When I left Forrester, I wanted to try to help fix this problem; to try to help companies avoid the avoidable mistakes. So I started this blog on which to start posting little items that might help. Here’s a short list of avoidables, in order of “please god, don’t do these”… recognize any of these?

1. Thinking you know your customers, and not actually talking to any of them. I’ve met and worked with my share of executives, probably more than my share. Generally, executives are a pretty smart bunch of people, but they all seem to have this weird blindspot: they all seem to think they know their customers, but have never actually met or talked to any of them. I’ve sat at many a boardroom table where interested, dedicated, smart people talk at length about their segmentation, their market analyses, their target audiences, only to be stymied by simple questions like “What do your customer’s want to do?” David McQuillen of Credit Suisse gave me the best example of this (for a case study we wrote together at Forrester, which can be found here). Credit Suisse executives, he told me, held the opinion that their customers were “too important to bother” and that it was the job of Credit Suisse executives to know what their customers wanted. Not true. Turns out that their customer’s actually wanted something very different, and ironically, customers generally liked being asked their opinion on how they would like to be treated.

2. The “we’ve only got one shot at this, so we have to make it count” attitude. So you’re looking at the budgets, and you’re planning your project. “Whoa,” you think, “This kind of budget doesn’t come along every day. I can’t mess this one up.” And we’re away with common mistake #2. The reality of big Web redesign projects is that there are almost always problems, and there are almost always delays, and there are almost always price changes along the way. And, guess what, the Web sites almost always go live with mistakes on them. It’s like Microsoft software – there are always bugs, it’s inevitable, you just try to minimize the severity and number of them. But, more important than little glitches is a crucial attitudinal problem: Web sites are not carved in stone. They will begin changing and morphing within seconds of being launched, and so it is vitally important for Web site owners to approach a Web site redesign as film editors approach their films. Editors say “Editing is never finished, it’s abandoned”. You get it as good as you can get it within the time scales allowed, and if you’ve done your job well, it’s good enough. Where the Web departs from film is that, hey, we have the ability and the tools to “always be testing”, to always go back and make changes, test responses to new content, and keep evolving the site forward. It’s a journey that never ends.

3. Failure to get educated or the “I can’t let them know how little I know” corollary. I was having lunch with the CEO of a large digital agency in London. We were talking about what causes agencies the most problems during projects for an article I was writing (which can be found here). She told me that more than half of her new clients have never worked on a digital project before in their careers. More than half! Normally agencies recognize this and consider it part of their role to educate their clients on what is possible, what is not, how long things take, etc. But, agencies generally can’t charge for this very important service, and so it sometimes gets short shrift. And, yet, there is a strong correlation between successful Web redesign projects and the level of knowledge of the client’s in charge of them. The worst scenario is a client in charge of a project who doesn’t know enough, but thinks that others will take advantage of him/her if they find out how little they know. So they nod through meetings and conversations, and cause more damage by agreeing to something they don’t understand, rather than just asking questions. The simple message here is: get educated, and never be afraid to ask questions.

4. Not enough money, not enough time, not enough planning, not enough testing. Enough already with the “not enough”! At the very core of a successful project is understanding, or as Steven Covey puts it “Seek first to understand, then to be understood”. That “understanding” takes many forms: business goals, key players, risks, what’s possible, what’s not, etc. But the act of understanding itself is often given too little attention because it is so boring, so lacking in action. Watching someone trying to understand something is akin to watching paint dry. It’s simply not good TV. However, what it lacks in glamour, it makes up for in the delivery of successful projects. Why? Because taking the time to really understand something, to really “grok” something (as Heinlein would have said) naturally informs very important decisions like the size of the budget, the length of the project, the requirements of the project, the customer experience needs that must be addressed, etc. The same is true of testing at the end of a project – testing and understanding are two sides of the same coin, and you neglect either at your own peril.

5. Junior people doing senior jobs. There is a reason why the coach of a successful football team is not the same age as the players. Can you imagine if the coach’s job of Manchester United, Chelsea or Arsenal was given to the 18-year old player who just left school to go pro? It’s an absurd idea. It would never happen. And yet Web site owners in charge of large-scale projects do this all the time. They put people just out of school, with little or no job experience, in charge of the management of huge projects. I wrote about this very thing while I was at Forrester (the article can be found here), but what I didn’t talk about then is why this sometimes happens. In my opinion, there are two main reasons: availability and false economy. Some companies recognize the importance of having a dedicated full-time project manager for their Web site redesign project, but then they can’t find someone to do the job or they don’t want to spend a lot of money to find and employ a senior person. And, hey look, there’s the new guy who just joined – let’s get him to do it. Presto bango, you’ve just injected an enormous risk into your project.

