It’s the time of year when we do the pruning and notice the bare structures that are left when the leaves have fallen and the flowers have long since faded.

It’s the time when we can take a step back and notice what is there without the busyness of the garden’s life taking over. And now, without the illusion of transient growth, it’s the time when we can know whether the garden’s architecture is strong enough to function as a thing of beauty in it’s own right; when we can really understand what is adding value to the beauty of the garden, what is overgrown and where the bare patches are.

So what if you took a moment to think about your life and your work; the team you lead and the organsiation or business you work in? When you strip  back the hustle and bustle, the busy-ness that we occupy our selves with,  what is left? What does the structure look like? What is supporting the architecture of your growth? Where are the bare patches and what is overgrown?

A beautiful garden is a mixture of architecture  (the structures) and transient planting, that brings seasonal interest.  Often, it is easy to get distracted and obsessed by the riot of colours brought by the other seasons; the cheerful spring flowers, the acid brights of summer and the warmth of autumn, but  when winter comes and the garden is dormant, we realise that there is nothing there to carry it through. If we are not careful and plan for when the blooms are gone  we may find that there is nothing left and the intoxicating, heady scents of summer are but a memory.

It is easy to get possessed by sheer speed of life, spending so much time planting  more and more until it is full to the brim, and the garden becomes so choked with life, that ironically our prize specimens cease to grow at all.  Sometimes take a step back and think about how the structures we have support us both in life and your work, asking the questions:

• What is supporting your growth?
• What has become overgrown and has now had its time?
• What is the seasonal interest that needs nurturing?
• And when the season’s over, what is left?

A garden that stands the test of time is just as beautiful (and sometimes more so) when the blooms are not disguising what is  inherently there.

The structures that we hold are where our authenticity lives. It’s our values and beliefs. It’s in how we nurture the relationship with our staff as well as the customers who pay our bills. It’s in what underpins how we do what we do and it’s in what others see of us. We can sometimes fool ourselves with the gloss of high summer and it can sometimes be seductive to others, but we know it is just a moment in the season. The most beautiful flowers sometimes only lasting a day. And when the moment has passed the time will come to stand back and  ask ourselves, what are the jobs to be done?

What needs pruning and cutting back?

What has had it’s day and needs digging out?

What needs sheltering from the winds, feeding and protecting until the weather is more favourable?

and most of all

How will the structures that I am laying out now stand the test of time and be a thing of beauty in their own right?

Many of us do it, my clients, colleagues, children and Ok, I admit it even me occasionally…. I even find, sometimes with my children, it is one I promote.

“So and so says I can’t run as fast as them” says no 1 child. “Oh, don’t worry”, I reply, “it’s not such a big deal, just let it wash over you”. Knowing that this is the umpteemth comment that this child has made about how my child isn’t as good as them. I  then jump straight into understanding the other child’s point of view and why they might have the need to feel better than other people, whilst unconsciously setting up no 1 child  for a lifetime of conflict avoidance. (It’s ok I am putting aside money for their therapy.)

The laid back promote the view that is important not to sweat the small stuff  and wear their label of  being laid back with pride, whilst then saying in their next breath that the reason they haven’t dealt with a particular sticking point is because they are avoiding a difficult conversation with X. “I am so laid back” they say, closely followed by “X is so irritating and if only they weren’t so defensive.” . “Have you talked to them about it” I ask? “Oh no”, they reply, “I really don’t like conflict”.

So could it be that we are fooling ourselves? Could ‘laid back’ be a positive spin on opting out of the awkward and difficult? Is it a behaviour that has tipped over the edge. Being so good at being laid back  that you loose the art of recognising how you are feeling and then using that feeling as the basis of real conversations that move things forward. Noticing, for instance,  that you are irritated and confused and then using this to understand what you need to not feel this. A formula a bit like this – Irritation and confusion = lack of clarity – therefore I need clarity. How hard would that be to say I don’t understand and want some clarity?

We fool ourselves into thinking that conflict means we don’t like the other person, when really it’s an indication of a conflicted feeling within us. We are feeling a negative emotion that indicates that we have a need that isn’t being met. We make it all about them rather then it being all about us. Could it just be that we can find out what we need  and just ask for it. How difficult would that be……

This video got me thinking about the converstions I have had with clients about what their work was like (very few of them tell me how fun it is, in fact many use war type metaphors, e.g. going into battle, winners and losers etc.) and consequently how ‘fun’ I found my work…..

