Marketing guru, Theodore Levitt postulated that the “product” could be likened to four concentric circles. Starting with the innermost circle representing the Core product, the three outer circles represent the Expected, Augmented and Potential product respectively. In his article “Marketing success through differentiation – of anything”, he also concluded that what one customer might regard as product Augmentation, another might see as Expected.
It’s 35 years since the article was published in the Harvard Business Review and there is no doubt that the impact of competition and technology and the resultant rise in customer expectation has seen the migration of features that used to represent the Augmented product being regarded as the Expected Product and those of the Expected Product becoming part of the Core Product.
Product quality is a given these days. So are such attributes as reliability of supply, competitive order lead-times, delivery-on-time and competitive pricing. These are the qualifying dimensions of any product or service and no supplier can perform below par on these attributes for any length of time. In Levitt terminology they are all part of the Expected Product. The real battleground between competing organisations is customer service and despite the growth in e-business, customer service invariably involves people.
My company has completed customer/client feedback surveys for all manner of organisations from large multinationals to boutique consultancies covering every type of business from freight forwarding to stock feed and IT. There is always a high correlation between the respondents’ rating of the level of service they receive from their main contacts at the supplier (my client) and the overall Customer Satisfaction Index. But it is one thing to achieve high indices, another to maintain them. And to illustrate the nature of the challenge, I tell them about the Parable of the Plate Spinner.
In the beginning, there was a plate spinner who became skilled at spinning an increasing number of plates.
He was so successful that he was being asked to do shows every night and increase the number of plates he could spin simultaneously. This got to be too much for him so he decided to teach others to spin plates. Naturally, they were not quite so good as him but it enabled him to take the occasional break and when they all appeared on stage together, the results were truly spectacular.
But then things started to go wrong. The number of plates to be spun kept on increasing and there wasn’t time to train the new plate spinners to the standard required. Instead of a set number of plates being the sole responsibility of one plate spinner, a system evolved whereby several plate spinners shared responsibility for the same plates. At times no one was certain who was responsible for keeping the plates spinning. Last – but by no means least – they began to spin plates of greatly differing sizes and they found that large plates took up a disproportionate amount of the plate spinners’ time and resources – both to get them up and spinning and to keep them spinning without losing equilibrium.
When a large plate started to wobble, it would require more than its fair share of spinners to reset it and the only spinners that could be spared were those who had plates that were spinning well.
The result was inevitable. Whether or not the efforts of the spinners to restore a problem plate to equilibrium were successful or not, other plates, deprived of their regular re-spin began to oscillate ominously and inevitably some fell from their poles, never to be spun again – at least not by this troupe of plate spinners.
The moral of this story is that when the quality of your customer service is of such a standard as to attract new customers, you have to increase the resources to provide the Core, Expected, Augmented and Potential product that they have been led to expect. Furthermore, the standard of service given to new customers must not be at the expense of the established customer base. Even the most stable plate will fall off its pole if you ignore it for long enough.
Always bear in mind the research by TARP (Technical Assistance Research Programs Washington DC) that showed that 68% of customers changed their suppliers because the supplier “appeared disinterested or indifferent to its customer’s needs”.
Graham Haines runs his own consulting practice Plans to Reality and has been conducting his proprietary customer feedback surveys for over 20 years. The feedback from these surveys provides a key input into operational and strategic initiatives for improving the performance of any enterprise. You can read about these surveys and others covering executives, employees and workgroups at www.planstoreality.com.au.