Producer it needs a 24-hour freight elevator, enough electricity for all the lights, and parking for trucks outside. The perfect location will have it all — the mystical and the logistical – you need them both to make the magic.
David,
As to your question regarding the difference between our company and our people. My feeling is that there is a critical and significant one.
Our company is an idea, a mission and a commitment. It has been so for more than 50 years. I founded the agency because I felt that it would succeed if it could solve certain clients’ problems in a unique way. It succeeds and prevails over competition because its basic mission not just its executions is more relevant to their needs.
Our hero has been the consumer not the product. What I began to market as “Direct Marketing” has become an major part of advertising. We are leading the way with “Relationship Marketing” and what I am beginning to call “Personal Advertising”. Whatever we call it, our strategy is data and information based and that is the way of the future.
Our people are the instruments that execute that idea and that mission.
They are selected and trained to solve clients’ problems “the Wunderman way”. Were this not true clients could and would find other agencies whose missions were more compatible with their corporate objectives.
If our people do not sell our mission, we would just be practicing “advertising”, whatever that is. We would be competing simply on executions rather than on strategy and that’s a game we shouldn’t play.
Our people build their careers and their resumes because they have succeeded in marketing and executing our special and unique mission.
And we have been lucky because fortuneately that mission has turned out to be the way of the future.
Lester