Fun at work sounds a bit like an oxymoron doesn’t it? Fun work. Surely work shouldn’t be fun……… Yet we know that when we are having fun we engage different parts of our brains and as a consequence are more creative and come up with better solutions. When we find work fun, we are also often more able to tackle the tough sticky issues that feel impossible. So how come we don’t make work more fun, more of the time?

Did you know that our brains are plastic? Hence the term neuro-plasticity. They are capable of change and growth with the potential to generate 7000 – 9000 new cells every day. Our left pre-frontal lobe is associated with happiness and well-being and conversely our right pre-frontal lobe is associated with depression. This is a growing area of research in neuro-science and it is being proved that people who actively take measures to develop their left pre-frontal lobe have higher reported degrees of well being and are able to manage the stresses and strains of life. Some of the ways to develop this area of your brain is through mindfulness practices such as meditation(1). and another way is to have fun. For instance, going to see a comedian has been proven to stimulate this part of our brain. And therefore, if we know this to be true, why not create the neural pathways that are likely to make us both happier and more effective?  Who wouldn’t want to have a happier workforces with less stress related illness and therefore greater productivity. So why don’t we actively make work more fun?

The world of work and indeed the word itself has a whole number of beliefs associated with it and these beliefs drive what we do, our behaviour.  Some of those beliefs could include: ‘meetings are meant to be business like’ , ‘It’s supposed to take effort, isn’t it?’ or ‘It’s all about difficult decisions’. May’be we believe – ‘If it comes to easily the achievement is lessened’. It should feel like work. Well, what if some of the time that wasn’t true? What if we created the environment were ease was the way forward and we spent more time solving the problem rather than agonizing over its details; developing  and developing it so that it became overwhelming. What if we knew that giving people permission to have fun, at least some of the time, increased their overall productivity? And I have purposefully used the word permission as we somehow seem to need permission to make work fun. If we were having fun, what might people think? And if we were having too much fun – well god forbid. What if we started to laugh at how seriously we took things, after al,l when we put it into perspective, it’s only work.

Fun is an odd word and will mean different things to different people and you recognise it when you feel it. We recognise those teams who are able to  bring some levity to their work and often those are the teams that are highly functioning and working co-operatively. They are also the teams that are able to debate and disagree, knowing that they have a strong foundation from which to do this. They are able to navigate the highs and lows with a sense of perspective.

The world is changing and we are being asked to come up with new solutions. We have to transform what we are doing to even get the same results that we were getting before.  Yet, if we approach the world as a problem a our mood sinks lower and we are less able to come up with solutions.

How could you make work more fun today?

I met Steve, when I attended one of his workshops. Some of you may know, I originally trained as a classical singer and have more than a passing acquaintance with what good music should sound and feel like and it wasn’t me on the harmonica. It got me thinking about what was stopping me. Yes, the harmonica is a harder instrument to play than you might think but on the other hand it is a self harmonising instrument so it is harder to make a bad sound. (School’s should take note: an alternative to the dreaded recorder!) But what was stopping me was all the feelings and voices going round and round saying things like: “you know music, you should be able to do this”, ‘=”come on, you should be better at this than that” etc. etc.   And of course the other voice was going: “you are a coach, you should be able to sort this out”. (And those of you that think you don’t have voices in your head, you are just in denial..)

This workshop really got me thinking about how we get in our own ways when in an unfamiliar environment; when we have a little knowledge but may’be not enough and why I suggested to Steve that we might want to run an organisational workshop together….

The phrase I keep hearing around organisations at the moment is “being comfortable with not knowing” – which is true to an extent and only up to a point. There is a lot we do know and the phrase implies letting go of all of this and to focus on what you don’t know and that is where it falls apart for me. Why would you want to put yourself in the position of just focussing on what you don’t know.

There is, for me, an analogy to learning to improvise ( in music and probably in other genres). When I first came across improvisation as a first year uni student, it was with a background of at least 10 years musical knowledge, of knowing what I know. Yet, somehow when learning something new I was somehow  flummoxed and thought I knew nothing. I thought I didn’t know anything about jazz and was lost in a sea of unfamiliar sounds and different terminology, apparently being asked to let go of what I was familiar with and just make it up as I went along. What I now know and was reminded of when working with Steve, is that improvisation is a process of responding in the moment and finding your way with what you already know, drawing on your toolkit of experience and knowledge, to lead yourself and your fellow improvisers through. Sounds easy, doesn’t it? So how come some people are great at improvising and other’s just thrash about, panic and eventually drown? Stopping swimming and stopping moving forward.

