January 5, 2005

smarter conversations (cont.)

zzzzzz7654121.jpg
A com­ment from a recent post:

And that is that I think most com­pa­nies them­sel­ves do not HAVE any such values, pur­pose, beliefs or inte­grity, as com­pa­nies — so what hap­pens when their bri­lliant ad agency puts together a series of ads saying they’re a com­pany who values their cus­to­mers (and by the same token THEIR EMPLOYEES), and what they believe in, and that they do so with inte­grity. Then the next day or two, blog­gers and other folks who work for the com­pany who’ve seen the new ad cam­paign start tal­king about what a bunch of shit that is and what the “com­pany” REALLY thinks of it’s con­su­mers and it’s emplo­yees…
I don’t know — maybe at the end of the day it would end up being the ulti­mate in accoun­ta­bi­lity for a com­pany, in a way for­cing them to A) care about their cus­to­mer, and B) care about their emplo­yees.
–Jon Lawrence

Yep, the smar­ter your mar­ket beco­mes, the more often you’re going to get the crap kic­ked out of you when you don’t prac­tice what you preach.
Ergo:

Pro­blem: Smar­ter Mar­kets.
Solu­tion: Smar­ter Conversations.

If any­body knows of a bet­ter solu­tion, I’d love to hear it. Seriously.
[ALSO:] More thoughts on “Smar­ter Con­ver­sa­tions” here.

5 Responses to “smarter conversations (cont.)”

  1. Anonymous says:

    “Prac­tice what you preach” reminds me of a story:
    My wife works for a health insu­rance com­pany. This com­pany, of course, wants other com­pa­nies to join (that is, buy into) one of their health care plans. The bet­ter the plan, the bet­ter for the health insu­rance com­pany — more money — and the bet­ter for the other com­pa­nies — healthier wor­kers and/or hap­pier wor­kers, in theory. So her com­pany uses all their powers of per­sua­sion to get other com­pa­nies to sign up for the best, most com­prehen­sive health care pac­ka­ges pos­si­ble.
    Recently, her com­pany “down­gra­ded” the health care plans it offers to its own wor­kers. Ins­tead of shoo­ting for the top 10% in the industry, they’re shoo­ting for the 50% mark. Why? Too expen­sive to offer really good bene­fits. (They also encou­ra­ged emplo­yees to drop out of their net­work and use a spouse’s insu­rance plan — again, saves them money.)
    None of the insu­rance company’s emplo­yees were par­ti­cu­larly happy about this.
    What’s the first thing peo­ple say to someone when they find out they work for an insu­rance com­pany? “Man, you must have awe­some bene­fits.”
    Seems kind of silly to ins­pire your emplo­yees to res­pond, “Not really. You’d be sur­pri­sed.”
    (I was going to publish this in my own blog, but I’d rather not risk word get­ting back to Cor­po­rate Masters.)

  2. Smart con­ver­sa­tion: speak for yourself

    Hugh’s got me going with his Smar­ter Con­ver­sa­tions riff. Another ele­ment of smart con­ver­sa­tion is that peo­ple speak for them­se­le­ves. I have learnt to be wary of “second-hand” con­ver­sa­tions, where per­son A tells me that per­son B thinks about me…

  3. Vy Blog says:

    How smart are you getting?

    I had a con­ver­sa­tion with a collea­gue a cou­ple of years ago who accu­sed me of being smart.

  4. A bet­ter solu­tion is dum­ber markets.

  5. Smar­ter conversations

    Hugh Macleod’s work at gaping­void is exce­llent. For exam­ple, smar­ter con­ver­sa­tions (cont.) where Hugh wri­tes,
    Pro­blem: Smar­ter Mar­kets.
    Solu­tion: Smar­ter Con­ver­sa­tions.
    And do you know what ? Hugh follows his own advice — I’ve noti­ced hi…