Here’s the good news: all of these common mistakes are avoidable and often recoverable… but, better avoided!

CM

dys – func – tion [dis-fuhngk-shuhn]
–noun

1. Medicine/Medical. malfunctioning, as of an organ or structure of the body.
2. Any malfunctioning part or element: the dysfunctions of the country’s economy.
3. Sociology. a consequence of a social practice or behavior pattern that undermines the stability of a social system.
4. Abnormal or impaired functioning, especially of a bodily system or social group.

It’s the last of the definitions that seems to be the most popular, particularly referring to a dysfunctional family. But, when people talk about their dysfunctional families, it seems there is almost always a sort of cuteness or quirkyness about it. Like “…my Mother is always nagging me and calling at the most inopportune times, and my brother never turns up at family dinners. We’re so dysfunctional.” And, the more people you hear talking about their families this way, the more you start to wonder if, actually, cutely dysfunctional is more or less the norm (that is, to say, very different from “acutely dysfunctional”).

The thing is, with this kind of dysfunction, there is also the suggestion that there is still love there, there is still affection and good reasons to keep chipping away at the dysfunction. There is still value to be had, emotional or otherwise.

So, now I’m going to get to the point of all this academic chit-chat.

Maybe this phrase has been coined elsewhere, but I am increasingly of the opinion that most big retail out there (and by “out there” I am referring the UK high street) is highly dysfunctional. What is “Dysfunctional Retail“? Here’s an example by way of explanation:

I recently went into business as a sole trader. Once I had confirmed my first paying client, I went into the market to buy my first “business laptop.” I had always been provided a computer in my former positions, and never really had much of a say in the type of computer I was provided – as a long suffering, card-carrying geek and all around technophile, this has always sort of offended me. So, the purchase of my first laptop for my own business was a decision laden, nay heaving, with emotional attachment.

I, like most Internet shoppers, have my first ports of call. Mine? Amazon, eBuyer, Play.com (see my publication on the UK Customer Experience Index), and PC World. Each has their own strengths… But you will perhaps note that the only real bricks and mortar brand on my list is PC World. It is no coincidence that my favourite PC World in London also happens to be at the end of the longest stretch of electonics shops in the free world (I have nothing whatsoever to back up this statement… but there are lots and lots of shops on Tottenham Court Road all, seemingly, selling identical merchandise at varying levels of aggressive merchandising). It is a comparison shoppers paradise, second only to the Internet.

But, buying a laptop is a tricky business. Especially when your primary purchase criteria is something slightly unorthodox. In my case, it was weight. Having had more than my share of back troubles, I long ago learned that the difference between a 2.5kg laptop and a 1.5kg laptop could be several days off work after a long-haul flight, followed by the now common mile-long death marches from the gate to the baggage check. And, when I say “days off work”, what I really mean is working recumbent on the sofa, with the same laptop perched on your knees… in my business, “sick” translates roughly to “working from home”.

Figure 1: “Not specified” doesn’t make for an easy or useful comparison. It just annoys people. It’s also one of their most expensive laptops!

Let’s start by saying this: PC World’s Web site is terrible. Really really godawful. I hope someone at PC World (the Dixon Retail Group or DRG for the sake of search engines) reads this. Please please admit you have a problem and get some help! Totally dysfunctional, in the first dictionary meaning above. It was just plain bad, giving incorrect information (for example, listing a laptop as both a 13.3 inch and 15 inch screen), items in wrong categories, confusing pricing information, etc (it’s a long list of problems – all, ironically, easily remedied). And yet, despite these problems, I found myself buying not one, but three laptops. Two through their Web site (both returned at the cost of PC World), and finally, one in the store. And I was deliriously happy with my purchase, even though every inch of my body recoiled at the terrible customer experiences I endured (and, as a former Customer Experience analyst and a grumpy old man, I am very finely attuned to this sort of thing).

My point is this: I was willing to endure all the obstacles PC World put in my way, obstacles like a phone customer services representative who told me an item was not available, only for it to arrive by post after a Web site order, a long disorganized queue to pick up my pre-reserved order at the shop, an ordering desk that looked like it had hosted a drunken dinner party, a store manager who would not let me see the unit I was about to purchase before I paid for it… I endured these obstacles because I really really wanted what they had to offer, and I knew I was getting good value.

My relationship with PC World is utterly dysfunctional. I really hate them sometimes, they consistently frustrate and annoy me, and yet I keep going back because I ultimately find some value there. But I don’t like doing it. Not at all. And consequently I spend a lot less there than I could… A LOT less.

So, PC World, are you reading this? Ask yourself the following question: how much better do you think your business would be doing if you tried to do something about your dysfunction?

CM