In this new world, there are no hard and fast rules of how things are to be done. Many of the old rules don’t apply and we are feeling our way forward; improvising as we go along. We can learn a lot from the mind set of musical (or other) improvisers about how they keep their cool and keep a clear head. This is what I discovered when rediscovering my joy in improvising:

Know what you know

To be comfortable not knowing you need to also be comfortable knowing what you know. People who improvise may look like they are making it up as they go along and it is actually a result of practice, thought and reflection, knowing that if I do this it gets a certain result most times. Most improvising musicians have well thought out licks and melodies that they know work individually and they can combine in different ways to get different results. It may feel like that they are making it up as they go along but it is actually as a result of working at an unconscious competence level,   developed from hours of practice, rehearsal and performance.  If you ask them how they did that, they will probably respond that they don’t know and that the muse inspired them. The reality is that they have created a safety net of knowledge that enabled the muse to emerge.

Welcome mistakes

Great Jazz musicians don’t fear or shy away from mistakes and view it as either an opportunity for creation or learning. They often repeat the mistake over and over until they have got the juice out of it and to the listener, it looks like they meant to do it. If the mistake does not bear repeating, they will regroup and move on. The mistake is just part of the process.

Now I’m not saying that in organisations we want to repeat and repeat the mistake (although sometimes that is how great things are invented), it is just that mistakes are an opportunity to be exploited and one that is often ignored. When we create the culture that  mistakes are for learning and making us better at what we do, then we learn how to think in the moment and avoid unrecoverable catastrophes.

Make your own boundaries

Improvisation may feel  like an un-boundaried free for all. In reality, it has mini signposts along the way, which musicians hang onto, listening out for where they are, in any given moment. This can be the cord progression of the song or a certain signature lick of a player or the order of play, bringing everyone together. We need boundaries to make us feel safe and unless we feel safe we don’t perform well. Boundaries provide the edges and give us a sense of surety.

Prepare for the unexpected

In their practice musicians prepare for things going off track and have plans for what they do when this happens. One of the ways that they do this is through exploring errors and another way is having back up plans in place. What if certain musicians are sick? Can anyone else step up to the plate. If the drummer isn’t there who else can keep the rhythm going and provide the momentum?

Be aware of others and play to their strengths

First and foremost musicians have to be great individual players and be part of a team. They have to be able to do both. They have to spend time getting their own skill level at peak and then time getting the groups performance to flow. They have to have both the ego to be an amazing performer and let go of their ego enough to celebrate and nurture the egos of others. They truly understand the concept of ‘it’s not about me except when it is’ providing the space for all to excel.

Lead and then Follow

There always a leader of band and that person has overall responsibility of how the band works and flows together. Then within a great performance leadership can shift between the players depending on what is needed right now, for instance, to capture the essence of the piece or change the energy of the audience. The individuals within the band need enough confidence in each other to let different people take the lead at the right time, in other words they need to allow them to lead and then follow whole heartedly. It develops that person as a performer in their own right and also gives the leader a break from holding it all together, allowing them  to really get to  know each other and how each of them improvises and responds to the flow of the music. It also has the added benefit of strengthening their back up plan and letting them prepare for the unexpected.  If the overall Leader insists on leading all the time (and sometimes doing all the jobs) then the band falls apart as they would be exhausted!

Know your limitations and develop your strengths.

To know your strengths is also to understand your limitations. Great musician’s know what they can and can’t do and their areas of development. They also know the strengths of the rest of the band and all know their main role (but are able to pick up others if necessary). A singer normally carries the melody but could actually do the rhythm if called to.

Great musicians are also honest enough with themselves to know what their limitations (rather than deny them) and concentrate on further developing strength areas to mitigate for this. After all how many people actually noticed that Billie Holliday had a very limited vocal range when she performed with such emotional conviction and musicality?

and most of all  manage your state…. and.…Don’t stop

And key to all of this, being all to improvise and respond to any given situation, is the ability to keep a clear ahead and keep going. Great Improvisers don’t stop, they keep responding and making decisions in the moment, because after all when you stop the performance is over.

To find out more about this workshop contact Lucy at  lucy.hampton@clearpossibilities.com

So time feels different according to who you are and what is happening in that moment. it isn’t really real;  just a construction that we have made to make sense of our days, yet we often presume that everyone thinks about time in the same way. Our five minutes is the same as anyone else’s five minutes.  Yet even if we are aware of this truth, it is something that we pay little attention to in terms of our customers and is a often the  source of tension and sometimes the trigger for complaints.

Imagine the following scenarios -

• A patient lying in bed waiting for the busy nurse to come
• A customer waiting to get through the call waiting to talk to their bank
• Customer Ordering online

Having just finished reading  and been inspired by ‘The Spirit Level’ by Richard Wilkinson and Kate Pickett about the detrimental effects of unequal societies I got to thinking about what happens if you apply this kind of thinking to organisations.  However we frame it the majority of large organisations work within some kind of hierarchy and therefore implicit within this is some kind of  inequality. Now we know that hierarchy does have an impact and in terms of organisations  and this can be both positive and negative.  Positively it enables staff working with an organisation to be very clear about the chain of command and therefore the chain of decision making.   However, the impact of a well defined hierarchy is that if decision making is always passed up the chain, staff become dis-empowered and potentially  have less flexibility in their working and tend to stick only in their job roles and responsibilities – laying the pathway to succession planning problems. Worst of all, it sets up the potential for issues not to be shared and problem solving to happen from afar and imposed on those delivering  services or producing the end product. When I have experienced this in some of the organisations that I work with, the psychological distance between staff and managers is palpable, noticeable in the body language, the words that people use, speaking in generalisations about ‘The Management’ and within the culture – feeling as if you would be blamed for unidentified (or even because of the blame culture – hidden) problems that inevitably (given the structure) only become apparent when they become painful issues

Now the answer to this is not easy and yet the organisations that I work with who have an ability to let go of the hierarchy and realise that it is merely  a construct, an illusion  gain the benefit of being able to focus on the outcome and are clear about what it takes to achieve.  They seem to have the ability to hold the paradox of having both clarity of role and be able to work beyond role definition.  This gives staff who work in these organisations the permission to innovate, something which role freedom often brings yet still be clear about the outcome expectations of the role. The defining characteristics of these organisations is, more than anything, the confidence to let go of hierarchy and hold the belief that ‘we are in this together to deliver this outcome’. It is a move beyond  performance targets and towards deliverable benefits. As opposed to putting in place processes that serve to maintain the status quo.

So how do you move towards a ‘we are all in this together’ culture? I believe that the first step towards this is the ability to let go of status as a definition of power and success and a move to a deep understanding of what the role is there to deliver. Now many organisations may talk this talk yet few actually walk the walk – and if they did the hierarchy would be turned upside down and the first indication of this might be in organisation charts, with those that are actually delivering being at the top of the tree, with other roles explicitly set out to support those delivering. Changing the organisational chart may be just changing a piece of paper, yet this can send a powerful psychological message and if followed through may change power relationships within organisations and set the conditions for real conversations to take place…..

We are required to make judgements of one kind or another much of the time, whether this is in our roles as Leaders, Managers, members of a team or even in our everyday lives. It is a vital  part of our decision-making process. It  enables us to weigh up the pros and cons and decide the best action to take to move onto the next step. It ensures  that choices are made at the right time to keep the organisation on the right path. So making judgements is a good thing to do, right? And yes it is, except when the process of making a judgement turns into being judgemental, judging ourselves or others.

Being judgemental can be  divisive organisational behaviour, that leads to poor management. It is a behaviour that can quickly become viral and can prevent forward movement and in some cases lead to failure.  Being judgemental is an act of judging others and assigning a label; such as ‘they are poor performers’ or ‘that organisation is rubbish’.  When we label in this way, we seek out and filter for instances that confirm our assumptions   and ignore or don’t even notice exceptions to the rule we have set. And by doing this we close down the possibilities of something different being true, because those who are on the receiving end of this kind of judgement start to believe it is true themselves – that they are just not good enough and never will be. It becomes a self fulfilling prophesy where morale drops and the corresponding behaviours become the norm; lack of care and lack of pride in the job to be done and eventually those who hold the possibility of raising performance exit the organisation leaving those who are left to flounder.  After all, when it comes down to it, it is all about reputation and it’s hard to change reputation isn’t it?

So how possible is it to change this?  The act of being judgemental is usually based on a feeling or an emotion (decision based judgements are based on fact), so what needs to happen is to change what is felt. Set realistic expectations and celebrate success when they are met. Notice and appreciate what works  and start to create a new story. It won’t be easy as human being seem to prefer the drama of failure, spending time gossping rather than taking responsibility. And slowly, bit by bit that new story will start to become true as people’s beliefs shift, behaviours change and a new era of possibility is ushered in….

Stuck in the Mud

I’ve been thinking about the state of the nation and what might make things better. A big ask I know, especially as I am no politician……

For various reasons we have got ourselves in a hole (UK and globally) and we can’t seem to get out – we are stuck. It seems to me that we are engaged in the worst type of stuckness; an endless going over of ground about how we got here, looking for causes and then wringing our hands, with no movement forward.  This series of symptoms appear to be applying across the board; politically, within companies and with individuals.. If I were to diagnose the problem I would say that we have a virulent case of anxiety and depression going on. It’s becoming catching, leaving markets open to the virus of financial marauders.

When a person feels anxious or describes themselves as depressed, commonly they are stuck in a dysfunctional present which may even connect back to a dysfunctional past. A feeling of hopelessness pervades because there seems to be no way out of the stuckness – there is a forgetfulness of any resources they may have at their disposal and an inability to take connect to the future. A common response at moments like these is : “I don’t know”, with people often only feeling temporarily better when they realise that, at least, they are not as bad as someone else. (A bit like what is going on between Eurpoe and the Republic of Ireland at the moment.  This was featured as a joke on the popular Radio 4 comedy programme “The Now Show” and the Greek Finance Minister George Papaconstantinou has sought to reassure his country by saying that, while things are bad there, at least they’re not as bad as Ireland.) So we make ourselves feel  better by focussing on how someone elses pain is worse than ours and doing  bit of one up man ship.  An Aspirin to treat a tumour.

As well as individuals, organisations I work with are also having the same kinds of conversations. Stuck in the here and now, unable to make decisions or waiting and waiting for others to make decisions about their futures. And these others are putting the decisions of because they too have no idea about where they are trying to get to. We are in somewhat unchartered territory and yet for some explorers this is exactly what spurred them onto find new lands.

But we are not focussing on new lands, we are focussing on how we can get back to what we had before, what we know. So plans abound about how to get us out of this mess and re-establish what was the status quo; strategies to treat the symptoms; tighten our belts; make cuts; put our houses in order. All particularly punishing analogies, if you truly try them on and none  connecting to a future but confining us to think and focus on what we have lost. And yes, we are in uncharted territory and as such we need to create a new destination, one we haven’t been in before. It was the excitement of exploring and finding  new lands that spurred on explorers such as Vasco da Gama and Christopher Columbus and just like us, each of them was spurred on by solving a problem or overcoming a present crisis. But they were also compelled by the vision of what that exploration would give them.  And that is what we need to do now. Move beyond our past and find  a new and compelling vision of our future. Make sure we have enough provisions and set sail. We really do need to use a different kind of thinking to get us out of the mess than the one we used to get into it. We can’t get back what is truly lost (and what we are finding out was probably a fantasy anyway) but we can decide what an how we want the future to be.

So what to do if you are leading an organisation, or a team or yourself. Set a compelling vision of the future that makes sense to both you and the people around you and remember it does have to make sense. ( A concept like “The Big Society” -  sorry David Cameron- won’t do it, as concepts are just that; an idea with no sensory meaning that others can hook into. ) Honour and recognise where people are now because if you don’t, fear and anxiety will overwhelm  and give them the tools to navigate safely, rather than casting them adrift. And by the way, if you don’t have a destination people will feel lost and cast adrift. And, finally, remember to look up from the map every now and again  to make sure that you and your crew are on course.

** with thanks to Robert Levine and his wonderful book – “A Geograpy of Time”, who got me thinking about this on a more global scale.

The Losing Team

I’m now going to admit one of  my secret vices (along with Mad Men and yes, I admit it the Archers).I watch “The Apprentice” and  pretend to myself that I  watch it out of academic interest but I really have to  admit that I am watching it for both the laugh out loud factor and also the inevitable – I can’t bear this any longer watch through your fingers moment.  The last episode didn’t disappoint and was probably the most dismal performance by both teams, ever.  ( If you are a sucker for this kind of thing you can still catch it on BBC IPlayer – http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b00vdc37/The_Apprentice_Series_6_Beach_Accessory/). The team’s task was to invent a new beach accessory that would appeal to a mass market and sell it and both teams failed on both counts.  Team Synergy invented a beach towel with a cooler pillow -” The Cuuli”  and the Team Apollo invented a device to hold your book on the beach “The Book-eeze”. Neither were particularly inventive and neither solved a consumer problem.  Unsurprisingly sales were low if at all.  The Beach Towel took one small order and the Book Holder took none.

So what led to this murky performance amongst those who are competing to be Lord Alan Sugar’s next bright thing?   More than anything it was a focus on individual rather than team success that led to disaster. It led to bad ideas being taken forward by over assertive members  and less assertive members allowing it to happen, divorcing themselves from responsibility for fear of being held accountable. (Ironically, this is what happened – with the firing of Joy.)

So how did this all play out ? In this episode,  Laura, the elected project manager, struggled with the task of managing and leading this competitive cackle, then  allowed the team to be led autocratically from the side by Joanna. Laura, may of  thought that she was leading democratically but  in all but title, let go of the  leadership entirely.  Joanna, wrested control and asserted herself at every opportunity, talking over others and making her point heard regardless of whether it was a good or not.

“I’m going to speak over you. I’m sorry to be rude.” Joanna could be heard to say, clearly not meaning it at all.

She received little or no feedback on the effect of her behaviour and the leader and  team itself  let go of group responsibility for overall success, choosing  instead to moan and blame from the sidelines or to say too late that it was a bad idea.   Now, I’m not necessarily saying that this was a fault of just Joanna or Laura, it was the dynamic and unconscious consent of the group that created the tyrant, allowing Joanna to fill the leadership void and lead them to failure.

If we look at this from the point of view of social psychology it is clear that a number of things were at play:

• Team Apollo, at least for this task became competitive and was led from the side lines by an autocratic leader, who mistook, having her voice heard and her idea taken forward as success. We know that democratic groups are more successful – they have higher productivity, they are more creative and behave more on task even when the leader is absent.
• The group conformed even when individuals within the group knew the idea was wrong.  If the opinion is said consistently and with enough authority, people tend to go along with it.  (See Milgrams’ Electric Shock experiments as far back as 1963!) So the group went along with Joanna’s idea  due to it being said often enough and with enough assertion.
• This group is at the point of competition rather than collaboration and see and experience each other as competitors. When they are in this space they cannot hold each other as being fundamental to each others success and are engineered to behave and think  as individuals rather than as a group. (Power of Situation)
• They  have lost sight of the long game where group success brings personal success as well.

So what could they do differently?

• Create and agree their social rules as a group – agree behavioural rules that will allow the whole group to shine. By this they will create the right environment for success.  – Social Psychologist think that situations are more powerful than character (“fundamental attribution error”).  As humans we tend to overestimate the power of personality and underestimate the influence of the social situation – by creating the kind of social environment that can allow all individuals to contribute and flourish you will negate the power of one overly assertive individual.  Groups often think that creating ‘ground rules’ are an  unnecessary waste of time when they could be getting on with the task. However, they can be a powerful part of group formation, allowing open discussion of group working, value formation and granting permissions
• Agree a group outcome that is bigger than the outcome of individual success. This outcome needs to be more than just completing the task and include how people personally contribute and work together to achieve overall success

and most of all

• being able to let go of the imperative and immediacy of personal success to make space for group success which in turn will give you the success you desire.

I had been day dreaming about what a wonderful time we had in Scotland; the beautiful the scenery; the wonderful people; the space, when I was catapulted back into a not so good memory through an email from a little robot. But it wasn’t the little robot it was the reminder how humans don’t always get it right.

On our fantastic trip, where I go to top up my feelings of calm and sense of perspective, there was one moment that disconnected me from those good feelings and catapulted me into annoyance and irritation and thoughts of  how it didn’t need to be like that. It led me to compare between two experiences; one where I was a valued customer and one where I felt I wasn’t. Interestingly, one of those relationships was with a robot….

The Humans *

During our first week of our holiday, a day with beautiful weather, we decided to take the children (girl – aged 8 and boy – almost 4) to a Farm Park. It promised to be a great day with lots for all of us to do; animals and areas to play (inside and out); something for everyone. The children were really looking forward to it (we had already put it off once , when rain called off play,) and it was the thing that they had chosen to do, through their before holiday online search. (Yes, like most children their age computers are intuitive tools.)  We  had a look at the site and saw it advertised as a great value day out for all the family.

So on the day, we paid our £35.00 and went in. Not too bad, we thought for whole day for a family, until we realised that many of the activities advertised cost extra when we were in there. At that point, there was a slight sense of irritation at having to have deep and meaningful converstaions with the pester power twins. And then it got worse from there……

The park was very well staffed and in fact you could describe them as having a plethora of staff. So there was no shortage of people who could help you or could provide some interaction with the customer. The problem was they just didn’t want to . The whole place was staffed with ‘disinterested teenagers’. Now, it isn’t the fact that they were teenagers that was the problem; it was that you as a customer felt that you were an intrusion and a pain. These young people had no sense of connection or pride in the company they worked for or any idea of that they were the outward face of the company and how their  interactions  affected the experience.  The bins weren’t emptied, the place was dirty, the queues were long.  And it wasn’t that there wasn’t enough staff  and  in some cases too many as they spent all their time talking to each other and ignoring the customers. The length of queues  were created by not serving the customer and chatting too each other. These staff were probably employed for the season (and probably season after season) and probably at minimum wage.  I don’t even think it was necessariy all the staff’s fault and I wondered how much the company had invested in making them feeling part of what they were trying to achieve and anticipating their needs so they could, in turn, anticipate the customer’s needs.

The Robots

Compare this then to the robots. Just before I went away, I ordered some customised cards from a company called ‘Moo’. I’d never heard about them before, they didn’t come by recommendation and I found them via an internet search. When looking at their website, I was impressed with how they had considered the perspective of their customers and had developed a proposition which was different and allowed the customer to develop something unique to them at a great price. Somehow, they had got something that felt creative, interactive and individual rather than the equivalent of ‘ you can have any colour you want as long as it is black’ of most online printing companies. They had got it just right at the same (if not better) competitive price. I selected my order through the intuitive website and it got better from there.  I then received my email from ‘Little Moo’  the print robot. Moo has thought it all the way through – how the customer might feel getting an automated response and what would it be like if they gave their computer a personality. It told me when I would expect my order and what to do if there were any problems.

“Remember, I’m just a bit of software. So, if you have any questions regarding your order please first read our Frequently Asked Questions (at X) and if you’re still not sure, contact customer services (who are real

people) at: (link given)

I then got an email telling me my order was in the post  -

” Hello,it’s Little MOO again. I thought you’d like to know, the following items from your order are now in the mail”

And then my order arrived, perfectly packaged, exactly as advertised (and slightly better than I expected) ahead of schedule.

Since then I have had several emails from ‘Moo’ – not too many, with the same friendly tone telling me more about the company.I feel like a valued customer, and hopefully without sounding too twee, I feel slightly fond of ‘Little Moo’ the print Robot.  Their company Logo is : ‘We love to Print’ and you feel like they do.

Basic Needs, Expectations and Adding Delight!

The difference between the two  may appear obvious and yes there is a fundamental difference in that one was a transaction and the other was an experience. However, ‘Moo’ turned the transaction into an experience and the Farm Park turned the experience into less than a transaction.  So what were the real differences? Both met my basic needs, but the Park didn’t meet my expectations of friendly service so I went away disappointed. ‘Moo’ more than met my expectations with quicker than advertised turn around, and then added delight through their creativity and creating a real connection with the customer.  When we do this, companies and organisations created the kind of presence in the world that helps them build business; building their reputation and a loyal customer base. And first, they need to start with their own employees. You can only get the kind of response you want if your staff are engaged and you are meeting their needs and expectations. Although, my interaction with ‘Moo’ is through a robot, I am left thinking that the people who work for that company love the job they do.

It’s a great question to ask yourself in whatever role or organisation you are in.

• What do my customers want and expect?   And how do I add delight?

Remember, do all you can to get it right first. There is no point in adding delight if you don’t meet the basic needs or the customer’s expectations.

*By the way Real Humans in Scotland do get it right. Culzean Castle is fantastic and in particular Barry the Tour Guide, who got it just right. Anticipating the needs of children and adults alike, telling stories that interested both and kept even an almost four year old agog for almost an hour. It’s simple really – see it from the perspective of the customer, find out what they want and deliver it and if you can, add something special.